I welcome the short timeframe. The Minister of State has said eight working days but I hope he accepts an eight day timeframe. Timing is all important and I have concerns about that. For example, if an application is made on a Monday and the respondent returns on Friday and says he or she did not have sufficient time to prepare a case and deserves to be heard, could we then be in a situation where the order would fall? Nothing in this Bill puts an onus on the judge to say where an adjournment could take place. There is no timeframe. If that is not corrected the system will fall and we will have applicants returning for renewable interim barring orders. We are back then at where we were before the Supreme Court decision. If an adjournment is called by the respondent while a judge is hearing the case the judge must set a date no longer than eight days from that adjournment. That needs to be written into the Bill or the adjournment could go on indefinitely.