Our Government extended the transitional support that was provided, and that transitional support would have run out—except we extended it again. Then, the council went through a process of determining what fee they wanted to affix. They determined that they would move from a three-year fee to a one-year fee. The fee would go up, recognising that the council had additional costs that it needed to meet. There'd been inflationary pressures. The council had never been particularly living within its means even before the purposes of the council were changed. The profession took a judicial review against the fees and that courts found that the council had made mistakes in the way that it set the fees; it set the fees under the 2015 law, but the courts found that those fees had been inappropriately set, and so the court set those fees aside. What that means is the council then reverts back to the fees that existed prior to the 2020 fee setting. The challenge there is that those fees were also set under the law that the courts had found was problematic, in the sense that the council was charging for all of its functions, when the courts found that the legislation only allowed it to charge for some of its functions. So the council was left in a position which was untenable, because potentially all of the fees that it'd collected since 2015 could have been drawn into question, and, at that point, the council was in some serious difficulty.