I share Senator Hinch's frustration at the government's lack of capacity to provide an answer to the question of the rationale as to why $150,000 is a valid level of compensation when the royal commission recommended $200,000. Can you please identify the architecture that shows—when the royal commission said the more serious forms of abuse warrant $200,000 worth of compensation—why the government believes that that abuse is only worth up to $150,000 in compensation?