KEY POINTS:
New Zealand's economy is at a historic turning point - and it's not about tax cuts or sub-prime induced downturns.
It's the transition from the point where atmospheric polluters free-ride on the environment to the new era in which they pay - the carbon economy.
It's a change being driven by compelling science and burgeoning consumer concerns. People are concerned about environmental sustainability, want "clean" products and are especially worried about the effects of climate change - and so they should be.
New science emerges almost on a daily basis with firming certainty about the need for concerted global action.
This citizen concern is behind what appears to be a strong political consensus about climate change policy. In spite of pressure from vested interests, both Labour and National are at one on the need for emissions trading - putting a price on carbon across the whole economy: all sectors, all gases - by 2012.
The Greens, of course, have been arguing for action on climate change long before it became fashionable. Some business interests, however, are sticking to their long-standing habit of seeking to delay action on climate change in spite of emissions trading and carbon taxes being discussed in New Zealand for more than 15 years.
These interests have had ample opportunity to engage constructively but have instead chosen to argue for delay and deferral for more than a decade, while the climate problem has worsened.
I'm referring especially to the Greenhouse Policy Coalition which has been running an unrelenting campaign against emissions trading.
Its members include New Zealand Aluminium Smelters, New Zealand Steel, Fonterra, Carter Holt Harvey, Solid Energy and Holcim. It could more accurately be called the Greenhouse Do Nothing Coalition.
Its members are all big, energy intensive companies and are important players in our economy. As individual entities, many of them are taking responsible steps to address the greenhouse challenge.
Fonterra is making strenuous efforts to measure its carbon footprint; New Zealand Aluminium Smelters has long been near or at world's best practice in emissions management. Holcim has produced a valuable discussion paper on detailed design issues for the emissions trading scheme and Solid Energy is diversifying its business into renewables and investing in carbon capture and storage research with Australians.
Yet their collective voice, under their more anonymous coalition umbrella, has been quite different and has long sought to delay or avoid meaningful action on climate change.
The coalition ran a successful campaign against the carbon charge, which led to the Government developing the only alternative policy response - the emissions trading scheme. Now, the Greenhouse Policy Coalition is running a vigorous "delay and defer" campaign against the scheme, using every possible argument it can muster.
First, it was that there's not enough time to prepare submissions. But the Government had signalled the policy many months prior.
Then it was that the select committee process was too short. Then we had shroud-waving about widespread industry closures if the scheme went ahead in spite of substantial taxpayer support to avoid that very thing.
In recent weeks it was that we should wait for the details of the Australian scheme to be revealed, while three months ago it was that we should not do anything at all because the Australians weren't.
There is clearly plenty of room for debate on this issue. Within the emissions trading-scheme design, there are big, important issues around carbon sinks, impacts on international competitiveness, sequencing of taxpayer support and more.
We need to get clarity and equity around which forests can be counted as sinks. There is a need for discussion about the best way of avoiding harm to the international competitiveness of our energy intensive New Zealand businesses.
The phase-out of taxpayer support for the transition needs careful consideration. All these issues will be considered by the select committee, and no doubt changes to the bill will be made.
But the coalition goes much further than legitimate engagement in these debates. It is running a campaign to overturn any substantive action on climate change.
Having successfully got the proposed carbon tax canned, it is now seeking to kill off the only alternative method of refusing to allow greenhouse polluters to free-ride on the environment. Where would we be if that campaign succeeded?
The campaign has included unseemly full-frontal attacks on other business groups, such as the New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development, which has sought to take a leadership role.
New Zealand needs a business sector that will embrace the opportunities and responsibilities that come with the proposed emissions trading scheme. Fortunately a number of innovative businesses are doing just that. But others are still treating this as a lobbying game rather than the greatest global challenge in the history of our species.
This is not the time for vested interests to prevail over the wider public interest.
* Gary Taylor is chairman of the Environmental Defence Society.
