So, in sum, National supports this bill at first reading. I do, though, just want to make mention of one caveat that National has. It's questionable, and I think some of my colleagues would say it's doubtful, that journalistic privilege should apply where the material in question is obtained by a crime. That may be the case in relation to a theft. I'm interested in the arguments we might hear at select committee, but it does seem to me that that's a reasonably common-sense position that I'm taking. The bill doesn't have an exemption or a carve-out in that instance and I think that would be an important thing in this bill and potentially important to secure National's continued support for the bill.