I guess there's a couple of points I would invite the select committee to look at. We absolutely accept that an adult grooming a child, communicating with a child, and arranging to meet a child is wrong, and we also accept that there's a role for the police to play in early intervention, in finding out who those people are. Given that they spend a lot of time and resources on intelligence, they often know who they should be looking for. My word of caution is this: that we want to be careful that we don't create behaviours in people that they wouldn't otherwise engage in—what in, kind of, common parlance would be called "entrapment"—that whilst a constable is entitled to engage in a conversation online with someone they think is engaging in risky and possibly illegal behaviour, we do not want them to initiate any inappropriate conduct or contact or in any way encourage it; it's for them to be a recipient. So I would ask the select committee to just have a look at that section, reflect on the problem of entrapment, of enticing behaviour that wouldn't otherwise occur, and make sure that there's no place for that, that the law properly controls that activity—albeit, I'm sure, when a police officer might engage in it, it's with good intent, but it's creating an offence where one wouldn't have existed but for the conduct, in fact, of the constable.