Yes, I can. There are quite a few arrangements that we had in place before the court action in 2006. One involved a fishery for which the department had a science program that was able, using our own resources, to take us a certain distance in terms of understanding the resource. We worked with the industry to involve them in that process. They asked us whether we could do further work on that resource to provide more clarity, less uncertainty, about the status of the resource. We weren't able, with the existing allocations, to do that, so we began to discuss an arrangement whereby we would have a joint project between the industry and Department of Fisheries science inn which we would cooperate to bring additional activities for more clarity.
The industry agreed to finance a part of that. They requested that we do so by setting aside a portion of their allocation, which could be used, with their engagement, to offset the costs that fishermen would incur in doing the work on the water, which would generate the information that we would then assess and use to provide more advice.
That was done, and it carried on for several years prior to the court case's indication that the minister did not in fact have the authority to allocate fish for that purpose.
That's an example. There are many others.