Sepuloni CarmelCARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): I will just start by saying that of course we will be supporting this bill in its first reading and I have to say it has been a long time coming. Back in October 2015 the bill that I had drawn out of the members' ballot to make social worker registration mandatory was debated in the House and it was unfortunate that at that time we had the support of some of the parties but not all. We did not have the support of ACT we did not have the support of Peter Dunne and United Future and we did not have the support of National. It was equally as disappointing at the time that I had met with every political party to discuss that member's bill and the importance of mandatory social worker registration and even the Minister for Social Development herself at the time could not say there was anything in the bill that I drafted that she disagreed with. She just said it was about timing.Well timing—let us talk about timing because actually when I looked back even further when Labour was in Government near the end of its term in 2008 we were on our way to actually making social worker registration mandatory. The Minister herself was on record in the Hansard pushing for this to happen—pushing very hard in fact for this to happen. She was a great advocate for social worker registration and yet here we are 9 years into that National Government's term and it has taken it this long to get this to its first reading. I have to say there was no need for an inquiry. There was no need for the Social Services Committee to undertake an inquiry. We could have done the same work if the Government had just supported my member's bill to the select committee which we ended up doing what a year later and we would have been ahead of the game.It is not just about who wins or whether someone wins with regard to getting a bill up and whose name was on it and who led it. It is about the fact that this is actually a really important and urgent issue. We have had recommendations come from the different advisory groups to say that it is actually imperative that we have a qualified and registered workforce working with our most vulnerable children and families. So it should not have been delayed and it did not need to be delayed at all.The bill does much of what we had proposed in the member's bill that I had in the ballot which was drawn and was voted against by National. Essentially it makes it so that a person may call themselves a social worker whether through names titles descriptions abbreviations etc. only if they are a registered social worker and hold a current practising certificate. That is so important because actually a few years ago a survey was undertaken and the general public assumed that anyone who called themselves a social worker actually had the qualifications and was registered and regulated by a body of some sort. So they were under the assumption that that was already the case.But in fact it was not the case and we have had multiple incidents in the media where people who had been employed as social workers" or called themselves "social workers" had been done in the courts for criminal activity. They had been trusted in positions as a social worker when they should not have had that title because it was misleading. The public assume that people who have that title have the qualifications and are regulated in some way or another and that has not been the case. So we support the fact that that title will be protected once we get through this process.There have been concerns raised. I have had the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers get in contact with me about this bill. It is happy that it is finally at this point and that we are moving towards making social worker registration mandatory. The concern it raised is that social workers or people with a social worker qualification could actually be employed in a role that is not titled social worker—like probation officer family advocate youth worker—and that there will be no expectation that those people be registered as social workers because they are not practising formally under the title of social worker. We have had that discussion. I have had that discussion with the association. That is a point that I am sure will be nutted out and discussed even further and that will be evident in the submissions that are received by Parliament when it gets to the select committee. At this point in time I have said to the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers that I am at this point in time on the side of just protecting the title of social worker and if we were going to go down the track of actually regulating those other positions then that is a completely different piece of work I think to what we are discussing here in the House today.Also I have been a teacher a qualified teacher. You can be a qualified teacher who might go on to other positions outside of the State schooling sector where you may tutor or whatever else but there is no expectation in those situations that you will maintain your registration. I think that is the kind of immediate comparison that I think of. But it is still up for discussion and as I said to the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers person whom I have been speaking to this is something that we can discuss further at the select committee. They can present us with the evidence there and we can go through the process with regard to that.I do not really have much to say on this bill because we are going to be supporting it. I think I have made the key points. It is a long time coming and we could have done it ages ago. The Government did not need to hold this up. I am looking forward to hopefully being part of the next Parliament where we will get to debate this further and where we can actually realise a mandatory social worker registration. Thank you."