If any legal point of genuine public importance arose in the High Court, I have no doubt that a judge – because High Court justices are humane and decent people – will refer it to the Supreme Court for resolution. To put it in the gift of the applicant to decide whether the Supreme Court should reserve a full day, half a day or whatever to decide these matters – I say this in the context that we receive 12,000 applications for asylum per annum – would make the Supreme Court a target for incessant appeal. It is all very well to say the court is there to hear appeals, but if there are 400 appeals does that not bring the judicial system into disrepute? If the Supreme Court sets aside a half day, an hour or half an hour to try to discover what each case involves, this would effectively wipe out its capacity to function as a court for an entire legal year. I will not go down that road.