I do think there's a big question about whether the balance is right, and these are very nuanced things in terms of what the influence should be going in but also what the scope of information is that comes out from those decision makers. I'm very aware, of course, that from a number of the submitters, from victims themselves, we heard about that sense of fear of just looking across the street and suddenly being struck by the accused. Interestingly, there's some international literature that also suggests that often the accused don't want to be in that scenario either. So, really, it's finding the balance that protects them both, and for this clause in particular it may be that the same outcome best suits both the victims of the family as well as the accused. Thank you.