Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): Thank you Madam Chair. It's probably the right time to follow on from Scott Simpson with his tabled amendment with another one here which is the amendment labelled F" on the Table. On page 41 it talks about no compensation being payable so no compensation. It says under clause 6(1) of the bill "No compensation is payable by the Crown"—Dr Duncan Webb: I raise a point of order Madam Chair. My understanding is that schedules are to be debated at the same time as the part to which they relate. Schedule 1 of the bill relates to Part 1 of the Crown Pastoral Land Act which is indeed Part 1 of this bill and this debate should have been held earlier.Stuart Smith: A point of order.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Just wait one second. I'll just get some advice on this.Stuart Smith: A point of order.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Let me deal with the first point of order. So Dr Duncan Webb is indeed right. Schedule 1 should have been debated with Part 1.Stuart Smith: Madam Chair that's not the advice that we had when we started on this. In fact the previous Chair said the number of tabled amendments that were included; it was five as I recall and in fact she said that. So we followed that advice and I think it would be most improper to not continue in that way because I've got a tabled amendment here I want to debate and we haven't spoken to those. I know the members are very uncomfortable on the other side but that doesn't mean things shouldn't be done properly here.Joseph Mooney: A point of order Madam Chair. I actually had the same reading as my colleague across the House earlier in the debate in Part 1 and I went to speak to a tabled amendment under my name and I had a ruling from the then Chair that I would have until Part 2 to do so. So we have proceeded on the basis of that and as my colleague Stuart Smith just said before it would be inherently unfair if we were then unable to speak to these tabled amendments given the advice we were given previously that we could not speak to them under Part 1.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I will allow for now for you to speak to the tabled amendments now but the Clerk is going to go out and check with the previous Chair what her ruling was. But for now I'll let you go ahead.BARBARA KURIGER: Thank you. So I was actually speaking to the tabled amendment of Scott Simpson which refers to clause 6 on page 41 of the bill which says no compensation is payable. In clause 6(1) "No compensation is payable by the Crown for any loss or damage or any adverse effect … or under any lease or … right [of] interest arising from the enactment or operation of [this] amendment Act." Clause 6(2) says "If there is any inconsistency between this clause and any other enactment or rule of law this clause prevails". Now my colleague Scott Simpson has suggested on his amendment and I agree with this that compensation may be payable and clause 6 should say "Nothing in this Act precludes a court ordering that the Crown is liable to pay compensation in connection with a judicial review in respect of a proposal or related review or for any loss or damage or any adverse effect … or under any lease or other right of interest arising from the enactment or operation of the amendment Act." Now if you're in a long-term—and this has been a very long-term legal relationship with the Crown and the Crown comes along and then changes the rules on the farmer and the farmer goes for a judicial review and the Crown is found to be incorrect would it just not make good moral judgment for compensation to be able to be payable? So I'd like the Minister to make a comment on that please."