So if you wanted to go back to the prior status quo, you sort of can't, really, because the situation in respect of farmland is now tougher than it was before all those changes were made, and we don't think overseas investment in forestry ought to be that tough, even though we think it ought to be a bit more rigorous than it currently is. The reason why we think the general "benefit to New Zealand" test is appropriate is that, firstly, the more stringent farmland benefit test would discourage the productive investment that we need in the production of forestry sector. Now, members might say that they wish that wasn't the case, but, as Andrew Bayly observed earlier, about 70 percent, or thereabouts—