Climate change, workers and their unions
Speech to CTU National Affilate Council
---------------------------------
Good morning, I'd like to thank the organisers for giving me the opportunity to talk to you.
I'd like to set out our position on climate change. In doing so, I make the point that sustainability is about much more than the environment. It is a framework that encompasses consideration of social, economic and cultural factors. It explicitly acknowledges that there are trade offs. If requires a high level of democratic participation and a consultative style of government.
This does not diminish the requirement for collective action on climate change - but a sustainability framework necessitates a broad-based approach to policy solutions, recognition of costs and employment effects, assistance during transition, and a high degree of research and analysis not just of scientific issues but effects on equity.
Sustainability contrasts the finite nature of resources with the infinite possibilities of human knowledge. It is by definition a global issue. But we need domestic polices also. We recognise that finiteness will, in time, have a fundamental impact on the nature of work and work organisation.
Worker participation is a pre-condition for the sustainable work place and economies that recognise this will be better placed for the shocks that will come.
What's another way to describe what I have said? In a word it's plagiarism. You may recognise what I said. You should, it is from the CTU's submission, and I agree with you.
I'd like to thank you for your submissions on the five energy and climate change discussion documents released late last year.
I recognise the valuable and ongoing contribution that the union movement is making in this area across New Zealand and internationally. I meet with Union groups at international negotiations on climate change. The government can't do it alone, and workers and unions are at the sharp end of taking action in the workplace, at home and while travelling.
I'd like to tell you where the government has got to now. We have a number of guiding principles including:
· That climate change is an international problem that requires an international response
· That at home, we need a policy response specifically designed with New Zealand's circumstances in mind
· That all parts of the economy can and should play their part, but some can do more than others. This recognises that some sectors have a greater ability than others to reduce emissions. Equity extends to looking out for the interests of workers and households in terms of the affordability of taking action and how policies will effect employment
· That broad-based emissions pricing will likely be part of the response but that this needs to be supported by a number of other measures. Market based mechanisms alone will not work. We need to improve energy efficiency and invest in public transport and biofuels and the many other policies that are already in place, or well on their way.
Most of what we need to do to reduce emissions makes good sense to do anyway as many actions deliver co-benefits such as lower energy use and bills, making our homes warmer and healthier and reducing our reliance on energy imports. Planting trees also has obvious co-benefits in terms of reducing run off and making the land more resilient to slips and floods.
Work is well underway on a cap and trade system, like that used in the fishing industry. No final decisions have yet been made but it is being designed to cover all sectors and all gases. We recognise that some sectors are better placed than others to meet the cost of emissions and that the competitiveness of some sectors will need to be taken into account. This will have a bearing on the stringency and timing of how sectors will transition into a cap and trade scheme. There are also decisions yet to be made around the method of allocating units. Options include free allocation and the auctioning of permits.
I note that we expect to hear of lot of vocal self interest from different sectors over the coming months. We've seen this overseas and that experience indicates a healthy degree of scepticism is appropriate. There are pitfalls to be avoided such as awarding emissions units to market participants for free only to have them pass the full cost of emissions through to their customers.
Spurred on by the need to respond to climate change, or at the very least in anticipation of emissions pricing, more and more organisations and individuals are looking at where their emissions come from; and they are typically from energy use, either in the factory or the transport system. And the government is here to help. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) runs an excellent programme for business called Empower and another programme for energy intensive businesses.
Tegel Food's New Plymouth factory has worked with EECA to reduce emissions from one of New Zealand's largest poultry plants, processing over 300,000 birds a week. They have now implemented a heat recovery system that looks set to save the company more than $110,000 in energy bills plus 600 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a year. The bulk of the work on this project was done by staff at the plant.
At the other end of the country, Comalco has cut its emissions substantially compared to 1990 levels at the same time as increasing production by 26 per cent principally as a result of improving energy efficiency. As a result of working with government, the plant is on a pathway to world's best practice in emissions management. This demonstrates the success of government taking a partnership approach, especially with firms where competitiveness at risk may be an issue.
