I wanted to build on the commentary by Mr. Motz. He used, a number of times, the word “interfere”. I wanted to direct my question to Mr. Davies and to look at the threshold that's actually in the language. The language isn't “interfere”. The language is “compromise or seriously hinder”.
In my view, that's a higher threshold than simple interference. Any law enforcement agency is going to see some sort of intervention by NSIRA as an irritant or as interference. Interference itself isn't enough to stop it. It's “compromise or seriously hinder”, and I wanted to ask Mr. Davies about his view on that threshold and also on the agency's capacity to assess objectively whether that threshold has been reached.