Penk Chris; Rurawhe AdrianCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Mr Speaker. I join with my colleague on this side of the House Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi in stating that the National Party supports this Oranga Tamariki (Youth Justice Demerit Points) Amendment Bill at least to the select committee. No doubt that will be a matter for the 53rd Parliament.We've discussed and debated already in this House a number of the aims of the bill. They seem worthy to us. Obviously the devil in the detail will be something that will be available for examination more closely at a later point. But for this the first reading I think it's worth noting the intention to provide a structured intervention regime. An intervention is literally a coming between so in this case the member who's sponsoring the bill is looking to come between an initial set of offending and what would otherwise be a later set of offending. Of course the intent is to head it off at the pass by introducing a system where the relatively insignificant offending would be appointed to the possibility of later more significant offending so that the path that a young person would be on would be diverted essentially such that they would not be engaged further in that kind of activity. I think it's always worthwhile particularly at the early stages of discussing and debating a bill—I did find the problem that it attempts to solve. The general policy statement that the member has outlined actually goes into a bit of detail on that and I think that's a very worthwhile thing that we have seen by this bill in the name I think of Jenny Marcroft and her colleague Darroch Ball has spoken to that as well. A number of percentages are worth noting—for example that 60 percent of youth offenders reoffend apparently; and then the number of reoffending occasions three or more times six or more times at 40 percent and 14 percent respectively. It is sobering reading indeed. So I think there's a well-established case for the fact that something should be done to help to try to solve the problem of persistent offending. But of course this will be only one of a number of ways that any Government should look to solve it. So we're happy enough with the idea that this go forward. There is I suppose the tension between the subjectivity of those making decisions that the member has highlighted in the explanatory note as being problematic. Of course on the other hand we do like the idea generally speaking as a Parliament of allowing discretion to decision makers. So that's a fundamental tension that can and should and hopefully will be thrashed out at select committee and beyond. The other observation I make before I conclude my remarks is that I'm just interested in the language that's being used. The member has talked about the recycling through of complex and ambiguous systems. The cycling through of offenders—well that's sort of a circle metaphor. We sometimes talk about people's lives spiralling out of control and of course we also talk about a vicious circle where someone gets involved in a system in such a way that they can't get off. So all of these I think go to show the difficulty of sometimes the social and criminal justice elements that we're considering here which is that the circle has no end and the danger of course is that people get into a system and don't get off. So to the extent that this may be helpful to identify those who are in a difficult place and can hopefully be found a better place we do support it at least as I say to select committee and we'll look forward to seeing what further can be said about it as we go forward.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Are the Greens going to take a call?Golriz Ghahraman: Yes we are sorry.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I call Golriz Ghahraman.