United Future
Since: Aug 2007
Posts: 314

BLOG: Emissions Trading

Posted in Discussion Forum at 12:37PM, 19 Jun 2008 ∞ Permalink

Occasionally an issue comes along that is of such immense importance and with such wide-reaching implications that it is deserving of cross-party parliamentary support. The Emissions Trading Scheme is one such issue and can be compared with other historical biggies like Superannuation and Kiwi-Saver.

While there is always room for ongoing tweaking and amending of any Act of Parliament, the public is not well served if major policy initiatives are turned into political footballs.

Let me start by saying the UnitedFuture agrees in principle that some sort of emissions trading scheme is the best way to meet our international obligations as signatories to the Kyoto Protocol to address climate change concerns.

However this week we pulled our support for the current legislation for the following reasons.
1) It appears that Labour are desperately keen to get this through before the election and so has sought to achieve this by by-passing robust cross-party consultation in favour of cobbling together the 61 votes needed... Read the full text of this blog post.

Quentin Todd
Since: Nov 2007
Posts: 68

Posted at 12:37PM, 19 Jun 2008 ∞ Permalink

Judy and Peter,
I support your decision not to support the rush through of the Emissions Trading Bill. It is too dangerous now to think the rush will help.

I say this because the rush through of the EFA is a case in point- that it has caused such confusion and mayhem in an election year.

The science of the Emissions Trading worries me: is it accurate? Can we as a nation be certain that we are paying the right cost? Who says we should pay 'X' amount- perhaps we should be paying 'V' amount (less).

Emissions Trading is a paradigm shift that should wait till after the election and where parties will have more time to consider what to actually and accurately do with such legislation.

Judy Turner
Since: Aug 2007
Posts: 22

Posted at 05:28PM, 21 Jun 2008 ∞ Permalink

Regardless of the science debate, a National government signed and then the Labour government ratified the Kyoto protocol. This means that we have a very real and expensive obligation.

HOWEVER that obligation should not see us responding in poorly considered way.

Quentin Todd
Since: Nov 2007
Posts: 68

Posted at 08:31AM, 22 Jun 2008 ∞ Permalink

I agree with the consideration needed. just don't fully understand the need to rush this Bill through-seems like political suicide to me

mcinnes
Since: Apr 2008
Posts: 53

Posted at 08:44PM, 1 Jul 2008 ∞ Permalink

Judy Turner has clearly stated the issues! Well done.

Please login to post a reply. Go to Login page »