Can I thank the submitters for their valuable submissions, which have led to additional amendments to the bill, ensuring the bill best reflects the Government's policy intent. Can I reiterate my thanks to the Finance and Expenditure Committee for their efficient deliberation of the bill, and I'm pleased that the bill is attracting broad support in the House. That said, some people would say that we should have gone further and made rules more restrictive. I would like to reassure anyone who shares this concern that the "benefit to New Zealand" test has sufficient flexibility to manage proposed investments in land for forestry. The "benefit for New Zealand" test requires investors to show the benefit of their investment is proportionate to the sensitivity of the land. Proportionality, in this sense, means that overseas investment in our most sensitive land must demonstrate a higher degree of benefit than for land that is not so sensitive. This goes beyond economic productivity, applying to land that's not just productive farmland but also land of high conservation values. The Government, outside of this work, is also looking at emissions trading scheme settings and Resource Management Act rules.