Now, we recognise the fact that when you're dealing with a bill under urgency, you don't have a lot of time. But even if half a day had been set aside for that purpose, we would then have had the opportunity to hear not just from submitters but also from legal academics, from people with expertise in public law, from commentators in the media and elsewhere—all of whom, along with the officials, would have increased our understanding of the issues, sharpened our ability to hone in on what needed to be done to recommend to the House and to the Government how this bill could be changed. But, of course, we have been denied all of that opportunity. So in the absence of a select committee process to report and consider, the second reading debate, I assume, will have to just try to ascertain what the Government's thinking was, what processes they've been through. And it is fair, I think, therefore, to look back on their management of the issue to date in order to ascertain what it is that they think they now need to do. 