"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.