I think we need to sort of divide this up. I think the complaints and mediation mechanism that the PCC has now, I think everyone broadly agrees, is fast, efficient, and most importantly services the public well, and I think in that capacity there needs to be a degree of representation from experts, ie editors that are serving editors. I think on any arbitration or standards body, I think there needs to be former editors, former lawyers, people that have been here and done that, who can sit in judgment but in qualified judgment.
Also, I think it's important, in the same way that the Inquiry does, is to have access to a panel of serving individuals, be they lawyers or editors, who can -- because, you know, editing a newspaper even seven years ago, when I took over, is a very different thing now than it was then, so ex-editors who have perhaps not sat in the seat for some time may not be fully up to speed on certain aspects of the job these days. So to have access to, again, a panel who provides strictly advice, they have no other input, I think would be a wise way.