7. CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) Link to this
to the Minister for Climate Change Issues
What implications are there for New Zealand’s policy on climate change from the changes announced by Australia this week in respect of its Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme?
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) Link to this
The National Party campaigned last year on a policy of aligning New Zealand’s response to climate change more closely with Australia’s policy. Monday’s announcements by its Government to delay the entry of its Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme by a year to 2011, and to provide for a A$10 cap on carbon prices for the first year, do need to be considered as part of the mix of where New Zealand goes to from here.
What processes does the Government have to further the discussions initiated by Prime Minister John Key and Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to explore harmonising the New Zealand and Australian responses to climate change?
Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this
Following the Prime Ministers’ summit in early March, I travelled to Canberra and met with my counterpart, Senator Penny Wong. We set up an officials process and agreed on the terms of reference for exploring harmonisation. That work is progressing well, and this week I have had further discussions by phone with Senator Wong. I want to emphasise that those discussions are at an early stage. Senator Wong and I agreed that it would be useful for the special select committee on climate change in New Zealand to be briefed by Australian officials on the details of the Australian scheme, and that is scheduled to occur by teleconference next Monday.
What are the implications for New Zealand of the announcement that Australia is prepared to commit to a tougher 2020 target of a 25 percent reduction in emissions if other countries make strong commitments?
Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this
The Government in New Zealand views this as a positive development. We are committed—
Hon Darren Hughes
Hon Trevor MallardHon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this
It is interesting that Opposition members are interested in hairstyles, when we are talking about an important issue like climate change. Quite clearly they do not consider it to be very significant. This Government has agreed to a global level of 450 parts per million, and that is what we think is going to be required to avoid dangerous climate change. New Zealand’s position on the issue of a 2020 target will be finalised after we get the sensitive data on forestry that will come from the satellite information next month.
What other developments have occurred internationally on climate change that might influence the success of the United Nations negotiations in Copenhagen?
Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this
I am encouraged by today’s reports that China is ready to do business with developed countries to reach an agreement on a successor to the Kyoto treaty, in response to the change in the United States’ position that has been outlined by the new Obama administration. That is a positive development, as China and the United States make up more than 40 percent of global emissions, and the engagement by both is critical to nailing a successful successor agreement to Kyoto at Copenhagen at the end of this year.
Charles ChauvelIs the Minister not embarrassed to be responsible for an emissions trading policy that has created so much uncertainty as to be labelled, this week, as an “investment blight”, costing New Zealanders hundreds of millions of dollars worth of job-rich investment in forestry, home renovation, clean energy, and biotechnology; and is not his policy fiasco further proof that National just does not give a damn about protecting New Zealand jobs?
Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this
The only thing that has caused me embarrassment has been, in the last week, furnishing the most recent climate change data, as required under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. That data, for 2007, showed that New Zealand had its worst record of deforestation, with a very substantial increase in that. We had the worst year of deforestation since records in New Zealand began in 1945. Further, if members opposite are serious about climate change being addressed and an emissions trading scheme being put together, I invite them to engage constructively in the Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee, where we will need to amend the emissions trading scheme. As Mr Parker well knows, mistakes were made in the rush to pass the legislation on it, and amendments are required to make it workable.
Given the fact that the Australian Government made big changes to its own emissions trading scheme on Monday without even telling the Minister or his colleagues that it was going to do so, given the evidence of his own blue-green colleague Guy Salmon at the select committee today that harmonisation with Australia would deliver very few benefits for New Zealand, and given that ACT has stopped going to the select committee that it demanded be set up on this subject, is it not time to just get on and implement the emissions trading scheme without any further delay or excuse?
Hon Dr NICK SMITH Link to this
The first point I would make is that the member is incorrect. The Australian Government did notify my office in advance of the changes it was proposing to make to the emissions trading scheme. What is lacking from members opposite is an understanding of how critical an emissions trading scheme is to the New Zealand economy. Members on this side of the House make no apologies for wanting to have a workable climate change policy that recognises that the economy is in recession. As we know today, unemployment figures are rising. The Government wants to take a balanced approach that ensures that New Zealand addresses both its climate change and economic responsibilities.