7. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does his Government support clause 16 of the 11 December draft text for the Copenhagen climate agreement that states: “Developed country Parties shall achieve their … emission reduction objectives [primarily] through domestic efforts”?

Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) : New Zealand, together with others represented at the climate change conference in Copenhagen, is currently taking part in negotiations about the content of a formal agreement. I do not intend to comment prior to the conclusion of those negotiations on the likely specifics of the final agreement. However, in a general sense, New Zealand continues to hold the view that climate change is a global problem and that our focus needs to be on reducing worldwide emissions in the most efficient way. We are less concerned with where emissions reductions occur, and more concerned to ensure that all countries do their fair share.

Dr Russel Norman: Does he agree that this clause is important because if every developed country tried to reach its emissions reduction target by continuing to emit and purchasing carbon credits offshore, then globally no one would reduce their emissions?

Hon JOHN KEY: Yes, of course it is important, but I think the member needs to take into consideration the argument purported by Treasury about relative equivalents and the ease of some countries to reduce their emissions relative to others. We need to make sure that in finding a solution to these problems we do not end up with a perverse outcome where we close factories and lose jobs in New Zealand, only to have those same factories established in other parts of the world where, in fact, the profile of greenhouse gases is rising.

Dr Russel Norman: Is it not the case that every country on the planet has unique circumstances and a unique carbon profile that make it hard to reduce emissions, and that if every country asked for special treatment, as the current Government is asking for New Zealand, then no one globally would reduce their emissions?

Hon JOHN KEY: Yes, but some are more unique than others.

Dr Russel Norman: Is it not the case that his Government has failed to give a clear commitment to support this clause because he actually lacks a Government strategy for reducing New Zealand’s domestic emissions?

Hon JOHN KEY: No, and the member will be aware that just last week he was quoting a climate watch group—a group that is known for being environmentally knowledgable—that has done an analysis of countries, based on the relative equivalents that I talked about, and came up with the result that New Zealand is in the median group. It has looked at countries like Australia and said it is in an adequate group. It has taken into consideration everything—from our emissions trading scheme to our target and our support for a global alliance—and determined that New Zealand is in pretty good shape.

Dr Russel Norman: Is the Prime Minister aware that the report that he has just used to defend the Government’s position assumes that forestry and land-use rules will remain the same, but New Zealand’s 10 to 20 percent offer is entirely conditional on changes to the forestry and land-use rules—changes that would suit New Zealand?

Hon JOHN KEY: Yes, and we are very hopeful we will get those changes because that would be in New Zealand’s and the planet’s best interest.

Dr Russel Norman: How is the announcement today of a new $2 billion motorway in the Wellington region, a motorway that will result in a 12 percent drop in the use of public transport and a big increase in greenhouse emissions, consistent with reducing New Zealand’s domestic emissions, given that our emissions from transport are up 63 percent since 1990?

Hon JOHN KEY: I do not know whether the member has driven out to Kapiti recently, but if he has at any time of the day when it is a little busy on the road, he would find he is stationary for a lot of the time, and that cars are expelling a lot of greenhouse gases. In my view, fixing that road is an example of the kind of Government we have now—one that actually delivers on its word, that is progressing, and that is building a fundamental infrastructure for a stronger economy. What a great day it is for Wellingtonians! They now know that, under a National Government, Transmission Gully will be built.