I believe the government is planning on offsetting 75% of their reduction
here’s some info i found at:
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/climate/emissions-target-2020/09-b-00576.html

——
Performance against a 2020 target

22. The use of these mitigation estimates along with baseline projections allows performance against particular hypothetical targets for 2020 to be assessed for each of the policy scenarios. To use a purely hypothetical example (for illustrative purposes only) of a 2020 target to reduce emissions 20% below 1990 levels, our analysis suggests that a $25 price on all emissions would result in the target being met approximately 25% through domestic mitigation and 75% by purchasing units offshore. This is shown Figure 6. With a $50 price on all emissions, approximately 43% of this target is met through domestic mitigation.

———-

& its pretty clear that the price of carbon will never get anywhere near $50 so – …offsetting it is.

looks like its up to ourselves to shut down the sources of emissions here in NZ – the government dont seem at all interested

That’s a great question. Greenpeace reckons that emission reductions should primarily be done at home. We’re not happy with offsetting in general, but we accept there will be some. We don’t want REDD in the carbon markets, for a number of reasons; we want to see a global fund to halt deforestation instead. We’re very unhappy that the Government’s strategy is to rely almost completely on international carbon markets and ignore opportunities to reduce emissions here in NZ (except for some forestry). So to sum up, no REDD credits and as much as possible should be done at home (such as 100% renewable electricity sector, smart farming that reduces emissions and sorting out our transport system). Hope that helps provide some clarity.

How much of the 40% would Greenpeace accept being offset by purchasing credits through REDD [privatisation of rainforests] and other market based carbon trading schemes / not actually reducing emissions in New Zealand? I read this quote [see below] from George Monbiot recently and wondered whats the point in getting a target if it doesnt mean countries like NZ actually have to make changes here in New Zealand, where it seem to me the real long term changes need to be happening.

“Carbon offsetting makes sense if you are seeking a global cut of 5% between now and forever. It is the cheapest and quickest way of achieving an insignificant reduction. But as soon as you seek substantial cuts, it becomes an unfair, impossible nonsense, the equivalent of pulling yourself off the ground by your whiskers. Yes, let us help poorer nations to reduce deforestation and clean up pollution. But let us not pretend that it lets us off the hook.”

— George Monbiot, The Guardian, July 2009