On that point, the prerecording of evidence was trialled in Western Australia in 1992 and then progressively rolled out around the rest of the country after they found that it did not impinge on the right to a fair trial. UK legislation in 1999, Scotland in 2019, and I understand that defence lawyers in some of those countries thought the sky would fall in and that it would undermine the right to a fair trial, but guess what. Now checking in with them, after it's been implemented, the sky had not fallen, and in fact there were some reports that that process had benefited their clients, because actually some of the evidence when the defendant was being asked inappropriate questions by the prosecution—those questions got edited out so the jury was not unduly influenced the other way. I do not see that as impinging the rights of complainants in our courts. I see that as positive support for the proper rights to fair trial. 