A bill took two years to pass. A news channel says this proves obstruction by the opposition

Why

The channel has taken a real fact and offered an explanation that could be true — oppositions do sometimes stall bills, and two years is a long time. But delay by itself does not say who caused it or why. The bill may have gone to a committee for detailed study, which takes months and usually improves it. States may have been consulted. The government may have redrafted it after objections, or had other business it wanted first, or simply not brought it forward. Some of those are failures and some are the system working carefully rather than fast. Test: look at the bill's actual timeline — when it was introduced, where it sat and for how long, and what changed in it between versions. Ask also whether the channel would call the same two years 'careful scrutiny' if a party it favoured had caused them. It does not follow: a duration is a measurement, and a cause has to be shown, not assumed.