Upston LouiseHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Madam Chair. I thank the Minister for Social Development for her contribution but unfortunately the contributions have actually made it even more confusing because of the inconsistencies in her answers. There's a couple of specific questions I want to ask because in her first answers she talked about the fact that with the original bill as introduced in the first reading which Labour in their time in Opposition supported the scope of the bill was too narrow. She said that actually the bill needed to be extended the scope of the legislation needed to be extended and the scopes of practice needed to be included and that is allowing for the creation of it. Then she's also saying in complete contrast to that these are minor changes in Supplementary Order Paper 187.So I do want to get real clarity from the Minister: is this a major change in that we're significantly changing the scope of the bill because the objectives required in the first bill were too narrow or is this just a minor change? If it's a major change as you outlined when you first addressed this House in the committee of the whole House stage—sorry Madam Chair; when the Minister addressed the House in this committee of the whole House. If it is that major then the absolute overreach of ignoring the Social Services and Community Committee and not allowing the select committee to consider this is outrageous. So the Minister needs to make up her mind: is it a significant change or is it a minor amendment? So that's my first question. Again if it is a major amendment and it's a major scope to the legislation there's been plenty of time since it was reported back in April for this to come back to the select committee for consideration of that major scope change to the bill as introduced.Now I am going to labour the point because I think it is incredibly important and I also want to address a couple of the comments that have been made by Labour Party members of the select committee participating in this debate which again complicate the issue and create these inconsistencies. Greg O'Connor said Yes the select committee determined that the scopes of practice were required." So if they were required and the select committee wanted that why was that not pushed for in the select committee stage? Why is it that the officials' advice was accepted that scopes of practice didn't need to be included? So I'm somewhat confused by your contribution Mr O'Connor—Mr Greg O'Connor not Mr Simon O'Connor—because you've made the point very clearly that you agreed with the submitters who were saying that the scopes of practice needed to be included.I also want to reflect on another of our select committee members' contributions and to say it was very useful to have the practical experience of a social worker brought into the House and of the process involved. I want to say to that point that the Social Workers Registration Board as the regulator have been incredibly committed to ensuring that the select committee got it right and unfortunately the select committee didn't have that opportunity. So in the seven months since the report back why hasn't this matter been brought back to the select committee for consideration?One query I do just want to put—because in a further contribution I'll refer to the regulatory impact statement—is that the regulatory impact statement that is on the Table is the one from 1 May 2017 but the most up-to-date one is 26 July 2018. So I'm not sure if the Minister is deliberately trying to exclude that regulatory impact statement from being considered as part of this debate. I do think that's critical. I do want the Minister to answer the question. The Minister's not listening right now but I do want her to answer the question as to why the regulatory impact statement of July 2018 isn't the one that's being considered here today because that has some critical discussion about the risks of the change about the risks of the sector misinterpreting the inclusion of the scope of practice. So I do want a couple of answers to that."