The last tranche of questions, Minister, is in regards to probably what has been said on public record by yourself and by many members or your officials as regards to the whole basis of this reform being around economies of scale and the benefits related to that. My questions around that are: do you stand by the reform benefits being modelled on Scotland as a point of comparison for New Zealand, acknowledging that with the exception of population between New Zealand and Scotland there isn't too much more in similarity between our two countries? The second question is, in order to achieve those cost efficiencies, it has been stated that the only way to achieve that is through the amalgamation of those 67 local entities into those four separate entities—my question is around the counterfactuals. So what assessment have you undertaken in regards to, I guess, what you'd refer to as the "business as usual" or the "do-nothing" scenario—so councils or the local authorities continuing their programme of asset replacement and investment in the future versus this model around amalgamation and what was the differential in regards to that? 