There are two things here. I'm running out of time, so I'll sort of do three at once.
I notice that there's a reverse onus provision for somebody to prove their innocence. Secondly, if they're not happy with the decision that's then reached, they can apply for judicial review in the Federal Court. So in essence, what's occurring here is you're making people prove their innocence. If they're not happy and they can't prove their innocence based on your standards, they have to hire a lawyer, go to Federal Court and spend that money. Wouldn't it be better to have some independent such as an ombudsperson or somebody who would look at this and make the decision at arm's length, rather than forcing them to spend money and go to Federal Court?