Jones Shane: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Jones Shane: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:651;Page:947] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 I will take a short call—a skimpy small contribution inversely related to the problems that will follow—on Part 2. I follow on from what Mr Robertson has said. The stripping away of these institutional powers worsens the capacity for ordinary garden-variety Kiwis. Whether they be firms and users of energy investors or communities they will have their rights to engage in participatory democracy stripped away from them. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: This is very good. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: I say to Mr Brownlee that the bill is inversely related to a certain girth but I will say more on that at another time. It is a very mean-spirited approach to people having a stake an opportunity to participate in and influence the outcome of investments in the energy sector. It might suit some narrow sectional interests that have been driving for a whole host of reasons and for a long time to change the character of energy investment and the range of sources from which we derive energy or the resources we use to create energy. In that sense it is a very blinkered approach. Others have spoken about how it will have ruinous consequences on our international reputation. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. We are meant to be debating Part 2 of the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill. It is a very narrow part dealing only with the deletion of the words “Commission” from the investigating powers of the Electricity Commission. I have listened carefully to the member. He has been well outside the Standing Orders and you should require him to speak to the part. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: Speaking to the point of order I say that it is quite simple. This strips away institutional powers and it will have an effect in terms of how the full legislation is implemented. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: No the member is getting into the debate. Several cautions have been given to Committee members to stay on target to stay on message and to keep within the realms of Part 2. I invite the member to continue. 
Hon SHANE JONES 
: For fear of spurring another avian contribution from Dr Smith I say fair enough. Dr Smith may laugh but as I have said before there is a famous Maori proverb: “He pipiwharauroa atu i konei ki kona—when the cuckoo leaves one nest it goes over there still a cuckoo so kaua koe e katakata. [ 
do not laugh 
] 
To go back to Part 2 I say that it is an egregious slur that Dr Smith puts upon the ability of a parliamentarian to contribute to such an important matter. National has brought forth a set of ideas and is hiding them as narrow technical amendments. But in actual fact it is a circuitous attempt to erode our ability to act in a sustainable and very wise fashion and uphold our international integrity in the eyes of our competitors. Also it worsens the prospects of moving towards a broad sustainable approach in relation to energy. This is a very worrisome negative and mean-spirited attempt to strip away a fantastic set of changes that was brought forward by my colleague here. The Government refused to allow them—[ 
Interruption 
] Ah there is noise from the cuckoo’s nest and it is now being joined by chirps and trills from the back of the Chamber. Of course those members fear the accuracy of what we are saying. One cannot reduce people’s rights to participate and one cannot force industry to pay higher costs as a consequence of stripping away the institution’s ability to investigate and to test the worthiness of various energy proposals. For that reason this will be only a short contribution to the statutory landscape until such time power returns to where it belongs. Kia ora tatou katoa.