Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Thank you Madam Chair. There we had it—right at the end of the Minister of Conservation's contribution her acknowledgement that 1080 in her opinion is the answer to all of our problems. The reason that we get this from the Minister is because she has put the handbrake effectively on Predator Free 2050. Can I just acknowledge the previous National Government for that initiative—that incredible initiative that big hairy audacious goal that we put out there that we are striving to achieve that this Minister has effectively put the handbrake on.I'm so pleased that she took a call before me because it leads me so nicely into my contribution today because I want to turn to the review that I found the most interesting and that is from Predator Free 2050. The discussion that we had in particular was around the use of biotechnology by Predator Free 2050 in reaching their goals and in that we took the officials back to some comments that they made a year ago specifically around the use of biotechnology in ridding our country of these pests these stoats rats and possums to stop them killing our forests and killing our birds.The question was around the support from this Minister in the use of technological solutions in the area of biotechnology and the answer that was given a year ago was She's given us support in regards to the strategy that we're undertaking" and we went on to ask "So she hasn't issued any instructions that you're not to proceed with the advancement of technological solutions?" and the official replied "No". Two weeks after we asked that question a mere two weeks the Minister did a complete flip—a complete 180—and sent a letter a directive to Predator Free 2050 and she said to them "Cease and desist. We don't want you even looking at it."Now fast-forward to just recently when we had Predator Free 2050 back in front of our select committee and we said to those officials "What changed?" and they mentioned specifically that directive—they mentioned specifically that directive. They brought up the letter of direction and they admitted to the committee they said to us that it came completely out of the blue. They were blindsided. And no wonder. Two weeks earlier—imagine this—they had the full support and commitment of the Minister for the programme that they were working to in terms of technology and then two weeks later a cease and desist letter a complete flip.We on this side of the House acknowledge that we have a massive problem and it's not the million mice it's not the butterflies; it's the stoats it's the weasels it's the possums and it's the rats and if we are to even start to think about Predator Free 2050 we have to have more tools in our toolbox than just simply dropping 1080 on our land which is what this Minister wants to do. The only thing in her little tool box is these traps and 1080 and we know very well from the officials and from Predator Free 2050 themselves that this is only going to keep a lid on things at best. They admitted in our select committee when we had them there in front of us—they admitted to us that they will need more tools in their tool box to achieve this very big goal and just dropping more poison is not going to be the answer.For the Minister to get up today and talk about the loss of biodiversity and about the pests being this major threat and how terrible it all is and how 1080 is the answer is absolutely appalling because we heard from Predator Free 2050 we've heard from the experts. I don't think there's anyone out there who thinks that these tools on their own are going to get us to Predator Free 2050. This Minister has put an absolute handbrake on these poor officials and you could say tried to dance around the issue but it was clear from their answers that they were going down a specific track they knew the tools that they needed—Hon Scott Simpson: Ideological handbrake.ERICA STANFORD: —it was an ideological handbrake; thank you Mr Simpson—and yet two weeks later from that original answer a year ago this Minister drops a bombshell on them: cease and desist that one thing that you know is going to get there.And they're not saying "Let's do it." This Minister isn't saying "Don't do it at all." She's telling them "Don't even look at it don't even research it don't put a cent into even thinking about it. Just keep dropping poison on our forests." That's what this Minister is saying: "Let's not look at new technologies." Despite what other members of her Green Party say that technology is going to be the future—not in this Minister's mind."