This is related to routine police evidence, so we should move to clause 278. This would then come into effect if clause 278 were voted down. That is my understanding.
Folks, this is a change to this clause that would be consequential to the voting down of clause 278, on routine police evidence, so we should move, I believe, to clause 278 on routine police evidence, to determine if the committee wishes to support it or vote it down. Does everybody understand that?