Hernandez FranciscoFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you for giving me my first call on this bill. I just had a few questions that I wanted to ask around it but I wanted to preface it a little bit with some context. Forestry as we all know is an over $6 billion industry and I had a look at what the actual costs of the registration were. So I had a look and the cost for the application was $510.60 with the annual levy set at $320 and the renewal being set at $444. There's been an assertion that the rationale for this bill is that there have been undue costs and undue regulatory burden on business but that fee doesn't seem to be set all that high to me.Considering that we've seen what the catastrophic impacts of under-regulation are with the impacts of forestry slash in the aftermath of the extreme weather events in Cyclone Gabrielle and the sad stuff that happened in the North Island it would seem to me that the forestry sector—and you know considering that some of the contributions that the Labour members have made are rightly pointing out that we do need to make sure that the forestry sector is safe particularly for workers particularly for owners and particularly for communities that are around forestry it doesn't strike me that there's under-regulation at the moment.So I guess my first question to the Minister is: what evidence I guess have you had in terms of over-regulation? I appreciate that this bill isn't going to go through a select committee process so we sadly will miss out on the chance to hear from submitters but yeah I would really be interested in what evidence there has been on over-regulation. Particularly since I think there's been an assertion that voluntary regulation and some sort of code of practice will kind of fill the gap that the withdrawal of regulation can have but the supplementary analysis paper says that before the regulation was introduced there were 90 registered members under the voluntary scheme and that after the regulation was introduced there were 527 members. So it just strikes me that if less than one in five of the forestry advisers and of the forestry owners were members of the voluntary kind of regime that existed won't it just go back to that same old kind of cowboy country of under-regulation as my colleague Hūhana Lyndon rightly pointed out?It's particularly important as well I think because I'm coming at this from a climate angle as well as the kind of regulation angle. Forestry will play an important role in meeting our kind of domestic targets and also potentially our international targets so I would also be interested in hearing from the Minister whether there has been any analysis done on the impact of repealing regulations on the extent of forestry coverage. I think it's kind of like the basics of supply and demand. I think members on the Government benches have asserted that if we withdraw regulation it will lead to the forestry sector expanding so what is the extent of that expansion that will happen and what can we expect from that?This leads on to my final question that obviously there's an interaction between the forestry sector and the New Zealand emissions trading scheme. We've seen in the past carbon market auctions fail because they have failed to meet the reserve price so is there a concern that—and this is the logic that I'm following—if the Government benches have asserted that withdrawing regulation will lead to a growth in the forestry sector and a growth in the forestry sector means that there'll be an expansion of potential providers of emissions returns and carbon units (NZUs) in their carbon market scheme does that mean that there'll be a flood of NZUs in the scheme? What will that do to the reserve price and not only the reserve price but the overall price in the secondary markets in the emissions trading scheme? We do need a carbon price that actually incentivises companies to avoid making pollution and we've heard assertions from the Government benches that they're relying on market-based mechanisms. So if you're actually flooding the markets with forestry credits what does that do to the incentives to actually reduce pollution? So I'm really curious to hear the Minister after the dinner break perhaps.