Williams PotoPOTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): I too express my colleagues' concern for the lack of time to actually fully understand the implications of this amendment bill—I presume this is the feeling that my colleagues have. We were led to believe that the bill was actually minor and technical in that it was about the sentencing date and also about the phrase release conditions" as opposed to "conditional release" and my colleague Kelvin Davis has already explained the interpretation of those particular phrases. But when you look through the legislation Part 1 and Part 2 you actually see that there is a little bit more going on than just those two things that we were led to believe we were tidying up.We have got amendments in clause 5 which clarify the definition of "corresponding registrable offender".Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.POTO WILLIAMS: Before we broke for dinner I was talking about the Opposition having received the bill at kind of fairly short notice and the idea that there were actually a couple of things that we needed to fix up in the primary legislation principally the difference between "release conditions" and "conditional release" and the whole expiry date for sentencing. But then we got the bill and see that there is a whole lot more that we need to actually consider. So I am a little concerned that we are actually being told that we are kind of making small but useful amendments to ensure we capture the 107 who are not currently eligible to be on the child sex offender register but yet when we look through this actually there is quite a bit of work that we are fixing up here.I think I want to concur with my colleague Kelvin Davis when he said that perhaps we should have been given a little bit more time to actually examine this fully. When I have a look I see that not only are we looking at release conditions and sentence expiry date in clause 4 but then we are also looking at who is a corresponding registrable offender and whom the court may take a registration order from. We are also looking at the retrospective application of the legislation. Then further on in Part 2 I think we are also looking at reporting obligations and various other applications. So this is actually quite significant.When we think about the Social Services Committee's process around this the select committee was looking at things like "Is it appropriate to actually have people on a sex offender register?". They were looking at vastly different requirements to what we are now considering. So yes I do agree that the Minister of Police is now responsible for this piece of legislation but it is quite a different beast from the original piece of legislation that came before the select committee.I am concerned that we actually are not going to be given sufficient time to examine the implications of this fully and I would actually like it if the Minister has a few minutes just to perhaps give me some comfort that the particular amendments particularly those that apply to Part 2 because it is quite a lengthy part of the bill—that actually we are going to be satisfied that we have got this absolutely right. I know I did make a plea in my previous call on this but I am looking for some comfort that we are going to be absolutely sure that we do get everything we need tidied up for this and I am sure the Minister has got some information that she can provide to the Committee on this. Thank you."