These are great results for the environment, the bottom line and the competitiveness of these plants and their workers. The situation in Japan provides a good lesson. There, high levels of energy efficiency are the norm, as are high levels of productivity. Japan proves the case that you can have a highly efficient and high wage economy.
The workers are often the people who know best what savings can be made. They know the processes best and have a vested interest in making improvements that make firms more productive, competitive and can boost employment prospects. And of course, it is the workers that will implement any changes. Who better to bring them about?
There is real scope for progressive businesses to partner with workers to take the lead in transforming our economy. Government is already providing leadership in this area through the sustainability drive announced by the Prime Minister in February. This comprises six programmes:
· Towards a Carbon Neutral Public Service
· Enhanced Sustainable Procurement
· Business Partnerships for Sustainability
· Eco verification
· Waste Minimisation and Management
· Sustainable Households
The government is leading by example. Six agencies are to be carbon neutral from 2012. The balance of the core public service is to have plans in place by then to do likewise.
We're enhancing state sector procurement polices to drive the market to supply more sustainable goods and services. We're also partnering with business to improve market access for sustainable goods and services and to help companies make their own operations more sustainable.
This work extends to helping companies with eco-verification. Having a trusted eco-brand helps build confidence in a company, its goods and services. A good eco-brand is also attractive to purchasers both at home and internationally.
We're also acting to further reduce waste and to make our households more sustainable. This means making homes better to live in and cheaper to run while reducing emissions. We know that low and no cost actions to become more energy efficient at home and on the road can result in workers being hundreds of dollars a year better off, even after the cost of emissions is included in power and petrol prices.
Our objectives include reducing net emissions, de-linking emissions and economic growth and creating a more sustainable, high value economy with more and better paying jobs. The government is looking at what steps need to be taken to manage this transition and its impact on workers.
Increasing numbers of workers with specialist skills will be required to bring forward the use of more efficient industrial motors, lighting, heating and cooling systems and processing. We need to do more to provide such skilled workers. That means working with unions and training providers.
More workers are also needed to deliver the increase in domestic solar hot water we want and to deliver home energy efficiency, heating and insulation retrofits. I'm proud to say that the EnergyWise home grants scheme recently completed its 30,000th retrofit. That's 30,000 families that have had their living standards improved. We've also announced an interest free loans scheme to cover home energy efficiency improvements as well as financial support for people installing solar hot water systems.
The world is crying out for innovative solutions to reduce emissions. We have some of the world's best scientists and our workers are among the worlds most flexible and practical. It's the number eight wire mentality. We can and should be developing new technologies and techniques, deploying them at home to boost our competitiveness and exporting them to the world.
Research is already underway on second generation biofuels. Local industry is already involved and I hope it leads to many more jobs being created as well as high value export opportunities for the technology.
We've already announced a fund to see marine generation implemented and government polices have led to the wind industry in New Zealand being years ahead of where it would otherwise have been. I note that the recently announced share issue for New Zealand windfarms was heavily oversubscribed.
Looking beyond the major projects, workers are best placed to implement the many simple energy conservation measures that together can make a big difference. It does make a difference to turn off lights and office equipment when they are not needed. Our parents were better at this than we are.
Enhanced information provision is a priority for government. The union movement has a key role to play as a trusted voice for New Zealanders. Together, we have to communicate why action on climate change is so important and how Kiwis can help in ways that save them money at the same time.
This makes both unions and government relevant to people who pay union fees and taxes. It builds relationships. Most examples of the things we do for climate change are good in there own right. This is about having warmer, healthier homes, clean water, less waste and lower fuel and power bills.
To conclude, the union movement and workers are absolutely central to delivering on our climate change polices. Government can't do it alone. It will take Kiwis up and down the county all doing their bit at work, at home and while travelling. Together, we can cut emissions and transform our economy.
