I read the Minister's legislative statement and if I could share some part of it and my particular concern with members present here, it actually says—I'll cut to the bit that I'm interested in. It actually quotes, "It seeks to address inefficiencies and ambiguities in our censorship system that were highlighted in the aftermath of the Christchurch terror attack on March 15, particularly in responding to objectionable online content such as the depicting of an act of violent extremism or terrorism." It actually lists the limitations that the Minister suggests—actually highlights or summarises why this bill is actually being presented to the House. Number one, the highest ranking reason why this is actually presented is, I quote, "1. Livestreaming does not fall within scope of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993;". Guess what—it does and I would suggest to this Minister, a brand new Minister, that if her officials actually give her advice saying that it doesn't, perhaps she should ask the right questions and perhaps she should do some research to figure out whether it is, in fact, covered off in the Act that she is actually quoting. 