Senator LUDWIG (12:51 PM) —In referring to Greens amendment (5), its purpose is to remove proposed section 337A in its entirety. It would be clear, if you looked at the Senate committee report into this, that Labor was not opposed to the rest of section 337A. However, we do agree with the conclusion of both Liberal and Labor senators that it is a retrospective provision. There is no doubt that the assertion that was made in the EM to the contrary is in fact incorrect. It was plainly inserted there to spare I think the Attorney-General and the minister any embarrassment that, despite their disingenuous huffing and puffing about Mr Hicks and retrospective laws, they are now implementing a retrospective law specifically to deal with Mr Hicks. In the end, and on balance, we agree with the Senate committee that the retrospective operation of this section should be closely considered in the three-year review mandated by the Proceeds of Crime Act. That is the course we favour in this instance. That is why in this instance we will not support the Greens amendment.