Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): The irony of this Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 191 is that it's meant to be about ensuring the competency of social workers and what we know from this SOP is that the Minister for Social Development is incompetent. Why? In the committee of the whole House yesterday when we debated clause 2 I specifically took a call. I asked the Minister in the chair to reassure the committee that the complex commencement dates were correct and the Minister got to her feet and said Absolutely—the bits that come in straight away on Royal assent the bits that come in at three months and the bits that come in at two years and at five years." and she said that I was wasting the House's time by raising a question. Well now the next day the same Minister fronts up to the committee and wants to reverse and go back into the committee stages and make amendments to that very provision. Now I've put 54 bills through this Parliament as a Minister—not once have I had the humiliation of having to come down to the Parliament and say "Hey I've screwed up. I want to patch up my mistake from yesterday." Now I checked the Minister for Social Development. The Minister for Social Development—this is her very first bill to get through the House and what sort of humiliation is it for her that the reassurances that she gave to the committee yesterday were false. They were wrong. So I say: why should Parliament today have any reassurance that this botched-up bill that makes 32 changes to the timing of the new social workers registration process—how come we should assure that it's all OK today?It's even worse than that; the Minister in the chair Carmel Sepuloni has not even had the gall to get up and to say to the committee "Hey look I'm sorry. I got it wrong yesterday. I gave this Parliament reassurances that I had it all OK and it is not." But can I say it's actually even worse than that. Let's just go through the time line. Remember that this was a bill that was previously developed by the National Government. It was reported back to this Parliament in April last year. That's 10 months—10 months—for the Minister to get the detail of the bill right and she introduces an SOP yesterday and a day later says "Oops I have screwed it up."And so to the Minister in the chair I say this: it is very unusual. It is incompetent for you to be introducing changes to the SOP that you only changed yesterday. This SOP is contradictory to what you introduced yesterday. Can any of my colleagues in the committee recall a Minister introducing an SOP the day after they introduced another SOP and saying "I cocked it up. I messed it up. I got it wrong."? So I say to the Minister in the chair: you owe the Parliament an explanation. You need to explain to the committee how come you got it so wrong. You need to explain to the committee why it is that the assurances that you gave to this committee yesterday were incorrect and false. Actually you owe my colleague Louise Upston an apology. Yesterday when she raised questions about clause 2 you said she was wasting the committee's time. Well she wasn't wasting the committee's time because today you're saying—Hon Willie Jackson: You're wasting the time.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well the member opposite says we are wasting the time of the House—actually we were right. The Minister was wrong. Clause 2 was a stuff up and why do we know that Mr Jackson? We know that because we have the unusual precedent of the committee being asked to undo what it did yesterday. I say again: how can we pass legislation asking social workers to be competent when their Minister has proved that she is totally incompetent? I say again: we should continue to take calls because what the Parliament is being asked to do this afternoon is totally disgraceful. The Minister yesterday told this committee that she had clause 2 correct. We face the unprecedented—it's the first time I think it's happened under this Government where a bill has had to be recommitted. That is yesterday this bill was passed through all its committee stages. It was finished. The Government said that we'd got it all OK. It's all ready to become law and then the Minister and the Government have today introduced a motion to recommit it and to completely rewrite clause 2. I just say to members of the Government: don't expect to manage your House agenda with this sort of incompetence and not expect any sort of explanation. They're such an arrogant Government that they think they can botch the law one day try and fix it the next and not take a single call of explanation.Hon Peeni Henare: That member should listen to his whips.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well I just simply ask the member opposite: does the Minister opposite think that it is acceptable for the Minister for Social Development to give a reassurance to the committee yesterday that was false and untrue without any explanation? My colleague Louise Upston has asked: when did the Minister find out that she had completely stuffed up clause 2? Is there an answer from members opposite? Well did the Cabinet approve the new changes to clause 2 my colleague Louise Upston has asked? Is the committee any wiser about that? Was it a mistake that was made in the Minister's office or was it a mistake that was made by the Ministry for Social Development? Will the Minister apologise to the members on this side of the committee that raised questions yesterday about clause 2 and was told by the Minister that we were wasting the committee's time? Will the Minister apologise to Louise Upston when she said yesterday that the provisions in clause 2 would not work when the Minister today is admitting that indeed Louise Upston was correct?All we have found out today is that the very legislation in which the Government is trying to ensure competent social work has been handled incompetently by the Minister for Social Development. Again I say to the Minister in the chair: stop the arrogance provide the Parliament with an explanation and explain to us why clause 2 was stuffed up yesterday and why we find ourselves in the very unusual situation of having to recommit this legislation and having to completely rewrite clause 2.I'd also like an explanation as to why was it that the Government wouldn't let the Social Services and Community Committee finish its job in April last year when this bill has sat on the Order Paper doing nothing for 10 months—how does that make sense? And how does it possibly make sense for the Minister to have an SOP yesterday that she has torn up today recommitted the bill and is now proposing to fix up yesterday stuff up?"