The topic that the Minister actually raised—all of us in this House probably abhorred the live streaming that the terrorists actually did. When I was introduced to a particular video, I chose not to look at it because I found it objectionable. Yes, I think all of us did. But the thing is that there is currently a law that actually can prevent—and the chief censor can put in interim decisions to prevent it from being shared. And this legislation is not necessary. This is about the Government wanting to provide an internet filter: Government deciding what is objectionable and what is not. And once we start down that path, I'm not so sure where we will actually stop. This is an overly invasive regime that encroaches on the rights of individuals. I mean, the example that I like to quote is the example of the murder of George Floyd in America. If live streaming and the death of a particular individual could be deemed objectionable, that live streaming that was actually shot by the public to show the brutality of the police action against an innocent man would be banned. And these are some of the concerns that the public also has as well. 