I've also noted that today in the House, and actually over the past few weeks, Labour and National have had a bit of a back and forth about migrant workers and particularly about pathways to residence. I want to note that migrant workers make a pretty substantive proportion of support workers, particularly in the aged-care sector. And it was interesting that on the one hand, National was advocating for quicker pathways to residency for migrant workers and particularly nurses, and Labour was pushing back against it because they were arguing that if we gave them pathways to residency, they would leave the profession, and neither of those parties were acknowledging that the reason many workers, whether it's nurses or in this case support workers, end up leaving the profession is the low pay and poor working conditions and the massive pressure they are facing. I think this bill is, again, not acknowledging that the reason why we continue having such a shortfall of support workers around the country is because of that poor pay and those poor working conditions. So if we're going to be bringing migrant workers with the hope of staying in the profession—and in this case, not so much the hope but the fact that we're putting them on employer-bound visas because they have no other option but to work for the employer that they came in with, effectively—I think we need to acknowledge that there's a better solution, which is to give these workers liveable wages, and to actually then give them the freedom to move around. Because support workers who enter this profession, they do it out of the love and care they have for the communities that they serve. But when we put them into the impossible situation of not being able to make ends meet, we're doing a disservice to the many people that we've talked about being essential during the pandemic.