I can give an example from a recent select committee hearing I was involved with with the Environment Committee on the enabling housing amendment bill to the Resource Management Act, which had a similarly truncated three-week report-back time frame. There was a large number of submitters who came to committee, and they said that all of the problems that the Government and the National Party, who had held hands, like they are today, on a podium and announced a piece of legislation that had to happen under utmost urgency to solve a problem that was so urgent, despite the fact it had been developing over decades. Actually, many of the submitters told us, "We've come here with our submission. It's four pages long, and it summarises the things we could get down on paper in the week that we had. We weren't able to go back to our governing bodies. We weren't able to go back to the executives of the organisations that we worked for and make sure that everybody in our executive leadership team understood the risks that this Government's legislation were likely to cause, and therefore say what was our organisation going to propose to the Government as an alternative." They weren't even able to get sufficient legal advice on what all the implications were of a piece of legislation that was brought to the House, and were then told, "Well, we've only got a week to make a submission, a week for hearings, and then a week for the committee to consider." 