The overwhelming evidence, despite all of that that was given to us at the select committee, despite the regulatory impact statement giving two options—the improvements similar to what I've just mentioned, or an outright ban—the Government is still, inexplicably, determined to ban this $261 million trade. It is an emotional topic, but it needs a logical conversation and a logical, practical application. I do understand the perception that New Zealand has no control of the welfare standards of animals once they land in port in offshore jurisdictions, but again, an importer licensing regime, a quality assurance programme would help enforce New Zealand's standards in offshore jurisdictions. And let's be rational here, no foreign farmer paying an absolute premium for these animals are going to want them to turn up in poor condition, least of all harm them, once in-country. As vets and multiple exporters told the select committee, offshore standards are higher than perceived. A lot of these offshore jurisdictions are learning from New Zealand's practices and Australia's practices, and they too want to be seen as world-leading in this space. Why on earth would a—for example—Chinese farmer spend all that money shipping animals halfway around the world only for them to live a life of misery.