I was in the House at the time of the settlement back in 1997. And I don't resile from any of the commentary that was read out by Tāmati Coffey as he quoted from that apology. I was also here when there was the bill passed by our Government—or should I say, by a Government in this House—protecting pounamu as being exclusive to Ngāi Tahu. And I was here too when there was the commissioners appointed into Environment Canterbury (ECan). And the rationale for that—and I was a strong arguer for it—was that we were taking away broad representation that might be achieved through a ballot box, and deciding who it was who, for a time, would be placed with that responsibility to remedy some of the problems that ECan was beset with at the time; notwithstanding some of the attempts to write history again here today. I was also the recovery Minister in Christchurch, and was very strongly of a view that Ngāi Tahu should be recorded as statutory partners in that recovery. Each of those, though, are separate things and separate incidents that needed to have a different approach taken to it.