But the one point that I did want the Minister's guidance on is in new subclause (3A) in clause 16A. It says that "After releasing identifying information for a reason described in subsection (2)(c),"—those are the ones I've been describing as best I can, but in summary—"the receiver must inform the discloser." So my question was really just as to timing, because it seems to me it might actually be helpful for the receiver of the information to advise the discloser before they released that identifying information. At least if there are circumstances where that could be done safely and without jeopardising the investigation, then that might be more helpful than simply telling them after the fact, and if there's sort of blowback in any kind of legal or real-world way that affects the discloser and perhaps their family, and so forth, then I think it would be good if they were to have advance warning of that, if at all possible. It might not be practicable, of course, in all circumstances, but it seems to me that that would be at least a helpful thing for the law to provide.