This week four backbencher bills got a shot at glory. Two were gloriously popular, one successful but contentious, and one pipped at the legislative post.
Every other week, Parliament MPs spend Wednesday pointedly ignoring the policy objectives of the government, and instead debate bills suggested by backbench MPs from any party.
Those Wednesdays are called Members' Days. It may sound like a country club event, but MPs refer to each other as Members, short for Members of Parliament.
This week was such a week, so Wednesday gave four MPs' bills a chance to fly or to fail.
It was, ultimately, an evening of two halves. And not just because of the dinner break.
The first two bills were unanimously agreed, the second two were, not. Here they are.
Listen to the radio version of this story.
Specifying grooming
First up was a bill from Labour MP Ginny Andersen to tighten the law around online grooming of under 16s. It provided a rare opportunity to hear the National Party spokesperson on criminal justice Mark Mitchell, praise the approach of a Labour MP on that topic.
"What Ginny's done is she's identified the fact that there was no actual legislation or law that was able to deliver with the front end of this offending, which is the grooming."
And not just National. Nicole McKee spoke for ACT.
"ACT thanks Ginny Andersen, again, for bringing such a good bill to the House and for getting cross-party support for something that will help all parents in this country feel safer for their children."
Yes, MPs do actually agree on many things. That bill received a second reading on a voice vote without dissent - a good way to start the day.
More time for sexual harassment complaints
Next up, another second reading debate; this time for a bill from Labour MP Deborah Russell.
Russell segued into her bill via a related, wider, gender issue: the fact that on Wednesday MPs had been celebrating women MPs reaching 50 percent of the House for the first time. It was a 'one small step' for women and a long way yet to go.
As another step along that way, her Bill would extend the period during which victims of workplace sexual harassment can take a personal grievance.
"Extending the time for raising a personal grievance from 90 days to a year recognises the special nature of sexual harassment. It is insidious. It is shaming. It occurs because of a power differential. It is traumatising. All too often, it is not all that obvious; a person cannot quite understand what has happened to them. All too often, sexual harassment is just brushed off," said Russell.
Again, MPs agreed unanimously. Two for two.
Second readings versus first readings…