Lee MelissaMELISSA LEE (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. I was expecting a Labour member to stand.DEPUTY SPEAKER: I was too.MELISSA LEE: Yes it's sort of like Groundhog Day I think we had the same situation last night. We are talking about a particular bill where members have talked about intent and effect and that sort of happened last night as well on another bill.I'm here to support fully the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency Registration) Amendment Bill. I'd like to start off with a commendation to the Minister: thank you to the Minister for the conciliatory way that the Government has actually consulted our party and right across the House and also the work that her agencies have done to bring this bill to the House and progressing this bill under urgency. I support the urgency motion as well. Other members who have spoken earlier have talked about the reason why often in this House we do not support the urgency motion or the retrospectivity of bills because of the way that sometimes intentions don't always end up in good effect of the bill. I think that is the reason why we are often very cautious. But in these circumstances it is necessary and I support the Minister fully on this side of the House together with my colleagues.I was rather surprised that the Green Party is actually not supporting this. They were talking about the Human Rights Act and all the other kinds of things and they're talking about how they want to support the rights of the children as well and the very fact that we want to protect our most vulnerable—our children—and yet they are not supporting this bill.I am actually quite shocked by that considering the fact that recently the Supreme Court ruled D v Police [2021] SC 2 that National's 2017 amendments in a 3:2 decision—it wasn't as if it was actually a unanimous decision; it was a 3:2 split on that bill; there were some members of the Supreme Court who actually felt that the intention was very very clear but it was actually the majority of three against two who said that the intention wasn't as clear. This is the reason why we need to make sure that this bill—I am putting my fingers crossed my legs crossed my eyes crossed my everything crossed—that we do actually get the wording right because sometimes as members of Parliament as Government we intend for the bill to work and when it goes out into the real world and the Supreme Court decides that it is not as clear we have to come back and do this process again. This is the third time that this has been done for this particular bill and I'm not going to delay the process.It is one of the most heinous offences that we can potentially face an offence against our children our tamariki particularly in the lewd way that people possess whether it's pornographic material or abuse of our children and we need to make sure that we protect our most vulnerable—and that is our children who often don't have a voice. When offences are committed it shouldn't matter when they are offending versus when they are convicted. The reason why we are here is because when the offence actually happened before this Act came into effect versus when they were actually sentenced it shouldn't really matter. The retrospectivity that we actually passed in the previous incarnation of this bill should have captured all of them but because in one case it didn't all 600 potentially are going to be deregistered and we now have to do this. I think it is a real shame.I praise the work of the police and the Minister. As I said I cross my fingers that we have done the job right today. Hopefully we will do the job right today we get the words right and it is clear that our intention is clear and we'll let the whole world know that that is our intention. Hopefully the Supreme Court will actually hear our voices. I hope that the legislation works this time round. I commend the bill to the House.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Call number nine is usually a split call are we going to get back on track? OK this will be a 10-minute call then not a split call.