of France. See, in France you have a sphere of privacy around you no matter where you are -- public street, no matter where you are -- but how that plays out is in a situation like this. Francois Mitterrand is having affairs. Well, in France that might get you brownie points, but in Australia it wouldn't. He's one of the leaders of the country, the press knows, everyone knows, no one reports on it. That surely has to have an impact on his moral character, and in Australia wouldn't the public have a right to know this? Second situation: Francois Mitterrand is suffering from cancer, but he's running for election. The media know, everyone knows, but no one reports it. Isn't that something that a voter should know, that here's this person, suffering from cancer, he's going to be making decisions that affect me, he may be going through chemotherapy or treatment, don't I have a right to know? In France, no. Now, I wouldn't want to live in a country where I don't know about those things that affect me, and that really crystallises to me this balancing act between the freedom of expression and the right of privacy. It's a very, very serious debate. The comparator of privacy regulation between civil codes and common law is false.  And France has even stronger privacy protections within the civil code system of justice.  Those cases and their examples would carry slight weight in the Australian context.  The UK cases