They were mostly opposed to the science, rather than to the process that was being put forward here, which was a process that was requested by Local Government New Zealand fundamentally saying, "Look, we manage the municipal water supplies and the injection sides, and we're being asked to make a decision on what is a health matter, and we don't feel like we have the competence in the health domain, and yet it falls to us.", and that was a very reasonable argument to make. It did fall to them, and so they were saying, "Let's put this decision making and responsibilities and the liabilities for getting it right and getting it wrong back where it belongs—back with health." So the submitters weren't arguing that process. They were mostly arguing the science of fluoridation, which, as I say, we've taken a position on and are supportive of. A number of health organisations presented as well, and I think the key point around Local Government New Zealand—and it's in the departmental report—is that those who supported the intent of the bill, including Local Government New Zealand and most local government organisations, agreed that local authorities should no longer be the decision makers about water fluoridation. 