There's a number of reasons for this, but the Minister was very quick to say, "Well, yes, of course, of course, I agree with that. In fact, I'm going to ensure that, through regulations, the discount is advertised." But he didn't mention anything about the fees or the charges. What he's trying to do is pull the wool over New Zealanders' eyes by advertising how gloriously amazing his scheme is in terms of the discounts, but, actually, when it comes to the fees or charges, "Well, no, no, no, those have to be hidden away. We can't talk about those. We can't disclose those, because, actually, I don't want people to know how much extra they're paying for their vehicles." If we can have it one way, Minister, why can't we have it both ways? Because this scheme relies on robbing from Peter to pay for Paul. If you're going to rob from Peter, Peter should know how much he's paying; if you're going to give to Paul, he should know how much he's getting. So my tabled amendment, effectively, says, when it come to the clean car discount or the clean car standard, both of those fees and charges or rebates should be transparently placed as part of the advertised cost of the vehicle. The question is: why does he just not simply adopt my tabled amendment, which seeks to do that, and which will allow for that transparency to be put forward out there, in terms of the market, and people to make those decisions?