Can I just say, though, while the reason he's asked for this short time frame is because the bill is significantly the same, in his opinion, as it was a year ago, can we just think for a moment what would have happened if he'd got his way in Cabinet and there was no sunset clause, and we were stuck with this shortened process? We would have had an entirely different bill. So it is only by the fact that he didn't get his way to have either three years or no sunset clause at all, which is what he actually wanted. It's only by the fact that the Cabinet said no to that that he's able to stand up here today and say that the bill is much the same as it was a year ago. But, actually, that could have been very different, and we would have been stuck with a very short time frame in order to get this passed with a significantly different bill.