So my point is—or point one—that referring a bill for a truncated consideration at select committee is a completely unacceptable way to address what are in fact long-term, structural problems that affect the lives of everyday New Zealanders, whether they are seeking justice through the court system, or whether they actually have been accused of an offence and are seeking to demonstrate their innocence in some way. So whether this bill is in fact necessary itself is questionable, and, again, that comes back to the rushed approach. If a Government, if a Minister, or if a department can't get the problem statement right, how on earth do they expect to solve problems that affect everyday New Zealanders like access to justice, and if they can't get the problem statement right with all the resources of Government, all the time available and all the advisers, how on earth do they expect the people affected by poorly thought out legislation to develop their own submissions and to consult with their own stakeholders? 