I think that, for once, the Minister has not made a drafting error. If a reference to clause 94(6)(b) had been left in, that would have removed any possibility of not making the confiscation order: that paragraph, having been altered so that ''may'' is replaced by ''must'', implies no measure of discretion. He substituted the reference to the just amount to leave in the residuary discretion that is implied by the other subsection—the number of which I have forgotten—that says that the court can, when it has taken all the circumstances of the case into consideration, decide not to take all the money.