Yes, only to explore the content of that clause and to understand better how in fact our amendment is out of order. Nothing in our suggestion, I believe, contradicts what was passed on division in clause 3. In other words, we argue that every person holding office as an elected director immediately before the day on which this part comes into force and effect should continue to be a director.
Your clause 3 talks about the government appointing four other directors. We had other amendments that would have challenged the idea that the government should appoint the new directors. But I don't see anywhere where it's contradictory to have the current democratically elected directors maintain their position when the new bill comes into effect.