So now the bill puts forestry on the same basis as other land-based investments, but it is still a weaker test than if an overseas investor wanted to buy farmland to farm, because it doesn't include matters like the oversight and participation of New Zealanders being of relatively high importance, which is a factor that Ministers have to consider when there are applications to buy farmland. But it does bring in those seven criteria under the benefit to New Zealand test, things like: is there an economic benefit; will there be jobs created or retained; will there be technology or business skills introduced; will there be environmental benefits, like the protection of significant indigenous vegetation; will there be public access to the coast, the foreshore, lakes, and the like? So that is a more even playing field.