Upston Louise; Sepuloni CarmelHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Mr Chair. I'm pleased Minister Sepuloni took a call but really it didn't answer the questions that my colleague Harete Hipango asked. I appreciate that the Social Services and Community Committee is controlled by the Labour Party and not the Minister—I accept that—but the point with this is there were multiple opportunities and requests from stakeholders throughout the select committee process asking for time: asking for time so that submissions weren't just over Christmas; asking for an extension to the time that stakeholders could submit on the bill. It's fair to say from many of the submissions that we heard there were parts of the bill that were very unexpected to stakeholders who were very surprised at the inclusion particularly around for example the movement of the supposedly independent monitor and not locating it the Office of the Children's Commissioner which was the original plan out of the Beatie report.The question is: why was the time not taken at every opportunity? And now when we have a substantial Supplementary Order Paper—which on the one hand the Minister says isn't really changing anything and so there's pages and pages and pages of something that's not really changing much. But she's listened to the stakeholders and met with them and listened to them and strengthened the language but not changed very much. It makes it really confusing in terms of what actually has changed. So this is going to take some time.I want to put on record for the people who have just started listening to this debate: this is about the oversight of the Oranga Tamariki system and the Children and Young People's Commission. Of any organisation the Government is responsible for the oversight of Oranga Tamariki has to be the priority and to do this in this manner is disgraceful. Stakeholders asked for time; members of Parliament asked for time; other select committee members from Labour ignored it. The Minister didn't support the efforts of the stakeholders to ask for more time to do this thoroughly. And actually one of the requests from many of us which still is on the table is: why do all of this? Why confuse all of this with changes that aren't really changes when the report of the royal commission into State abuse hasn't come back?The question Minister is simply: why this level of change? Is it real or is it not? And why not take more time refer it back to the select committee allow the level of scrutiny it deserves and the most vulnerable of children deserve too?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): I'm going to stick closely to what is within scope of the bill. Discussing through the committee stage when speaking specifically to the detail around the bill doesn't include extending that to why we wouldn't take more time to deliberate over this. However the one point I will make about it is that the Social Services and Community Committee did get an extension to hear more submissions because the select committee saw that as being of importance.Also I was asked by the previous member from the National Party Harete Hipango about the Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs) and to explain what they were. I think I went into great detail about what those SOPs were and I also summarised what they do. I did say very clearly that although they don't change the intent of the bill they do provide further clarity and the assurance that stakeholders were seeking with respect to protections for our young people in care or in contact with the system. So it was the assurance around protection as well as the clarity that we sought when pulling together the changes that we are discussing.