Simpson ScottHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): This is a bill that is an attempt to be a solution to a problem that doesn't exist to a problem that the Government has utterly failed to convince not only the leaseholders exists but the Parliament of New Zealand surely cannot be convinced by the Minister for Land Information's speech just a few minutes ago.Now it's important that we go back a little bit in history to understand the genesis of this piece of legislation. It was actually introduced into the 52nd Parliament by the then Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) Minister the Hon Eugenie Sage a Green Party Minister who introduced it to the House and then of course not long after the bill was introduced and referred to the House in July of 2020 there was a general election and the makeup of this Government that is currently in office changed significantly. The introducing Minister lost her ministerial warrant but she was rewarded with the chairmanship of the Environment Committee and now she has sitting in that role overseen the process to bring us to where we are today. Now I accept that she was not in the chair during the hearing of submissions but that was a token gesture to help placate what could only be seen as an ideologically driven philosophical approach to these 170-something high country pastoral farming families who are the victims of this unnecessary unconvincing and frankly insulting piece of legislation.We heard as we travelled around the countryside submitters from far and wide. Many of the leaseholders came to speak to the select committee during our hearings in Wellington in Queenstown and in Christchurch and they were amongst some of the most heartfelt submissions that I've heard in my time in Parliament. These were representatives of families who had farmed sensibly pragmatically with conservation and environmental values at their heart for several generations and they were distraught they were hurt they were confused and they were unconvinced by the need or the desire for why this Government would want to treat them so harshly so poorly and so insultingly.Actually no argument has been put forward by the Minister by the Labour Government backbenchers who sat on the select committee mostly mute during the submissions unable to address the concerns and issues raised by the leaseholders in any sensible way as to what was the motivation for this piece of legislation other than one of envy and one of despising their way of life their way of history and their contribution to conservation and the environment in the high country. Frankly it was an embarrassing and appalling display of mute silence from Government members who sat on the select committee.We operate in this little democracy of ours here in New Zealand a unicameral system. We don't have a federal system we don't have an Upper House we don't have a Senate. We in our own little way have developed what we would hope would be a select committee process that provides the scrutiny and the analysis and the detailed careful scrutiny of legislation. Well submitter after submitter came and presented to the select committee and none of their points that they raised in trying to convince the Government that they were farming well that they were conserving land that would otherwise be the victim of uncontrolled pests weeds and wilding pines and the like—none of those arguments seemed to be in any way resonating with Government members.So I come back to my original point: this seems to be a bill that is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. High country farmers the leaseholders can feel rightly upset and angry with the moves that this Government is making because at the heart of this piece of legislation it undermines the generations of goodwill that have been established between the Crown and the leaseholders. It undermines the good work and the faith that they have invested not only in terms of their emotion their hard work their blood sweat and toil but also millions tens of millions of dollars of improvement enhancement and careful prudent management of the high country leases. I felt very very sorry for those submitters who came and in many cases were emotional understandably emotional about the way that they were going to be treated under this piece of legislation because at its core it changes the relationship that they have entered into.As one submitter said it is effectively a treaty. These are people that entered into a treaty with the Crown. Does it sound familiar? They entered into a treaty with the Crown and now the Crown is arbitrarily taking away those treaty rights that they entered into in good faith and changing them changing them to be put in the place of quasi-criminals. An infringement regime will be put in place that means that someone will drive up the driveway or wherever it is to the high country pastoral lease homestead and issue them with a legal document telling them that they have been bad and evil and wrong in some way.What used to happen was that there used to be a relationship of trust good faith and understanding between LINZ and the leaseholders. That's all gone and that's I think a great sadness and a great pity. I think it's a shame that something akin to 1.2 million hectares of our national landscape something close to 5 percent of New Zealand's total land area that has been administered managed and carefully prudently cared for by the 170-something high country leaseholders—that that undermining of those relationships going back several generations in some cases should be cast asunder so lightly and so carefree-ly by this Labour Government on the basis of ideology nothing else; on the basis of ideology and envy. Well I don't think that's good enough. I think it's very sad. I think it's a real shame and I think that in future a re-elected National-led Government is going to have to put to rights this piece of legislation. It's just another piece of legislation of what is becoming a very long list of pieces of legislation that are going to have to be put to rights but this is one that will need to be addressed.The infringement regime is particularly offensive—particularly offensive—to the leaseholders. It's a regime that is utterly and totally unnecessary and hasn't been proven. It erodes at its very core the element of trust respect and goodwill that has existed to date and now that's gone—cast aside cast asunder all for the benefit of an ideological philosophical approach that simply doesn't like the fact that there are pastoral leases in the high country and that actually they have been doing a very good job.I want to acknowledge the very good work of the member the Hon Jacqui Dean the member for Waitaki who has been a strident passionate advocate for the leaseholders. She has done an outstanding job in my view representing them not only in this Parliament on the select committee but actually collecting their views their opinions and their heartfelt messages of concern and frustration with this current Labour Government. I think that she's done a very good job and so has Nicola Grigg. These are hard-working local rural MPs with the interests of their constituents and the environment at their heart and they can be proud of the work that they've done on behalf of the high country pastoral leaseholders. They have advocated strongly and will continue to do so through the course of this bill as it goes eventually to the committee of the whole House where I'm interested to know that the Minister is going to introduce at least one Supplementary Order Paper and maybe that's good. So we'll wait with semi-bated breath to see what that might be.Maybe there is a glimmer of hope. Maybe there is a small glimmer of hope that some tiny resonance of common sense and logic has found its way through to the Beehive office of the Minister and maybe we can hold out just a small glimmer of hope that a degree of logic and common sense will be applied even if it is at the eleventh hour. We oppose this bill.