As promised earlier, I released to the media yesterday a copy of all correspondence and documents in relation to Labour’s negotiation with the National party on revising the Emissions Trading Scheme. As you will see, we were assuming that our meetings would be continuing as we got down to agreement on a MoU and proceeded in a fair fashion.
Labour could not have made such a deal like that made between National and the Maori party. What we were prepared to negotiate was made clear in the Minority view in the ETS Select Committee’s report, a view I elaborated upon last week.
Labour had been very principled in what to compromise and had expected that National would also bring their principles to the table, in a negotiated process towards a fair outcome.
Now, it’s difficult to see how that could be accomplished.
Great. More reading.
Yep, Charles. As I blogged yesterday, the M?ori Party have acted in a totally duplicitous manner, given what they wrote in their minority report.
But what I don’t understand is why either Labour or the M?ori Party needed to enter negotiations at all. The existing ETS legislation was on the statute books, and National couldn’t get the numbers to amend it.
They could, I suppose, have gone with Act and moved to repeal it, but they would not dare, as that would have made New Zealand an international laughing stock and had grave repercussions for trade and tourism.
So why negotiate anything at all, given that National’s proposals will make the ETS less effective in reducing emissions than the one enacted last year?
Toad
“So why negotiate anything at all, given that National’s proposals will make the ETS less effective in reducing emissions than the one enacted last year?”
I think you answered this in your previous sentence when you said “They could, I suppose, have gone with Act and moved to repeal it, but they would not dare, as that would have made New Zealand an international laughing stock and had grave repercussions for trade and tourism.”
This current bunch are that strange that I do not think we can trust anything to be beyond them. The steps they have already taken to undermine measures aimed at reducing CO2 emissions speak volumes.
So why negotiate anything at all, given that National’s proposals will make the ETS less effective in reducing emissions than the one enacted last year?
A desire to be accomodating and create durable policy on one part, and to get a better deal for (a very narrow subset of) their people on the other.
A desire to be accomodating and create durable policy on one part, and to get a better deal for (a very narrow subset of) their people on the other.
They wanted to get Labour to help them give money to farmers. Labour agreed to give a lot for five year, but not the close to a billion per year (at current prices), in perpetuity, that National have just handed over.
I thought that Goff made some excellent points in his letter, especially regarding forestry. Pity he’s not the Prime Minister…
[...] allow Nick Smith to introduce the ETS amendment for a first time. If it had taken time to work with Labour in good faith on an enduring compromise, none of this would have been [...]
[...] committee (which was a waste of time), to the walkout by National on a grand coalition with Labour (which would have settled the issue months ago), to the backroom deals with the Maori party (who knows what else has been agreed to), and now with [...]