Thankyou
---------------------------------
Good morning, I'd like to thank the organisers for giving me the opportunity to talk to you.
I'd like to set out our position on climate change. In doing so, I make the point that sustainability is about much more than the environment. It is a framework that encompasses consideration of social, economic and cultural factors. It explicitly acknowledges that there are trade offs. If requires a high level of democratic participation and a consultative style of government.
This does not diminish the requirement for collective action on climate change - but a sustainability framework necessitates a broad-based approach to policy solutions, recognition of costs and employment effects, assistance during transition, and a high degree of research and analysis not just of scientific issues but effects on equity.
Sustainability contrasts the finite nature of resources with the infinite possibilities of human knowledge. It is by definition a global issue. But we need domestic polices also. We recognise that finiteness will, in time, have a fundamental impact on the nature of work and work organisation.
Worker participation is a pre-condition for the sustainable work place and economies that recognise this will be better placed for the shocks that will come.
What's another way to describe what I have said? In a word it's plagiarism. You may recognise what I said. You should, it is from the CTU's submission, and I agree with you.
I'd like to thank you for your submissions on the five energy and climate change discussion documents released late last year.
I recognise the valuable and ongoing contribution that the union movement is making in this area across New Zealand and internationally. I meet with Union groups at international negotiations on climate change. The government can't do it alone, and workers and unions are at the sharp end of taking action in the workplace, at home and while travelling.
I'd like to tell you where the government has got to now. We have a number of guiding principles including:
· That climate change is an international problem that requires an international response
· That at home, we need a policy response specifically designed with New Zealand's circumstances in mind
· That all parts of the economy can and should play their part, but some can do more than others. This recognises that some sectors have a greater ability than others to reduce emissions. Equity extends to looking out for the interests of workers and households in terms of the affordability of taking action and how policies will effect employment
· That broad-based emissions pricing will likely be part of the response but that this needs to be supported by a number of other measures. Market based mechanisms alone will not work. We need to improve energy efficiency and invest in public transport and biofuels and the many other policies that are already in place, or well on their way.
Most of what we need to do to reduce emissions makes good sense to do anyway as many actions deliver co-benefits such as lower energy use and bills, making our homes warmer and healthier and reducing our reliance on energy imports. Planting trees also has obvious co-benefits in terms of reducing run off and making the land more resilient to slips and floods.
Work is well underway on a cap and trade system, like that used in the fishing industry. No final decisions have yet been made but it is being designed to cover all sectors and all gases. We recognise that some sectors are better placed than others to meet the cost of emissions and that the competitiveness of some sectors will need to be taken into account. This will have a bearing on the stringency and timing of how sectors will transition into a cap and trade scheme. There are also decisions yet to be made around the method of allocating units. Options include free allocation and the auctioning of permits.
I note that we expect to hear of lot of vocal self interest from different sectors over the coming months. We've seen this overseas and that experience indicates a healthy degree of scepticism is appropriate. There are pitfalls to be avoided such as awarding emissions units to market participants for free only to have them pass the full cost of emissions through to their customers.
Spurred on by the need to respond to climate change, or at the very least in anticipation of emissions pricing, more and more organisations and individuals are looking at where their emissions come from; and they are typically from energy use, either in the factory or the transport system. And the government is here to help. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) runs an excellent programme for business called Empower and another programme for energy intensive businesses.
Tegel Food's New Plymouth factory has worked with EECA to reduce emissions from one of New Zealand's largest poultry plants, processing over 300,000 birds a week. They have now implemented a heat recovery system that looks set to save the company more than $110,000 in energy bills plus 600 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a year. The bulk of the work on this project was done by staff at the plant.
At the other end of the country, Comalco has cut its emissions substantially compared to 1990 levels at the same time as increasing production by 26 per cent principally as a result of improving energy efficiency. As a result of working with government, the plant is on a pathway to world's best practice in emissions management. This demonstrates the success of government taking a partnership approach, especially with firms where competitiveness at risk may be an issue.
