There is wide recognition of a few weaknesses in the U.K. act, as with any legislation after some experience, and there's some talk of amendment bills coming in. There are issues around the reporting repository, that there should have been one established that's easily accessible, and that's not the case, so you can't find all the reports at one place.
There's concern there wasn't enough mandatory content requirement, so that some of the reporting is superficial and others do a very good job of it. It's quite patchy, if you read the reporting. There's a range of issues such as that.
The point I stress to people is that it has changed the conversation. There is a supermarket firm now in the U.K. employing former victims in the U.K., running a jobs program for them. It has had a conversation in the society that has made people more aware, and the act has been a real catalyst for that. In Australia, the inquiry has also been a catalyst.
What we do know is that it sure is a complex question and solutions are hard, but it's a very worthwhile thing to undertake. As I said already, your own mining industry has a voluntary protocol. They are trying. They are giving advice. If you look at companies such as Coca-Cola or Unilever, they're quite sophisticated in their approaches to these supply chain issues.
Yes, the U.K. act can be improved upon. I think you'll find the Australian parliamentary report will be quite extensive in going through those things. There have been submissions from U.K. parties about that. They'll be a good source of information about the critique of the U.K. legislation, but there is ongoing debate in the U.K. as well.