Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm pleased to take a short call on the Conservation (Infringement System) Bill at committee stage. I'm going to be talking to the tabled amendment that Sarah Dowie has put on the Table as well. I want to thank the Minister Eugenie Sage for taking a call to explain her position. I guess the crux of all of this comes down to fairness and consistency and you've heard those words a number of times.The National Party's position around the Department of Conservation (DOC) having the power to issue infringement notices is that we're quite happy with them doing that. In fact as you heard Maggie Barry instigated all of this in the first instance because DOC are one of the only major compliance agencies without an infringement system and we believe that they have the ability to issue notices in a fair manner objectively and with consistency over the country. They are State sector employees they are under one umbrella they have training and they are able to control their officers and monitor them so that they are issuing notices in a fair and consistent manner.The problem that we've always had right from the beginning is with Fish & Game a completely different organisation having the same ability to issue an infringement notice. The issue that we've always had is with fairness. We are concerned with the confidence that the public have when they are out on the estate when they're going about their recreational activities—the confidence that they have in DOC and in Fish & Game being fair and consistent across the infringement system. We don't believe that with two separate organisations issuing infringement notices you will get that.The Minister explaining to us today about the safeguards in the bill and having the national policy statement is not enough we don't believe. We still think that the Fish & Game rangers are not State sector employees. They don't have the same training. They don't have the same level of consistency across the country and we are worried about the fact that the public will lose confidence. So you may have some instances where DOC are applying the rules consistently about people who are camping in the wrong place and Fish & Game officers you know might take that a completely different way. So we're worried about the public and how they feel about the infringement notices being issued in a fair and consistent way.I know that Minister Sage said that there would be a review after a year but I can imagine that there are going to be many complaints during the first year that this is implemented—for example where we get people who are on one hand being issued an infringement notice and another being issued a warning—where we can see inconsistencies across the country and how that's going to be dealt with.This amendment brings us back to a position that we can all agree on. We are quite happy with DOC in their ability to have an infringement system and to issue those notices fairly and consistently. They have long advocated for this and the Hon Maggie Barry instigated all of this. We're quite happy with them. The issue that we've got is with Fish & Game and this amendment will bring us back to a position where we can agree on the legislation.This addition of Fish & Game is the main sticking point. It was in the select committee. We don't believe that the safeguards in the bill are good enough. We do think that there is going to be an erosion of public confidence in the system. I think that there are going to be lots of complaints and I'd like to know how the Minister is planning on handling that. The amendment that's on the Table will remove all of the references to Fish & Game taking it back to what we had in the first instance which is a bill that we can all agree on. If the Minister could get up and let us know how she's going to handle the complaints and the potential before that end-of-year review that would be much appreciated.