Despite the fuss and furore about the legislation, there is little serious challenge to the change from five to ten years. The argument is about the logical consequences of doing that and what it should cover. I readily concede that five years ago people on all sides of both Houses were, perhaps, a little too enthusiastic. However, we have had five years experience to gauge what is and is not practicable. Ten years is eminently sensible. The commissioner does not say a word about this issue in either section of his report. It is a reasonable change, the purpose of which is to balance the need for good Government and freedom of deliberation within the Government with the right to freedom of information, which I also support, for the public and the media.