So I think it's important. With the two views that have been outlined tonight—the view that Dr Smith has, the academic view that thinks that freedom of speech is impeded—what I have outlined just now does not demonstrate in any shape or form how freedom of speech is in any way inhibited by the introduction of this legislation. What we've seen tonight is two views: the view of an academic point of view that Dr Smith has drawn upon, but the point I would like to think about tonight is the view of the voter—the view of the New Zealand voter back in, say, for example, 1998, when those eight New Zealand First MPs left their party and joined National. Those MPs represented voters in New Zealand who voted for Winston Peters and his party, yet their votes went towards supporting a National Government which would have otherwise failed. The voter expects MPs in here to do as they wished when they voted, and for that to be implemented over the three-year period. 