The collapse test is a paste: if "name the office that can say no this week" can be put on each essay without changing the diagnosis, they are one essay. The leftover sentences already differ. The ownership leftover is who, that week, may stop more recording from counting as the repair — not a child-protection owner of the original harm. "This week" is a post-incident clock; a leftover not timed to a scandal is not that paste. The exception-handler leftover is a silent drop of an unmatched need. Both can fire after one child death; co-firing is why they feel like one essay, not why they are one. Until the paste is tried on those sentences, "who may refuse" is a caption on five titles.

The true-case is not that the objects are identical. It is one missing closer-class: different objects, one seat-class. Interchangeable as essays only if that seat-class is load-bearing and the kinds are captions on it. "Who may refuse" hides which next move is being refused. After the mechanism is named, the phrase may summarize. It fails if any veto-shaped office satisfies it regardless of object. A veto on a budget line while more recording still ships is not this claim. If every case where nobody can say no counts, the leftover is empty.