But I want to focus particularly on the Supplementary Order Paper No 39, on clause 7, replacing new section 26D(2). I think this really comes back to the whole $250,000 question, because under replacement section 26D(2) it says, "Trading relationship, in relation to a contract, means a relationship consisting of—(a) that contract; and (b) any other contract (whether current or prospective) … ". And what my question would be is: what happens if a dispute arises partway through a contract and it is lower than $250,000? It says here, quite clearly, "whether current or prospective". And various actions along the way in the contract trigger further an expansion of that current contract, and it ends up being $252,000 or $300,000 worth of transactions that therefore falls outside of this bill. What happens then to that particular action? Does it fall over because it then falls outside of the bill? And there will be no case law, of course, to fall back on. If the prospective amount of the contract exceeds $250,000, do you not even get past the first base if you have an issue and an issue arises?