We must also remember the families of those impacted, a number of which have actually moved into my electorate as a result, wanting to get out of Christchurch City. So I do see the ongoing harm that this event has occurred on a very regular basis. The harm that the bill seeks to address is urgent, and the intentions of this bill are laudable. National did oppose it at its first reading because we felt that the internet filter was too much of an overreach and it didn't achieve the bill's objectives. The submission that stood out to me the most was from InternetNZ, which colourfully described the filter as "a blunt tool which is a mile wide and an inch deep." and was "purely symbolic … which anyone can get around". I sat in on the select committee, and we took the view that society needed to be protected from seeing the kinds of content that the bill was seeking to block, but we also had to balance that with those critical rights and freedoms.