Sepuloni CarmelCARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): I do want to support some of what Jan was saying because it is frustrating that we are now back here discussing an amendment to legislation we just recently had in the House given that there was lots of debate on that original legislation. There was lots of frustration for those of us who were on the Social Services Committee at the time. We were thinking that it was not the most appropriate committee for that legislation to be in in the first place. I do wonder whether or not we would be in this position now if it had gone to the right select committee in the first place.It is interesting that it is the Minister of Police who is pushing for this amendment when it was the Minister for Social Development who dealt with the original legislation. There is a breakdown there and we in the House have to acknowledge—I think very fairly—that this is reflective of the shambles that that Government is in when it comes to dealing with matters in this House. We should not be back here less than 6 months later I think making amendments because a bill was not dealt with appropriately to begin with—mainly I think because it was not sent to the right select committee initially.We did support the original legislation and we will be supporting the amendment legislation that we have in front of us. We are supporting the amendment legislation because there has been a stuff-up here and it has to be fixed. Essentially the bill is amending the retrospective application of the 2016 legislation so that all relevant child sex offenders will be registerable under the Act as intended. Specifically the bill states: The Act was intended to provide retrospective provisions that at the commencement of the Act would provide for registration of all offenders subject to sentences of imprisonment or post-sentence orders relating to qualifying offences and those yet to be sentenced when the Act came into force who would have been registrable offenders if they had been convicted after the commencement of the Act." The additional groups that have been added are "child sex offenders serving short-term sentences (2 years or less imprisonment) who had reached their statutory release date before 14 October 2016"—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I am going to interrupt the member. Reading the explanatory note of the bill is actually not part of the debate.CARMEL SEPULONI: OK sorry—I was leading somewhere Mr Assistant Speaker. Most notably on the additional groups that I was touching on it appears that the National Government failed—in the original legislation—to include many people who were sentenced before the Act came into place and any child sex offender who was no longer serving their sentence but still subject to release conditions. Release conditions are things like residential restrictions not being able to go near certain places or associate with certain people or being able to work only in certain areas—essentially the conditions that serious sex offenders are on for most if not all of their life post-release from prison.We do support this amendment legislation. I have to reiterate some of the frustrations that the previous speaker—that being Jan Logie—did discuss. The original legislation caused frustrations for many of us in the House because of the fact that we did feel that resource could be spent better in other places to actually address what the legislation's intention is which is managing the risk posed by serious child sex offenders and protecting our children from harm. We did feel that $146 million over 10 years could have been spent in better places.But today we are dealing with an amendment bill. Going back to my original point I just want to state that we would not be in this position if the Government had sent this bill to the correct select committee rather than sending it to the Social Services Committee which was not the appropriate place for it to be considered in the first place. And so here we are back in the House less than 6 months later making amendments because of mistakes in the bill that were overlooked. Thank you."