John Armstrong: No date set for agriculture's inclusion in ETS

If measures to combat climate change are to prove effective, they will have to be in place for a long time. That means they must have political stickability: it means there must be a solid and lasting consensus that they stay in place.

Consensus is one commodity in very short ration, however, in the majority report produced by the special select committee charged with reviewing the emissions trading system introduced by the previous Labour Government.

Even allowing for the difficulties of getting agreement on climate change policy when Act and the Greens are in the same room, the committee's report is a cop-out.

It goes for easy political options in flagging allocation of free emissions credits to vulnerable industries in a fashion which would offer little incentive for greenhouse gas emitters to change practices.

It suggests a price cap for carbon which, as the Greens argue, would have the perverse effect of rewarding those who are causing the problem and punishing those - like the forestry industry - which thought they were part of the solution.

Above all, it puts agriculture on the never-never by failing to set a date for its inclusion in the revised emissions trading scheme - a staggering omission given farming is responsible for close to 50 per cent of New Zealand's greenhouse gas emissions.

Labour and the Greens deemed the Act-instigated exercise a waste of time. It certainly takes things little further forward than was the case during debate on Labour's legislation two years ago.

Peter Dunne, the committee's chairman, describes the report as a "middle road" through some "complex and contentious material". In other words, his job was like herding cats - but harder.

Being in the minority, National now has to find the common ground Dunne was looking for. It appears to be none too fussy about where it finds it.

Its driver is two fast-approaching deadlines. The first is a year-end deadline after which coal, gas and thermal generation automatically join forestry in the scheme which Labour promulgated and which remains in place until it is amended.

The second deadline is international climate change negotiations in Copenhagen in December. National needs to have a credible replacement to Labour's scheme ready by then.

The thrust of the majority report suggests it will be a much watered-down alternative.The degree now hinges on negotiations under way with the Maori Party. That party is in an uncomfortable position. It is no surprise it tried to pull its minority report - one of four produced by parties on the select committee in disagreement with National. Its report strongly backs a carbon tax and opposes an emissions trading scheme.

The Maori Party either u-turns - and National is putting a lot of effort into persuading it that a carbon tax is not a good idea. Or it risks seeing a gutted emissions trading scheme which makes little impact on emission-cutting targets - the result if National has to turn to Act for support.

The Prime Minister was yesterday making little secret that he intends playing off political friend and foe in such fashion.

That modus operandi will be applied to Labour, too. That party is still indicating it is willing to be flexible about changing its own scheme to avoid it being watered down completely. But only up to a point. Its bargaining chip is time - or rather John Key's lack of it.

The nature of the revised emissions trading system is now a simple game of parliamentary numbers. In the process, however, the chances of the new scheme lasting for the long haul would seem to be diminishing by the day.