Another issue with this bill is that it does create a strict liability offence. So the intention is assumed, which means that the causality in my view needs to be shown even more than it does in a normal case. And here we have correlation, but no causality is shown. If we look at UK best practice, there's a holistic approach around workplace testing. The approach is to consult with employees. There needs to be an assessment of safety-critical work that needs to be identified, policies developed, people would be tested, and there would be support for those with a problem. The issue here is the safety-critical work element. As has been said by my colleagues on this side of the House, the impairment is what is missing from this bill. The problem is the impairment. It is the impairment caused for whatever reason, be it drugs, be it tiredness or something else, it is simply missing from this bill. So logically, not all employees who have ingested drugs are impaired, which again speaks to the intent of the bill, and not all impaired people or even a significant amount will be rendered safe by this bill.