Lee MelissaMELISSA LEE (National): Madam Speaker thank you very much. I jumped the gun there a little bit. It's a pleasure to actually rise—I will signal now to the Minister and to the House that the National Party will be supporting this bill to select committee only at this stage. There are some concerns that we have and me and my colleagues will actually put some of them down.But I have to commend the Minister of Internal Affairs. Considering the fact that there is a wider media content review happening by the Hon Kris Faafoi and also the Māori sector review that is actually happening I'm slightly confused as to what the rush was for this Minister to have a very narrowly focused bill brought to this House for us to debate literally the second day before we close for Christmas rushing it through so that we are supposedly reporting back on 28 April. It's not even six months and most people who are actually in the industry perhaps are on holiday and Parliament doesn't even return until February. I just feel that it's a little rushed and I just urge the Minister to have a little bit of leeway in terms of the way that our submitters will have some time to submit to select committee and to review some of the concerns that we actually have.The objective of this bill is to reduce the potential for harm for consumers from viewing inappropriate content in commercial videos on demand. As a parent when my child was growing up I was always very concerned about some videos that he might actually consume on television or on DVDs and I would always check the ratings that were on the box—whether it was for general viewing or parental guidance that was required for the content. I think that as my son grew a little bit older I sort of stopped doing that. You know I wanted to make sure that he knew what he was actually watching. I always reminded him about the classifications that the videos actually had but knowing young children they want to go for something slightly older than they are. At age 16 I think he wanted to go for something that was for 18-year-olds and trying to convince my son not to do a video game that was rated 18 was a major fight in my household to restrict my child to not do R18 video games. I think it was rated because of the violent nature of the video. So there were actually a lot of arguments in my family. I'm sure that it is like that actually everywhere up and down the country and that is one of the reasons why we want to make sure that we have consistent labelling of the ratings and the classifications. I think it is a good thing and that is one of the reasons why we are actually supporting this bill.Having said that I guess one of the reasons why we oppose—well why we are concerned about it; and I hope that the submitters will actually address some of these concerns that we actually have—is the issue of establishment of criteria and process to identify less regulated providers. It's in the second page of the explanatory note of the bill. This is actually about the Schedule that the Minister in consultation with the chief censor creates—the people who are able to actually have content in New Zealand. I guess one of the things is that according to the Schedule or the proposed Schedule it does not list some of the content providers on different platforms that many young people actually go to. I've actually alluded to the Minister that there are many content providers that we haven't even looked at. I think hopefully the submitters will actually bring that awareness to our select committee.For example there are anime platforms that are actually very violent and have very sexual content that our young people could potentially get at but haven't even been included in it. And potentially commercial videos on demand could be our broadcasters like TVNZ. They haven't actually been included in the list and I think they need to be included in this.One of the things that—hopefully my colleagues will actually address some of the other issues but I think having mandatory classification of all content has been a clunky process. Having actually run a film festival for the Korean community—I run the Korean film festival every two years as part of the Korean Cinerama Trust—one of the issues that we've always had is the mandatory classification of every video or every film that we wanted to run during the film festival. When content has already been classified in other countries I think we need to look at how we actually share that classification in terms of the levels of violence or the content. But when the censors want to view every content that's going to be shown let's say at a film festival sometimes the process takes too long and we ran the risk of not being able to have the film classified on opening night. That is a major delay.The other concern is that if the regulation is too much sometimes I think we run the risk of having content providers geo-block New Zealand. These are some of the issues that we will actually traverse during select committee.There are quite a few things to actually go through but I'm sure that we'll nut those things out during select committee. We support it to select committee and I commend this bill to the House.