I would like to know the nature of the problem. I agree—I see that there is a great need for support, for understanding of those on the front line, and for compassion and understanding when we lose a police dog. But I would find it hard to understand in real terms how you would have a specific instance where an offender would be charged alone with killing a police dog. Therefore, that is probably why we have never seen, as far as I can ascertain from looking through the list of police dogs that have been lost in front-line duty, where anyone has ever served that time of two years. Currently, that time is at the discretion of judges and it has never been served currently. So I would question what the merit is of extending that period from two years to five years when I can't see how that is currently, in the history of these instances, being actually administered to someone who's been accused of this offence and held to be accountable for it.