11. Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does she stand by her statement on 28 March, in regard to the devolution of carbon credits to foresters, that “It would be a fairly silly forester who took that as a signal to plant trees, when it was a scenario in a discussion document that followed an ‘in principle’ decision, which had yet to be confirmed, and of course was not, in the event, confirmed.”?
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
Why did the Prime Minister say that the decision in principle “had yet to be confirmed, and … was not … confirmed.”, when the Cabinet record specifically states that the July 2000 decision to allocate carbon credits to foresters was confirmed by her Cabinet in January 2001?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I have the minute from January 2001 in front of me. The minute is perfectly clear that it is quoting the “in principle” decision, which it noted, and it further noted that the Government is yet to finally determine its position on allocating additional assigned amount units from specified forest sink activities. It goes on to say what it could take into account if it did. The member has consistently misrepresented this.
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
I seek leave to table the Government document Forest Sinks and the Kyoto Protocol, an information document that says that in July 2000 Cabinet agreed and then confirmed that in January 2001.
Madam SPEAKERLeave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? I am sorry, members know they identify the document. They do not actually go on to describe all the content—please be seated, I am on my feet. I have noticed several members today have also done that. I just remind them that that is the process and the procedure—identify the document. The member was kind enough to do that. I ask members whether there is objection. There is objection.
R Doug WoolertonCan the Prime Minister confirm that if the carbon credits were to be in the ownership of foresters, surely the carbon debits and a fair percentage of Kyoto Protocol costs would be the responsibility of foresters also, which could, in fact, put the foresters in a position of financial hardship?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
One is assuming that if the National Party wants to devolve credits it would also want to devolve liabilities, and it is not quite clear where the balance of that would pan out, at this time.
Eric RoyHow credible is it for her to be talking up carbon neutrality in agencies such as Treasury, which have a negligible greenhouse gas emission, when the Government’s own State-owned enterprise, Landcorp, is clearing hundreds of hectares of regenerating native bush at Hikuraki Station in Southland—Landcorp’s operation there—without consent, and also clearing vast areas of forest in the central North Island?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
With regard to the central North Island, it is my understanding that Landcorp is actually managing those contracts rather than being the owner of the land. I would have to take further advice on the Southland property.
Hon David ParkerHas the Prime Minister seen any reports recommending devolving liability for carbon emissions to the agricultural sector?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
That appears to be being advocated in a number of quarters at the moment, including by Guy Salmon, who advised the National Party on its current environmental policy statement. He wants Fonterra to “carry the can”, in his words, for the agricultural sector’s emissions. The question, of course, is whether this will become National Party policy. I notice in the 30-page report they put out last year they curiously failed to mention carbon credits at all, despite the fact that Guy Salmon advised them on the document.
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
How can the Prime Minister maintain that deforestation has absolutely nothing to do with the Government’s policies, when records show that since 1951 in every single year New Zealand’s forest estate increased; that in 2003 the Government backtracked on its policy to provide carbon credits to foresters; and that in every year since, there has been significant deforestation; or are we to believe that somehow this is just a coincidence?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
There are a number of errors in that question. In the first place, even Mr Dickie has now conceded that there was never a promise to devolve. In the second place, the “in principle” decision of July 2000 was reversed in 2002, not 2003. In the third instance, the fact is that forestry planting and deforestation tend to track forestry prices.
Hon Jim AndertonHas the Prime Minister seen any report that indicates that the only guarantee of carbon credit returns to investors was given by Roger Dickie of Kyoto Forestry Association in a prospectus issued in 1995 before Kyoto was ever heard of, let alone ratified by this Government?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I strongly suspect that the Minister is right and that Mr Dickie has egg on his face because of the way in which he enticed people to invest.
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
Will the Government be adopting a timetable and interim targets to achieve its goal of carbon neutrality; if not, why not?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I have been very clear, when answering a number of questions on this subject, that I have set it out as an aspirational goal.