It's fair to say that the funding model, particularly around housing, for the provision of infrastructure is a barrier to development, and I just want to paint a picture for members of this House of the sort of choices that local authorities face. They are faced with, in many cases, debt ceilings—Auckland in particular has a debt ceiling. They are faced with, for want of a better word, a reluctance for communities to pay substantially more in rates and to spend more on debt servicing and debt itself. So you have that on one hand, and then you've got this insatiable demand for housing. When you have an insatiable demand for housing, there's a lot of pressure on local authorities to do things. Developers come along and they say, "Mr Mayor"—or Mr Councillor or Mrs Mayor or Miss Mayor—"we'd like to do this.", and generally the council has to put all the money up first, has to build the infrastructure, and then from that it charges development levies, but they generally only occur at the subdivision stage and when the titles are issued. Generally, the infrastructure's already done by that stage because there's a lag. So local authorities, in my view, carry all the risk. I'm reminded of going to Te Ānau about seven years ago. There were almost 800 sections in Te Ānau: fully roaded, all the reticulation, and no buyers. Now, that's now been sorted out—I haven't been to Te Ānau for a while and I'm sure it's been sorted—but that local authority took the risk, did that development, and carried that risk itself.