Bidois DanDAN BIDOIS (National—Northcote): Oh fantastic Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to take a call in the committee stage. We have been waiting a long time to debate the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) in question and I know we're going part by part so we'll narrow it to Part 1. As you'll recall in previous debates the Chair didn't allow us to—quite rightly—go into the SOP so it's a really good chance to go into it now. I want to thank Minister Carmel Sepuloni for fronting up and answering the questions around the SOP. I do want to go to something she said earlier on about the fact that we've been waiting 16 long years in order to get this change through. Of course everybody in this Chamber tonight wants to see the professionalism and the standards of social workers improve but our point on this side is: could the Minister not have given the select committee two or three more weeks to consider SOP 187 because as we have pointed out we do have some serious reservations with being dumped on at the last moment. I do want to get stuck into in particular new Part 1A of the bill which talks about the scopes of practices. I wasn't on the Social Services and Community Committee at the time but having read the commentary there were reservations with the scopes of practice. Yes 70 percent of submitters said they wanted that included but the report prepared by the select committee outlined the difficulties with defining the scopes of practice. Had we had the time to consider the Minister's SOP we would have been able to actually dive down deeper into that to exactly formulate what is a really important bill. We have all been waiting 16 years; I'm sure we could have waited another two or three weeks to get the process right. So I want to just again go back to new Part 1A of the bill around the scopes of practice. I do have a couple of questions for the Minister in the chair tonight. I do want to ask the Minister who exactly she's consulted with with respect to the scopes of practice. So she says that she's taken on board some of the written submissions—did she follow those submissions up? Has she spoken to some of those organisations that spoke for and against the scopes of practice? That is something that I think needs to be heard because as my colleague the honourable Simon O'Connor pointed out—Simon O'Connor: Not honourable—tell me you're a prophet!DAN BIDOIS: —ha ha!—30 percent of submitters did not want the scopes of practice. So I think it's fair to ask the Minister in the chair to front up over who she has in fact consulted in terms of the groups. Has she been out into the sector to consult widely over the scopes of practice? The second thing is around the use of the board to define the scopes of practice. If the Minister believes that this board can in fact define the scopes of practice for what is a social worker why not put it in the legislation itself? Why is it that we need a board to define it? If we are setting the standards and we want to make sure that the 2000 unregistered social workers become registered why do we not clarify and use the resources from the select committee to in fact define what is a social worker and the scope of a social worker in the relevant legislation. Those are kind of the two broad areas that I would like as the member for Northcote feedback on from the Minister tonight.I want to reiterate that this side of the Chamber is very supportive of the overall legislation. We want to see our social workers valued. We want to see the profession professionalised standardised so that it encourages far more people into the sector because we know and we acknowledge the value that these social workers provide into our society. Thank you.