The second argument is about freedom of speech and that it should trump the harm principle. Freedom of speech is a right that is old and deep, and we should have regard to it, but as all rights are, this is a right that has been subject to reasonable limitations. In my speech last week, I gave some examples of how we do this in everyday legislation. I'm going to throw a few more into the mix: consumer protection, workplace bullying, electoral regulation, copyright, confidential information and privacy, and the rules of evidence. Yes, the rules that direct us to get us to the evidential best truth restrict freedom of speech. 