Allan KiritapuKIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour): Well what an interesting contribution from the member that just spoke then Nathan Guy. I actually got quite an insight into where the National Party's view towards the regions and to farmers is right now because I tried to follow it—and I was studiously trying to take notes just to make sure that I could follow the logic of the Hon Nathan Guy—but it was an incredibly distracted and defensive contribution with regards to farmers and I ask myself why Mr Guy would be so defensive about a bill and about a measure that is targeted to ensure that the wellbeing of our farmers and our rural communities is protected. Why would he be so defensive in this regard?It took him over two minutes to even turn to the whole purpose of the bill. I thought well that's because the feedback—and he mentioned it: when we were all at Fieldays just the other day—if you are like many of the members on this side of the House entrenched in your regions and in our community is poor for the National Party. There is poor feedback because the communities know those people that have been so loyal—so so loyal—to that party that has promised to be the bastion for the rural communities the bastion for the famers. Those communities know that they have been deserted. They have been upstaged by this coalition Government and they know that the real champions for the regions for our rural communities for those sectors that are the backbone of this country are on this side. So what an incredibly insightful contribution and I thank that member.But now I turn to more serious matters before us. I'm really pleased that this bill is before the House. I am incredibly pleased and I want to acknowledge the work of the new member Mark Patterson from New Zealand First from Lawrence. I want to acknowledge him for his work in bringing this bill before this House and working closely alongside the Hon Damien O'Connor. Look the member prior made note that this bill has been in various iterations since 1999. I had the pleasure of sitting alongside Mr Patterson in a range of different fora. In the communities that he seeks to represent coming from a sheep and beef background coming from a very strong farming background I know that that member is held in very high regard. So when we have an issue like farm debt—we know the rates of farm debt.Now over the last 20 years we have seen our farm debt increase by 270 percent. That's 270 percent that New Zealand banks actually are carrying on behalf of our farming community. That number's up around $62 billion to $63 billion. It is a large number and that's one thing I can agree on with the member that spoke just prior Nathan Guy. Now when you have that level of debt sitting over a particular sector and one that is critical for our country's economy—we know and we see this play out all throughout our own electorates those of us that come from rural provincial areas. We know the immense stress and look I talked about it actually a couple of nights ago but one of the biggest areas that I see or interaction that I've had in particular with the Rural Women's support network has been around the advocacy around mental health—mental health on behalf of the farming community. Now why that has really come to the forefront is because of the amount of foreclosures because of the debt levels that these families are carrying and because of the impact of the wellbeing of the sector. It's been a rough time a really rough time and I want to acknowledge those people that have really put a spotlight on the wellbeing of our farmers and our farming communities.Now when you're carrying that level of debt whether that's a small farm one of the things—in an area like mine up in the East Coast you've got a lot of sharemilkers. They might have really high levels of debt to equity ratio. Now their incomes of course are dependent on factors often beyond their control. So let's take a biosecurity outbreak like M. bovis. Well they can't control that but their vulnerability to their debt that they're carrying obviously that continues. So this measure—and this is why I really do support this measure this alternative dispute mechanism to require or enable the option for both banks and for farmers to be able to trigger the ability to go through a mandatory mediation process—the guts to the bill is about early intervention so that we're not getting to that point where we're having to see foreclosures because we know in our communities that when one farmer loses their farm because of debt that has a massive impact in the broader community—to the wellbeing of the community in every aspect in these small rural towns. The guts of this bill is about early intervention.Now the member just prior said Well if you're getting to that point where you need mediation then you've gone too far." but just prior to that he said "But people are carrying such high levels of debt because they are invested and have seen the prosperity that they can obtain from the sector." So the thing is that a lot of these—sharemilkers in particular—go right out on a limb and they want to become prosperous in these areas and they're working blimmin hard but sometimes things beyond their control happen. So this bill triggers a process where you can call on mediation. Now what I like about it in particular is there are really tight confined time frames that you can have basically an "out-ser"—subject to you know any exemptions and deferrals that the parties may mutually call upon—but you've got 60 working days to get to the end of that mediation process. Because what's happening right now is that there is so much uncertainty and things are going all over the show—it's the stress of not knowing when you might have an outcome or an answer from that bank. The other thing that is coming through from a lot of farmers in the rural community is that they're feeling a little bit the power imbalance between the big bank coming after your home your property and all these types of things. This restores a bit of balance to those discussions particularly at a time that's very frightening for many. So in terms of the actual cost to establish this mediation service it's really low-cost. It's low-cost when we're talking about the implications across the board. So I think they've estimated the fine people at Treasury and the Ministry for Primary Industries it's going to be about $350000 to establish the scheme and about the same there or thereabouts to maintain it per annum—so really low-cost—but the certainty I guess long-term ongoing is something that I think so many farmers are looking towards us right now and going "Thank you."Now I'll turn to the words of Richard McIntyre. He's the president I think of the sharemilkers section at Federated Farmers. He had a big discussion the other day about this and just said it's about time that this bill comes before the House. He said this is hugely beneficial for those sharemilkers that are impacted kind of disproportionately in this area. So it has really good support from not just the "Feddy Farmers" but from those throughout the sector. It also has support from the banks because—now the banks obviously they're carrying massive debt and they have to carry the risk of that debt that they discharge. Well I don't think that the banks are wanting to—well actually I won't get into what the banks want to do I don't blimmin know. But what we do know is that they support this particular measure and so I think again just to acknowledge the stewardship of of course the member Mark Patterson but alongside the Hon Damien O'Connor who has worked to ensure that they've got the balance right when working with both sectors the farming community and the banking sector. So I think this is a day that we can be immeasurably proud of on behalf of our rural and regional communities. This is a small but pragmatic step to ensure certainty for the wellbeing of our regional communities and it's without hesitation that I commend this bill to the House."