This is Nick Smith’s response to a 50 billion dollar blunder, or put another way, a 100 billion dollar subsidy to big polluters.
That is roughly $92,000 per family each year…until (at least) 2050!
Ask one of those families if they had an annual $92,000 bill whether they would get away with the excuse that it’s “foregone revenue rather than debt” when the bank calls in.
The Minister is out of touch with the New Zealand public.
No one likes hidden costs, and a deliberative and unrushed process would mean that access to accurate data would improve the policy discussion. Just like the science, we are going to be better informed each day on the complexities of climate change and its economic impacts as a policy issue. So why rush it?
I have to agree with the Herald, National is redesigning an ETS the way you would when you do not want one.