Naylor JonoJONO NAYLOR (National): Actually when I was looking at this bill the Films Videos and Publications Classification (Interim Restriction Orders) Amendment Bill I stopped to think about how many bills that go through this Parliament have long titles that actually at times are almost more of a mouthful and would there be a way that we could simplify the title of this bill to make it easier for people to get their mouths around—and I know we manage to reduce it down by one word through the select committee stage. But actually I was thinking through what some of the alternative titles to this bill could possibly be. For example I know that based on the way that people consider classifications they might have wanted to call it the Keeping Dodgy Stuff Away From Teenagers Bill" or particularly from other submitters they might have wanted to call it something like the "Protecting Families From Being Exposed to Offensive Material Bill". I realise then of course that those names for those bills would not necessarily be a whole lot shorter either. And of course coming from the other spectrum as has been alluded to today—because in doing this it does restrict people's ability for freedom of speech—it might have also potentially been called the "Inhibiting Freedom of Speech Bill".But when I look at those different options and those different alternatives that are out there probably on balance the name and the title of this bill is in fact about the right one. It is in fact obviously amending a parent Act which talks about films videos and publications. I guess my concern though is that actually in the modern day now when we are talking about the terminology like films or videos for example—I know last time I spoke on this bill I referred to a recording and Mr Faafoi suggested that perhaps it might have been done so long ago it would have been done on cassette. But what we did have is that actually the term video for example is a very broad term—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): My first record player had a handle.JONO NAYLOR: —and I wonder whether or not we actually need to really revise our language sometimes to make sure it is a bit futureproofed. I know Mr Mallard still would like to play his LPs on his gramophone it would appear from the description he was giving.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): No no. We did not have LPs in my time. They were 78s.JONO NAYLOR: Of course they would not have even been LPs—78s on a gramophone. Of course if you are using a 78 you have to wind it a little bit faster of course and it is a little bit more tiring.Finally I just do want to touch on the commencement. Sometimes it is appropriate to have a lead-in time between Royal assent and when the bill comes into play. Given that the use of this legislation is usually reasonably rare—it does not happen very often—and given the expertise of the people who are involved in classifications it seems very appropriate to me that they have actually had quite a lot of lead-in time. They have seen the support that this bill has got across the House and will be able to even see with a level of surety now that this is the way things are heading so they can start to gear up for it. So it seems to me that having a commencement date for the day after the Royal assent is entirely appropriate. I do want to thank the member Maureen Pugh for our constitutional lesson that we had about Royal assent a couple of speeches ago.I think ultimately as I said we have settled on the right title for the bill. It does adequately describe what is contained in it. I commend Chris Bishop for championing this bill through the House and look forward to the third reading stage.Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.Bill to be reported without amendment presently."