So it is that, in Supplementary Order Paper 483, Ms Dyson proposes a regime where someone who is exercising a conscientious freedom not to perform an abortion service would, nevertheless, be required to, basically, undertake research and advice about how the person seeking the abortion services should go about getting that. That seems to me a step too far. I would argue that the first stage, essentially, in the process should activate—namely, that the person would advise the seeker of the abortion services that they do have a conscientious objection, and be allowed to leave it at that, and to walk away.