I also like the idea of the changes in the broad definition that allows the court to define what is necessary when setting the conditions of an FPO to being what is "reasonably necessary". At this point, we'll just go to the scenario that the Minister talked about, where he suggested that if you have a nephew or a son that turns up at a father or uncle's place for Christmas and they have a firearms licence, the search and seizure would be occurring on that father or uncle's home. In actual fact, the bill itself says that that person can be there as long as the firearms are secured in the Police-approved secure facility. So I don't quite understand where the Minister was coming from with that, because there's a whole lot of other things that need to occur in the home for that to actually happen.