I have a specific question here for the Minister. It's all very well to look at the spectrum of performance of polytechs, which I think all of us in this House would agree has not always been first-rate, but then why do you assume that the best model is to take all of those polytechs, regardless of financial performance, regardless of the fact whether over the last 12 months to two or three years they have confronted themselves their own sustainability and have found a solution, which means they are strong, they're economic, they've got a great capital base, they have the support of the community—yet you think what is best for Bay of Plenty is to subsume it back into the centre? It is as if you are driven by an ideology that is because there are some that are weak we are going to subsume those that are strong and force them into a model which is not fit for purpose, in our view, and is not actually going to deliver against the community expectation. 