So taking the intent of the legislation at its face value, namely "to try to minimise drug and substance harm by allowing drug and substance checking services to operate legally in New Zealand.", we can make a number of different observations. The first is that one of the points of emphasis of the bill is the idea of legal certainty. This is explained in the general policy statement with reference to the handling of controlled drugs. But more accurately, or more importantly, the point is not simply the handling of the drugs; it's the fact of handing them back to a person who has handed them into the care of these checkers, who might have the best intentions in the world, but who are nevertheless engaging in activity that will increase the likelihood of harm from the drugs themselves in the act of handing them back. So whereas we see in the explanatory note a number of different functions that can be carried out, one of which is the testing, another of which is the checking, another being the advising—these things are all fine, of course, in themselves, but it is the returning of the drug or substance to the individual who had presented it for checking that is the dangerous element that we can see in the licensing regime, that is to allow the activities to be carried out in a way that's licensed or regulated.