The net point between us is that it is clear that people want to give somebody authority to order the destruction of weeds that are called noxious. I understand this Bill met with general approval. Power is given to the Minister to prescribe what are noxious weeds and, once he so prescribes, the growth, whatever it is, stands as a noxious weed. It then comes to the serving of notice for their destruction. As the Bill stands, if a person does not destroy within a certain time he may be prosecuted. That is surely a secure position for the Ministry to have. They have the power to prescribe what is a noxious weed and then to serve a notice saying "Get that destroyed," whatever the term may mean, inside a certain period. At the end of the period, if there has not been what they think is destruction under the terms of the Act, they can prosecute. That is the position as it was, and I think it is a sound, good and very secure position. The Government want to go a bit further and to order not merely destruction, but destruction in a specified way, and that is the way which they will prescribe by private notice to the individual. The House will have no say in that order. Is there not something to be said for a court, and for leaving other people to decide whether a prosecution lies or not, and whether, in fact, an order has been obeyed achieving destruction? It is not worth having a fight about, but I do not see any reason for it. Is it being pressed?