Right, and I should clarify that. The witnesses said that given that they were already sentenced and everything was taken into consideration on top of that, they would lose the extension.
The other side of that argument was that persons weren't necessarily entitled to that extension except that it was provided for by statute. So the policy could be to take that extension or the type of people who were allowed to have that extension away, I suppose on the basis that they had some control over their actions by committing the crime and therefore placed themselves outside of the position of work.
Those are kinds of arguments, but I don't think we want to get into the essence of it. You've both made a good point. Do you want to clarify that further?