The comment was raised earlier by Mr. Butler that a major debate is happening, particularly on the east coast—that's where I'm hearing it the most—around the appropriate role for the regulator in the context of an impact assessment panel.
Mr. Butler's opinion is one I share, which is that there is an appropriate role and it would be important to have a regulator on a panel, but that having a majority of seats on a panel would not be appropriate. What is your opinion on that matter?