Submissions close Monday 10 September… here’s mine.
You can submit yours here (feel free to use anything in this one).
– – – – –
Submission on Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill
The Government is re-writing environmental legislation to suit our biggest polluters at the cost of ordinary New Zealanders. This is irresponsible. The Government should be sending a clear message to industry that they must move to a cleaner, smarter way of doing business.
By further weakening our environmental laws the Government is putting our global reputation at risk.
Government should bring in an action plan for the 21st century that phases out old fossil fuels that pollute our land, water and air and phase in new, clean and safe energy that can create thousands of jobs and strong economic growth for New Zealand.
I do not agree with the amendments to:
– maintain the 1-for-2 surrender obligation after 2012, without specifying an end date in legislation;
– maintain the $25-a-unit fixed price option after 2012, without specifying an end date in legislation;
– remove a specified entry date for surrender obligations on biological emissions from agriculture.
The ETS has long been criticised for being too weak because of the fixed, low price on carbon and a high allocation of free credits to our biggest polluters. And these proposals will allow this status quo to continue. It sends a signal that its business as usual as there’s no incentive for our biggest polluters to clean up their act and change their behaviour. The taxpayer is left subsidising this free allocation of permits to the tune of nearly a billion dollars a year.
By further delaying the inclusion of agricultural emissions indefinitely, it’s clear that the Government has no intention of including this sector in the scheme, which was designed to include all greenhouse gases from all sectors. The ETS simply cannot function without the inclusion of our largest emitters.
The purpose of emissions trading is to place a cost on emissions significant enough for them to reduce pollution and start investing in a cleaner, safer way of doing business. However, these proposed amendments to defer the increase in cost of polluting and surrendering the two permits for the “two for the price of one” obligation, will only result in more pollution, not less.
Put simply, these amendments will further undermine the very premise upon which the Emissions Trading Scheme was set up and weaken the only major tool that the Government has in place to reduce our impact on our climate.
I am concerned about the very short time within which the public can have our say on these important changes.By limiting the consultation period to just two weeks, the decision-making will not be as robust as it could have been on this issue that is absolutely critical to the future of our planet.