There's certainly a review in Australia at this time. Again, we'll see how that evolves. I'd be very surprised if it changed the fundamental self-regulation position.
I would point out that both Australia and New Zealand share the principle of the United Kingdom that there is no constitutional requirement of free speech, but I think all three societies would regard that as a fundamental element of the way they operate, and I share the view of many of your other witnesses that in this society, where there is not a constitutional guarantee of free speech, for the government to make laws which intervene in the press would contravene that basic principle and undermine the principle of a free press.
I think in the other markets I've worked in -- I don't think there is much to learn from Hong Kong, due to the particular constitutional circumstances of Hong Kong, although I should point out it does have a vibrant press -- Chinese-language press.
In Italy, the press is not directly regulated by the government, but it is subject to influence in several ways, in particular by very extensive state subsidies for newspapers, and also by a requirement that to be a journalist you must pass a state-sponsored exam.