But the fact of the matter is that unlike some of the situations where we've seen—and the three-strikes legislation has been discussed already. The kinds of difficulties that the court had with that legislation were because it was so repugnant to some of the rights held so dear, and those decisions are difficult to read on the words of the legislation as it then stood. But this kind of framework enables the courts to put their views in a way which demands a response. It isn't simply saying, "We're striking it down." It's saying, "We don't see this the same way that Parliament has, and we want to hear from Parliament and the executive about that.", and that's a much more nuanced approach than the kind of approach we've seen in some other jurisdictions which are all or nothing. 