I want to return to the question that the Hon Gerry Brownlee asked, around whether this local bill had been to the Labour Party caucus. Quite rightly, Mr Tirikatene pointed out that conversations in caucus are for caucus, I don't have an issue with that, but what we have here is a local bill. In Part 1, we have clause 5, "Relationship between this Act and other legislation applicable to local authorities", so that's why I'm asking the questions on this part. It is important to understand why it is a local bill, because even the Clerk's Office says that a local bill can't be about amending primary legislation. So that's why this bill doesn't amend primary legislation. So the question is, why is this not a Government bill that would amend primary legislation? And it comes back to that point: is it because a local bill did not have to go and seek support of the Labour caucus? Because we're led to believe some Ministers in the Labour Cabinet said, in response to Tāmati Coffey's bill being kicked out, they didn't know how flawed it was because it hadn't gone to the Labour caucus.