But, also, in terms of the mechanism, it sits uncomfortably with what others have pointed out is now the regulatory impact statement. It seeks to take very, very specific rights and ways of lawmaking and put them next to what are quite general principles. One of the things that is puzzling to me is the requirement to produce benefits that outweigh the costs of legislation to the public or persons. That seems vague. That seems like what lawmakers do any way. Every Government, every Parliament, would purport to say that we are balancing the interests of individuals in the public when we legislate. So what is this adding? What is it adding on top of the regulatory impact statements, on top of the Bill of Rights Act section 7 declarations of consistency?