The Regulatory Standards Bill, as we heard—there's principles, they are found in clause 6, as the previous speaker said. They include the "Rule of law", "Liberties"—the subheading is "Liberties"—and a lot of this deals with private property rights. So this is something that, obviously, the member and his party feel very strongly about. There's also, then, the "Taking of property": that there'd be full compensation for taking of property. These are differences from our current law. There's also "Taxes and charges", the "Role of courts", and then "Good law-making". Some of the issues in "Good law-making" at paragraph (i) are, in fact, already addressed in things like regulatory impact statements. At paragraph (k), it is said that to "be the most effective, efficient, and proportionate response to the issue concerned that is available." While, at first glance, that sounds like a very sensible thing, and I would agree with it, there's always political judgment in making those decisions, they are subjective things that politicians, who stand on manifestos, should be deciding; it should not be for the court. So that is why this is a very important debate to have on this bill.