Okay.
Parliamentary oversight happens after the fact, after a decision is made. Then Parliament looks at things. We know how that sometimes goes, because if the wrong decision is made, we try to repair it after the fact.
What I'm going to ask you, Minister, is this: Why wouldn't we have judicial oversight, a judicial authorization at the front end, whenever you—or the government—wish to take action, as in proposed section 15.2, to ensure that the government isn't breaking the law? Would you not support that, rather than looking at something after the fact to see if we got it right?