Logie Jan; Tisch LindsayJAN LOGIE (Green): I rise to take another short call on this amendment bill. In my first speech I outlined some of our concerns with the initial legislation. I will try to keep this speech a little bit more focused on this bill while addressing some of the views that have been brought up by other members. What we are being told is that this bill is to clarify the original intent of the legislation and that as it was drafted there has been some ambiguity over three different categories of child sex offenders: those serving short-term sentences who have reached their statutory release date before 14 October and had a sentence expiry date after the 14th and were subject to release conditions offenders on long-term or short-term sentences of imprisonment that reach their expiry date before 14 October 2016 and were on release conditions at that time and child sex offenders who were convicted of a qualifying offence before 14 October and sentenced to prison after the 14th or sentenced after the 14th to a non-custodial sentence and ordered by the court to be placed on the register. We are told that it is about the intent.I did not sit on the initial select committee but I did follow this quite closely and I also have not actually heard exactly why we need to be passing this bill under urgency. I understand the fact that we would not want to be wasting more of Parliament's time on something that has so recently been covered in a select committee and that so much resource went to but I am not actually still quite sure of the urgency. If it is a matter that some people have been on the register where legally there was no justification or legal grounds for them to be on that register and it is this House protecting the Government from appeals on that basis and possible calls for compensation then I would be interested in hearing that or if it is a matter of making sure that the time of the House is spent efficiently then I would also like to hear a very clear rationale for that.It has been raised by other members that it is possibly a result of the legislation having been sent to the Social Services Committee that we are back dealing with this. There were some questions at the time as to why this did not go to the Law and Order Committee where there is a certain expertise around sentencing and those related issues. My understanding was that it went to the Social Services Committee because we had done the inquiry into specialist services for sexual violence which the Greens had initiated. That certainly gave us a lot of information about what we need to do as a society to address sexual violence and to reduce the level of offending in our country but I would say to this House that a sex offender register was not anywhere in those discussions. Nobody was suggesting it as a good idea at all in that very in-depth inquiry which had almost a thousand submissions. So the Greens have opposed the initial legislation and we continue to oppose it because this is an extension of that initial legislation.I would just like to address specifically one of the points made by a previous member from New Zealand First who was saying that we in the Greens do not seem to recognise the potential danger of child sex offenders and the fact that they are not normal and that they do need monitoring. I think that there is a very real danger in that kind of statement of creating the sense again that all child sex offenders are of the same type and are not rehabilitatable and that actually flies in the face of all the evidence. There are very different categories of offenders and the more we create a stigma and create them as other" then actually the less likely it is that people will come forward voluntarily to get help. We know that that is actually what we need to be driving towards because so few cases make it to court so it is a problem.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Jenny Salesa—5 minutes."