Sepuloni CarmelCARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): We are supporting this bill just like we supported the original bill but I do need to state really clearly again that we did have some major reservations about the original bill. We supported the bill in the end because of the fact that it was agencies that would have access to the data. We were really concerned during the process that the public would have access to it. We were not convinced entirely that it would have the impact that the Government had set out because the evidence that we had set before the select committee did not really support to any great extent that it would have the impact. We were really concerned about the amount of money that needs to go into this—it is $146 million over 10 years—and we knew that we had different organisations that work with people who are victims of sexual abuse come through telling us that actually this money could be better invested in different places. But in the end we got a point where it is one measure. It is not necessarily the most effective measure it is not necessarily one that we would have prioritised over anything else but it was one measure that was set up to manage the risk posed by serious child sex offenders and so we did support it.It is disappointing now to see though that here we are less than 6 months later back in the House having to amend the bill because there were things that were overlooked and now there are changes that have to be made. Going back to a point I made earlier in the night one of the reasons why we have to question why it may have happened is that this bill which now has been put forward by the Minister of Police was originally put up by the Minister for Social Development and was sent to the Social Services Committee. We questioned that decision at the time and really had to question whether or not that was the place for this bill. Now to hear in the chair tonight the Minister of Police saying that she has taken over this bill because the sex offenders' register sits better with her ministry makes us throw our hands up because we tried to say that over a year ago when it was sent to the Social Services Committee. So we have to wonder at what point the Government worked out that this was the better place for this bill and this issue to be situated.Also I am a little bit concerned that we are hearing nothing from the Minister for Social Development who was responsible for seeing this bill through and now here it is back. We would think that actually the Minister for Social Development would be standing up in this House and explaining to the House and to the public how we got to this point why these things were overlooked in the process and why less than 6 months after the bill was passed we are back in the House having to amend it because some serious oversights have now been found.I do not have much to say about this bill except for the fact that yes we will support it because it is important that the amendments are made but the mistakes should not have been made in the first place and the Government is responsible for that because it made the decision to send it to a select committee that it was not suited to. We made that point right at the beginning of the process. The Government now acknowledges that with Paula Bennett saying that this is better situated with her in her ministry. So yes we will be supporting it but as I said the Government has made an absolute mess of this. It will not be the first thing that it has made a mess of but it has made a mess of this and it needs to be very careful in the future about which committees it sends things to and needs to just make sure that the correct process is followed the whole way through so that we do not end up having to waste the time of the House and the time of the public by having amendments made to legislation within 6 months of it being passed. Thank you.