These are great results for the environment, the bottom line and the competitiveness of these plants and their workers. The situation in Japan provides a good lesson. There, high levels of energy efficiency are the norm, as are high levels of productivity. Japan proves the case that you can have a highly efficient and high wage economy.
The workers are often the people who know best what savings can be made. They know the processes best and have a vested interest in making improvements that make firms more productive, competitive and can boost employment prospects. And of course, it is the workers that will implement any changes. Who better to bring them about?
There is real scope for progressive businesses to partner with workers to take the lead in transforming our economy. Government is already providing leadership in this area through the sustainability drive announced by the Prime Minister in February. This comprises six programmes:
· Towards a Carbon Neutral Public Service
· Enhanced Sustainable Procurement
· Business Partnerships for Sustainability
· Eco verification
· Waste Minimisation and Management
· Sustainable Households
The government is leading by example. Six agencies are to be carbon neutral from 2012. The balance of the core public service is to have plans in place by then to do likewise.
We're enhancing state sector procurement polices to drive the market to supply more sustainable goods and services. We're also partnering with business to improve market access for sustainable goods and services and to help companies make their own operations more sustainable.
This work extends to helping companies with eco-verification. Having a trusted eco-brand helps build confidence in a company, its goods and services. A good eco-brand is also attractive to purchasers both at home and internationally.
We're also acting to further reduce waste and to make our households more sustainable. This means making homes better to live in and cheaper to run while reducing emissions. We know that low and no cost actions to become more energy efficient at home and on the road can result in workers being hundreds of dollars a year better off, even after the cost of emissions is included in power and petrol prices.
Our objectives include reducing net emissions, de-linking emissions and economic growth and creating a more sustainable, high value economy with more and better paying jobs. The government is looking at what steps need to be taken to manage this transition and its impact on workers.
Increasing numbers of workers with specialist skills will be required to bring forward the use of more efficient industrial motors, lighting, heating and cooling systems and processing. We need to do more to provide such skilled workers. That means working with unions and training providers.
More workers are also needed to deliver the increase in domestic solar hot water we want and to deliver home energy efficiency, heating and insulation retrofits. I'm proud to say that the EnergyWise home grants scheme recently completed its 30,000th retrofit. That's 30,000 families that have had their living standards improved. We've also announced an interest free loans scheme to cover home energy efficiency improvements as well as financial support for people installing solar hot water systems.
The world is crying out for innovative solutions to reduce emissions. We have some of the world's best scientists and our workers are among the worlds most flexible and practical. It's the number eight wire mentality. We can and should be developing new technologies and techniques, deploying them at home to boost our competitiveness and exporting them to the world.
Research is already underway on second generation biofuels. Local industry is already involved and I hope it leads to many more jobs being created as well as high value export opportunities for the technology.
We've already announced a fund to see marine generation implemented and government polices have led to the wind industry in New Zealand being years ahead of where it would otherwise have been. I note that the recently announced share issue for New Zealand windfarms was heavily oversubscribed.
Looking beyond the major projects, workers are best placed to implement the many simple energy conservation measures that together can make a big difference. It does make a difference to turn off lights and office equipment when they are not needed. Our parents were better at this than we are.
Enhanced information provision is a priority for government. The union movement has a key role to play as a trusted voice for New Zealanders. Together, we have to communicate why action on climate change is so important and how Kiwis can help in ways that save them money at the same time.
This makes both unions and government relevant to people who pay union fees and taxes. It builds relationships. Most examples of the things we do for climate change are good in there own right. This is about having warmer, healthier homes, clean water, less waste and lower fuel and power bills.
To conclude, the union movement and workers are absolutely central to delivering on our climate change polices. Government can't do it alone. It will take Kiwis up and down the county all doing their bit at work, at home and while travelling. Together, we can cut emissions and transform our economy.
Thankyou