I also want to note that in the select committee's thorough consideration of many issues—and they made some technical amendments to the bill, which is outlined in the commentary—they also, as members have referred to in the House, heard some disgruntled opposition to the bill. There were around about two urgency applications, as has been stated in the summary, to the progression of this particular settlement, and not upheld by the Waitangi Tribunal. But again, these are difficult and challenging aspects of trying to carve out a settlement where you are also ensuring a way forward for those who have a vested interest in the settlement progressing but are also going to put to rest some of the historical tribunal claims that make up the component parts of the settlement. That's detailed clearly in the bill, and for many of the reasons unbeknown to this House, that is often the place to go to as to why various members of a hapū, or hapū themselves within the context of an iwi, will assert their opposition, often because their Wai claim is being included within the context of the settlement and they believe it shouldn't be. We just need to have confidence that the select committee did consider these issues and made no change to the recommendations of the settlement.