Dean JacquiHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Thank you Mr Speaker. In November 2017 the Minister for Land Information received a briefing on issues and opportunities in the high country. Now that's fair enough. It's always good to review legislation particularly legislation that is particularly longstanding—as is the Crown pastoral land regime which first came in 1948 and then was refreshed by the Crown Pastoral Land Act some 40 50 years later. Fair enough. And in that briefing to the new Minister Land Information made some very interesting observations and indeed recommendations. One of those observations was We recognise that stewardship of land needs to be integrated and strategic to deliver good economic environmental social and cultural outcomes. We can achieve better outcomes when we coordinate our efforts with others" and by the "others" I'm assuming that the officials meant the lessees—SPEAKER: Order! I apologise for interrupting the member. I forgot to start the clock and as a result of that I'll stop it when we get to one minute. I think it gives her about an extra minute.Hon JACQUI DEAN: I assume that the officials were referring when they made reference to coordinating our efforts with others—I assume and I do hope that at the end of 2017 those comments were referring to the high country farmers. Further into this advice received by the Minister for Land Information the Hon Eugenie Sage some of the recommendations of improvements came to "Support more innovative approaches including identifying ways we can support farmers"—support farmers—"to exercise stewardship while using land productively; … Improve coordination with other decision-makers; … Enhance public participation; and … Improve quality control and consistency." This is good stuff—this is good stuff. But where is the focus—in this document in any other document that I have seen where is the focus on the performance of Land Information in all of this? So fast-forward to July of last year when the Minister for Land Information brought the Crown Pastoral Land Reform Bill to the House and spoke in the House—somewhat predictably—as did I and my colleagues. I spoke very passionately about this issue because when I saw this bill when I saw what this Crown Pastoral Land Reform Bill was when I saw what it contained my question was: what happened to the advice? What happened to that partnership approach? What happened to that enabling approach? Why are we now dealing with a Crown Pastoral Land Reform Bill which does anything but that? Because what this bill before the House before the Environment Committee does is it turns a partnership arrangement between Crown pastoral lessees and Land Information New Zealand the Crown into one of master and servant. More than that it takes a partnership which indeed could need improving as alerted by the officials in their advice to the Minister—how have we moved from a partnership to the prescriptive master-servant relationship which is contained in this bill? So here we are. I made my comments very plain at the time as did colleagues. We are in the select committee—none of that today because our committee has not reported back but I will go back to the Hon Damien O'Connor's first reading speech when he was Minister of Agriculture but not land information where he said "The bill will ensure that the Crown and leaseholders work together". OK the Hon Damien O'Connor how is that going to happen in a regulatory environment which pitches Crown pastoral lessees against Land Information New Zealand and a regime where Land Information and their agents go on to a Crown pastoral lease and can strike an infringement notice—can strike an enforceable undertaking upon that lessee? Where is the partnership in that? This bill which is before select committee—and submissions close on Monday—has fundamentally changed the nature of high country farming in New Zealand. So what's the way forward?I have some suggestions. My first suggestion to the Minister: withdraw the bill. Turf it make it go away come back to this House with a bill which recognises that high country farmers are stewards of their land that environmental outcomes in the high country are improving—could do better are improving. Instead of doing it to the high country farmers how about doing it with the high country farmers? Ditch the bill Minister; come back with a better one.SPEAKER: Order! The time for this debate is well past expired.The debate having concluded the motion lapsed."