CLIMATE WIN?
National’s new leader was the key Opposition negotiator for New Zealand’s zero carbon law, but his elevation to party leader isn’t necessarily a slam dunk for climate action.
Todd Muller was climate spokesman for the National Party when Climate Change Minister James Shaw was seeking National’s support for going net zero carbon, and he helped to get the law passed as well as to trim its impact.
Passing a law committing to being carbon neutral by 2050 with the blessing of both major political parties was hailed as a big climate win for New Zealand. It would have taken political capital to secure support for the bill inside National, which still contains members who don’t believe in climate change.
The sheer work involved suggests Muller might feel some attachment to what he helped create.
Yet several people who watched those negotiations closely said the bill would not have passed without Bridges’ say-so, and they downplayed the difference between the two leaders on climate change.
‘‘Both Simon and Todd are cautiously progressive and got the caucus to support the Zero Carbon Bill,’’ says Gary Taylor, the head of the Environmental Defence Society.
‘‘On the downside, Todd has been quite reactionary on the freshwater reforms and will need to moderate that position as leader if he wants to recruit the urban vote.’’
Shaw, Muller’s adversary and collaborator on the carbon law, said: ‘‘I have lot of respect for both Todd and Nikki [Kaye]. We will see if he acts consistently with the principles and policies he was advocating as climate change spokesperson.
‘‘From what I know of him, I’d be surprised and disappointed if that was not the case.’’
Muller’s relationship with scientific evidence has not always been as harmonious as it was the day the carbon law passed. He publicly railed against an exhibit at Te Papa laying out several options for getting our emissions down, calling it ‘‘biased and not science-based’’.
One of the 14 options for cutting emissions in the interactive exhibit was less dairying. Agriculture makes up half of New Zealand’s emissions, as they’re accounted for under our international targets. Dairying, along with road transport, has been the biggest driver of emissions upwards in recent decades.
While some farmers are exploring how to profit from less-intensive dairying methods, Muller has been staunchly opposed to any suggestion New Zealand should climb down from ‘‘peak cow’’.
He has championed an approach of waiting for technology to reduce methane from livestock’s bellies, a solution that’s being heavily researched, but isn’t yet available to farmers.
Muller fought to keep agriculture out of the Emissions Trading
Scheme and pressed for the lowering of methane reduction targets.
However, he also supported the creation of the independent Climate Change Commission, an expert panel now tasked with drawing up New Zealand’s emissions budgets.
Muller also publicly supported the feebate scheme to make electric vehicles cheaper, before his party turned against it.
Not long after the zero carbon law passed, Muller was moved from the climate change portfolio to agriculture, and was also promoted up the ranks.
In his agriculture capacity, Stuff asked him last month what the Government’s priorities for post-Covid spending should be, particularly regarding the climate. Muller was enthusiastic about water storage, calling water ‘‘the oil of the 21st century, if you will, and we have it’’.
‘‘Water storage can help drive the decarbonisation of our transport and industrial heat sectors over the next few decades through provision of renewable electricity; it can release the productivity of waterstressed rural catchments, a particular benefit for Ma¯ ori land; it can improve environmental outcomes in rivers and streams by reducing the drought/flood dynamic; it can assist in ensuring potable water for our towns and cities.
‘‘In short, it is our country’s economic elixir,’’ he wrote.
Muller also talked about farmers needing to show they could farm within environmental limits. Yet any push to use irrigation to intensify farming in dry areas will rub up against environmental groups and, possibly, falling emissions caps.
The test for the zero carbon law, meanwhile, will come when it moves beyond setting long-term targets and into policies that noticeably affect people’s daily lives.
That’s when bipartisan support will count, and when Muller may need to defend his hard work.