It is a pleasure to rise to speak on the Commerce Amendment Bill. I have taken note of what Mr Tangi Utikere has said, and he was actually rather surprised that we were positive in our support to select committee, but he was a little bit despondent about the way that we raised some issues with the bill. I would have thought that a member would support that action—that we move very carefully when we're dealing with legislation. Earlier, one of my colleagues said—and I take his word very carefully; it was Hon Paul Goldsmith—that in this House, we pass legislation sometimes with the effect of the legislation which is often opposite to the intent. This bill is actually dealing with those issues of whether a business had actually intended, or did the effect of their actions have different effects, and this bill changes the margins. This bill will replace the taking advantage test with an explicit provision on the firms with a substantial degree of market power from engaging in conduct that has the purpose of effect. So it goes from intention: did it actually have the intention to actually be a major force and change the effect? Or they may have had the intention but didn't have the effect, so you can't actually prove that they actually had the intention. Now we're actually changing the margins to only looking at the effects. It doesn't matter whether they actually had the intent or not. If it has an effect, then it actually becomes something that is against the rules, apparently. 