When you think about it, this is quite a substantive degree of interference. Somebody gets on a list, is listed by a foreign government. I know the bill is called the Freezing Assets of Corrupt Regimes Act, which is all very well, but it doesn't apply only to corrupt regimes; it applies to any government. There's nothing that says any government can't deal with an issue that they say flows from the activities of any of their predecessors. They don't have to give you any court judgments. They don't have to give you any evidence with respect to exactly what this has done. They simply have to say, “We're giving you a request”, and in response to that request, you can pass a regulation to seize that person's property.
This is quite a substantive piece. Now I know that we like to think that the government will not act in an arbitrary, wilful way. We like to think that other governments will be reasonable in their requests. Am I exaggerating the potential here? I hope I'm not, but it seems to me that on the face of it, it's pretty dramatic.