Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Justice): It is pretty clear because at the end of the clause, they're "suitably qualified to represent the child", and if that person isn't qualified to represent the child in that specific instance, then I'm pretty sure that the court will adjudicate that that person isn't the right person to represent the child. I would also reflect that the independent panel recommended the framing of the clause, and I'm also told that the clause reflects the practice note and also aligns with—and I haven't seen this section—section 159 of the Oranga Tamariki Act in order to make sure there is consistency across pieces of legislation. So, to answer the member's question, I don't think the clause and the point that she is making are mutually exclusive. I think, if the person is suitably qualified to represent the child within that scope of practice, then the court will make a decision that they are the suitable person in that instance.