DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I rise to support my colleague Chris Bishop's contribution, and his proposed change to the title. I think it should be called "COVID-19 Response (Retrospective Property Law) Legislation Bill", because for reasons that Mr Bishop has outlined, that is the most significant part of this bill. Most of it is administrative, but what is far more significant is the idea that a contract that was signed under one set of laws will now be interpreted under a different set of law. You know, that's never been the case. You are always judged for your actions on what the law was when the action occurred. The idea that you can have the goalposts moved and be judged under a different set of law, that's quite extraordinary.