Based on that, actually we have a lot of members on the opposite side who say exactly what you think and what others think. For example, Mr. Atamanenko said he believes we need to get all stakeholders involved. Mr. Szabo had a number of quotes saying that we have to have a comprehensive solution, that this is a crisis in these communities, that we need a comprehensive strategy, that we need to look at where all the implications are for the affected communities, that it has been here for a long time.
The truth of the matter is that what we need is a comprehensive solution. So you can understand that when a motion was brought forward for one single-faceted, narrow approach to the solution, it wasn't appropriate. I think you would agree that we need a comprehensive solution. Any motion other than that would almost be irrelevant.