Legislative guidelines actually state that legislation should have prospective, not retrospective, effect. If retrospectivity is intended, this must be stated in the legislation and capable of justification. I don't actually see anything that is stated in this legislation that justifies why it's retrospective, other than the time frames: "We have to do it in a hurry—we have to do it in a hurry." If it was needing to be done in such a hurry, why didn't the Labour Party talk about it on their way into Government? Why didn't we give it to the public to use their voice? What are we scared of—what are we scared of? Why should we not be letting the public—isn't that what we're here for? I mean, even the departmental disclosure statement states the policy details have not been "tested or assessed in any way to [assure] the bill's provisions are workable and complete". So I'll repeat that: has not been "tested or assessed in any way to ensure the bill's provisions are workable and complete".