What I'm saying, though, is this. With your office as an under-funded office, with you yourself as the only regular employee, are you saying your office would have been better to continue with that than to go with this new direction? I did write down that you said it wasn't arm's length, that it may not be independent, that you're going to have to reserve judgment on its effectiveness. But even you, as a public servant, sir, how are you more independent than this council would be?
I'm not quite getting where your criticism is coming from. Could you explain that?