So when we were confronted with legislation that said a Minister of Health can define an area—a part of New Zealand, a public place—and say it's illegal to communicate in that area, well, here's the thing: standing up for free speech seldom involves defending people that you'd want to have over for dinner. In fact, I don't think I've done any defence of free speech on behalf of anyone who I actually like, yet—but you never know; the way that this Government's going, they might widen the range of people who need defence of free speech. And so it's easy to say that you really detest the odious ogres who stand outside and shout at scared, often young, women who are going to have a pretty traumatic medical procedure, and abuse them because of their own sense of justice or belief or spirituality. It's pretty easy to be opposed to all of that, but still think it would be wrong to have the gradual creep of State power to ban communication within an area. And when this bill was introduced, the Attorney-General and Crown Law advice agreed with ACT about that. They said that the word "communicate" being included was actually a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, particularly the right to freedom of expression, and it was a breach that exceeded what was demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society.