Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you, Madam Chair, and congratulations to the member Louise Upston for getting the bill this far. There's a couple of questions I really invite you to talk to—and I saw her about to get to her feet before—and I guess the first is this, and it's about the kind of importance of the concept of mens rea as an ingredient of guilt. The phraseology chosen of "not criminally responsible" is clearly dispensing with the idea of "not guilty", and it seems to be right there in the nub of this bill that we are putting insane people into a kind of different category. The law's long recognised that the actus reus and the mens rea are critical ingredients of guilt, and that if you don't have either of those components—the intention that's necessary and the critical thinking skills necessary to form that intention—then you are not guilty. I'm really asking whether that undermines the concept of mens rea as an ingredient of guilt itself, of the responsibility from which flows criminal conviction and the sentencing that follows.