"Sweetheart deal" or "pork barrel politics", the Government's
determination to have an emissions trading scheme ready to
wave at the Copenhagen climate-change conference lies behind
what must be regarded as some of the most foolhardy
legislation ever proposed in this country.
Foolhardy because it has been contrived in haste, has not
been adequately explained to taxpayers, clearly benefits the
worst polluters who must now be subsidised by the general
population, and creates for future generations the certainty
of costs of which no reliable estimate can be made.
If ever there was legislation where consensus was needed, it
was this; New Zealand will come to regret that cross-party
agreement was not achieved, if, in fact, any serious attempt
was made to secure it.
The concessions given to the Maori Party to benefit some, but
not all, tribes in the face of a threat - a mere threat - of
legal action, will mark this National Party Government as one
prepared to do any deal to secure its position.
But the Maori Party and its constituency are not the only
quarter to be so privileged.
Although the scheme designed to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions through carbon trading will include over time all
sectors of the economy, many industrial and agricultural
polluters will have the considerable advantage of not having
to face the full cost for some years.
They are responsible for an estimated two-thirds of New
Zealand's carbon emissions and there seems to be nothing to
prevent them taking full advantage of the "holiday" by
increasing polluting production in the meantime, since
taxpayers will have to pay most of the cost of their
emissions.
The effect of the legislation, then, may well be to further
increase their level of emissions - as has happened since
Kyoto - rather than being held responsible for any increase
above 90% of what they emitted in 2005, as was intended under
the previous government's scheme.
These preferences are to be balanced - if that be the correct
term - for everyone else by some unspecified softening in the
projected price increases on fuel and electricity signalled
under Labour's scheme - as well as more carbon credits for
the fishing industry, a large part of which is already part
of the Maori preference.
Tribes and non-Maori forest owners with pre-1990 forests will
not be included in the special arrangements, although they
will be able to plant permanent forests on Crown land - but
have to share the carbon credits that accumulated.
The Maori Party deal includes $24 million extra to be spent
on insulating 8000 low-income homes; a Treaty of Waitangi
clause obliging the Government to consult Maori on the
scheme's regulations; the five tribes which consider the
scheme undermines their treaty settlements get the right to
plant 35,000ha of Crown land rent-free and claim carbon
credits worth an estimated $25 million to $50 million; and a
"review" of tree-planting incentives.
Two tribal representatives will also be part of New Zealand's
official delegation to Copenhagen.
The Government's pragmatism simply secures poor law in a
hurry; had it not been in such a rush, an emissions trading
scheme would have had to have been delayed until 2011,
election year.
That, at least, would have given time for cross-party
consensus to emerge on climate-change policy, a forlorn hope
now.
The Government's scheme is weaker than Labour's flawed
proposal in its initial stages, about the same between 2013
and 2018 and thereafter provides further benefit to
large-scale polluters with a slower phase-in period.
In effect, the Government has agreed to forego revenue from
polluters for some years, making up the difference by
imposing higher costs on householders now.
Attempts have been made to estimate this - Labour says it
amounts to $110 billion - but it is all pie-in-the-sky stuff.
No accurate forecasts can be made until the international
price of carbon is known; add to this two other great
unknowns - whether there will be binding global agreement to
curb emissions, and how the cost of adjusting to a low-carbon
economy will be shared between rich and poor nations - and it
will be seen that haste is making poor law.
In the meantime, this legislation delivers an incentive to
our worst polluters to do nothing, or very little, to trigger
a fall in emissions.
Maori may well justly claim that it is unfair for tribes to
have to carry the extra cost burden of switching land
returned under the treaty from forestry to another use, such
as dairying.
But it is difficult to see how a deal like this achieves the
Prime Minister's claim of balancing economic opportunity with
environmental responsibility, especially when it demands no
urgent commitment from polluters to protect the environment
for the present and future generations.
And the issue of fairness - claimed to be at the heart of the
Government's deal with the Maori Party and others - remains
highly disputable.
