I don't think there's any doubt that our gun legislation needed to be reviewed and changed and improved. There's no question of that. The first piece of legislation was a reactive piece of legislation, and I'm not at all critical of the need to react; there was a need to react at that time. It was a reactive piece of legislation which set out to try to achieve a task which, as I just said a minute or two ago, it didn't really achieve all that well. So we accept the fact that there was some form of gun reform needed, but it needed to be done in a manner that, in my view, was much more informed and better calculated than this piece of legislation has been done. So it's disappointing that we're putting a piece of legislation through the House that we've already heard from the Government is going to be reviewed almost immediately after it goes through the House. 