So, look, it did take from around 2005, we heard today. That's about 16 or 17 years since the need to change the purpose or the use of this land was identified and now here we are today, hopefully going to all vote yes and support this bill passing through the House. But I just want to point out what the cost was, not just the cost in the member's time while we considered it, not just the opportunity cost to Palmerston North City Council and its residents but also the costs of officials' time. While the committee sat, we had officials from the Department of Conservation, experts in their field. They came to the committee and they presented about biodiversity and land ownership and the Reserves Act. We got down into all kinds of detail that people who don't sit on select committees and aren't members of Parliament, or don't work in the Parliamentary Counsel Office, or in some Government department where the lanyard class goes to work every day—they wouldn't understand it. They would have no idea how complex and how difficult it is actually to pass a piece of legislation to prove why it should be allowed to pass, to make the case, and then to draft the legislation and have it passed just so that Palmerston North can sell or otherwise dispose of a piece of land or simply choose to own it but change its land use. I mean, who knows? They might find oil in Palmerston North and they might come to the House and say, "We want a bill to overturn the ban on oil and gas exploration because, just like Jed from The Beverly Hillbillies, "We've found oil!" But that's very unlikely. However, they should be able to use their land for whatever purpose they see fit, and it shouldn't be up to nimbys and others to say what council should do with their land and how they should use it, it's best fit for the communities. 