But the member hasn't made it clear what objectives this bill is trying to address, because if it's around decision making over fresh water, well, then potentially Environment Canterbury should be saying to Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu, "We look forward to what the Waitangi Tribunal says about your right to some fresh water.", because guess what! Ngāi Tahu have evidence that they were the first people to sell water in New Zealand to some French sailors who turned up in Akaroa harbour, and they charged them a gold coin to re-victual their ship with fresh water. So if they do have rights and interests in fresh water and they think they should have extraordinary decision-making powers over natural resources, let them have their day in court. But I'd like the member to explain: if that's not the purpose, what is the purpose and what is the objective? Thank you.