So, I haven't had much to do with the particular bill, so I'm standing on the shoulders of giants in the sense that I've read the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee report and, by doing so, had a bit of a flavour of some of the submissions and had the benefit of the work that they've done. So, passing off their homework as my own, I'm going to copy that and pretend that my points are original in the traditional way. But actually, I did genuinely have some reactions of my own to the legislation as I was reading it, so I've compared notes with the select committee report, and indeed the bill itself as it now sits, and the legislative statement. And I think it's pretty clear what we've got is a bill that does cover some pretty important gaps. That's what it sets out to do—not actually create many new offences, if any, so much as clarify powers that are existing and extend them in a geographical sense. So not extending jurisdiction in the sense of any new kinds of offending being captured, but extending jurisdiction in the way of the reach of New Zealand's sovereign power, even out into international waters, which is sort of an interesting concept in itself.