The New Zealand
Climate Science Coalition

1 October 2009 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Treasury call signals time to cool off on emissions trading

The time has surely come for a cooling off period for proposals to start greenhouse gas emission reductions in New Zealand, according to the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition. The Coalition statement says that rejection by Treasury of the government’s own regulatory impact statement that forms part of the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill, as not providing “an adequate basis for informed decision-making” should be a wake-up call to all New Zealanders about what the Coalition describes as “this headlong rush into economic upheaval on grounds that are not justified by science, commonsense or anything else.”

The Coalition statement continues:

“Every day now comes a new report that suggests that a Kyoto extension now seems to be off the table for Copenhagen in December, and likely to be replaced by a deal whereby each country volunteers an emissions reduction target, and makes that figure enforceable under their respective domestic laws. It would be a major worry if New Zealand were to stick its neck out for the huge cuts already approved as ‘conditional 2020 targets’ - that would position us as world leaders, for no benefit whatever other than to encourage ‘other countries to think well of us’ (in the words of the ACT minority report from the Select Committee which reviewed current emissions trading scheme legislation).

“Climate Change Minister Nick Smith and other ‘planet savers’ seem to be unaware of the growing number of scientists who reject the dangerous temperature increase thesis but also of the growth of scepticism within the wider community. In the United States, polling shows sceptics are now a majority and, in Australia, the government’s promotion of ‘Think Change’ has actually led to a reduction to 61 per cent of those who consider climate change ‘very important’. This despite the lack of any independent assessment of the alleged problem and the paucity of critiques provided in the media.

“The latest international scientist to advocate caution is German academic Mojib Latif, a climate modeller and a lead author to the last two reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He told a recent UN World Climate Conference that some of the warming in the last three decades was probably due to factors other than CO2 emissions and that, in the absence of any warming for a decade, it is now likely there will be ‘one or even two decades during which temperatures cool’.

“For New Zealanders, it should be a matter of utmost concern that Treasury has rejected the regulatory impact statement (RIS) prepared for the latest climate change amendment bill, saying that ‘the level and quality of analysis presented is not commensurate with the significance of the proposals, which represent major design changes to the Emissions Trading Scheme, and that the RIS does not provide an adequate basis for informed decision-making.’

“We regard this as just another example of the present government’s fixation with futile attempts to solve a non-existent problem. Part of the post-election agreement between ACT and National was the promise of a quantified cost-benefit study on the ETS - and this requirement was clearly spelled out in the terms of reference for the recently completed Select Committee review. It even specified that the study was to be ‘high quality’. Numerous submissions sought the right to make further input when the study was available. It never came.

“Now, Treasury, the Government's own internal watchdog on regulatory impact statements (RIS) has rejected the pathetic document accompanying the latest Climate Change amendment bill. If this is not an RIS at all (as Treasury suggests) then the Bill is in breach of Cabinet requirements.

“What is there about climate change that causes the Government to break all its own rules, promises, and agreements? Is it that they know that a proper RIS would reveal that the emperor of global warming has no clothes?

“Nick Smith says he hasn't time to do the job properly because he would like this rushed bill passed before 11 December. Why? What earthly difference will the exact date make in Copenhagen - or anywhere else? Is it just so the Minister can preen at an international meeting? Is his vanity so important when considered against an issue that Treasury says will be the most important considered by the Government this year?

“We know that Labour and the Greens are ideologically wedded to this man-made warming scam, but the government’s support parties, ACT and, in particular, the Maori Party, need to take to take a close look at Treasury’s assessment, as well as asking themselves why New Zealand should even consider this absurd policy of legislating for emissions reductions knowing that a binding international agreement will not to be reached at Copenhagen in December. The government is right to be worried about its need to dispose of the existing ETS Act passed in haste by Labour and the Greens last year, but that can be fixed either by repealing that Act altogether, or by delaying its commencements dates for, say, three years or as long as it takes to get certainty on the science, the reality of what’s happening to our climate, and whatever other countries eventually decide is an appropriate response, ” the Coalition statement concludes.

ENDS

© Scoop Media