Curran ClareCLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): I would like to refer to clause 3 and also new clause 1(3) of amended schedule 1 set out in clause 7 in Part 2. My first question to the Minister of Police relates to the unusual circumstances—and I will not dwell on this because I know that it has been referenced before—but the unusual circumstances of having to amend a principal Act within 5 months of it being enacted and in quite an important way. I can see that law schools around the country will be paying attention to this piece of legislation or this amendment tonight and actually it will probably end up being taught in courses and classes as being—Hon Simon Bridges: Oh I doubt that—I doubt that very much.CLARE CURRAN: Well with respect to the Minister over there he would say that.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Order! I just wonder whether the member would mind getting quickly to the new point she is making about the point that has already been reiterated.CLARE CURRAN: Well the question is: how many times has this Parliament under this Government had to make amendments to primary legislation within a year—well within 6 months—of it actually being enacted? That is my first question and I can see this being taught as what not to do as legislators. My second question goes to new clause 1(3) of amended schedule 1 as set out in clause 7 in Part 2 which actually provides a lot more detail than previously as I understand it on the reporting obligations of offenders. What my question goes to is this: if this clause does not relate to deportees from Australia and the 107 people who have fallen outside of the original legislation; and if they are not deportees given that new clause 1(3) of amended schedule 1 relates to a person who—(a) was convicted before 14 October 2016 of a corresponding offence in a foreign jurisdiction; and (b) as a consequence of that conviction … (i) was … sentenced to imprisonment; or (ii) was … required to report in that jurisdiction information about [themselves] to [somebody] performing functions substantially similar to those of the Commissioner under this Act" etc. "or (iii) was … deported from that jurisdiction." who does this clause apply to? I think that is a really valid question—who—because I have been sitting here racking my brains. If we need to insert this subclause it must apply to some people. It must apply to people who have committed offences in another jurisdiction and who are now in our jurisdiction—am I correct? Hon Member: Yes.CLARE CURRAN: So if that logic plays out—and it refers in new clause 1(3)(b)(iii) of schedule 1 to "was or is deported from that jurisdiction."—then clearly deportees come in somewhere. And if they are not deportees from Australia then where are they deportees from and how have they been excluded from the primary legislation?I know that the Minister has given some assurances around monitoring to the Committee during the debate and I thank her for that and that is reassuring but I think that what we now need to know is some information clearly without identifying people about what jurisdictions we are talking about and how this came to be. What has actually sparked the concern and the need to insert this clause into the legislation? I think this is really important and I hope the Minister can answer."