Can I thank Neil Hamilton for his question, and for recognising that the deal that is on the table is certainly better than the one that was presented back in July? I think it justifies the position. I recognise they came under a lot of criticism back in July, but it justifies the position that was taken back then, when we were presented with a request for guarantees amounting to 83 per cent, which is more than £100 million more in guarantees than what we have been able to drive through with this deal. However, due diligence is required, as normal, as in every project of this type, to give us confidence that the investment, the potential guarantee drawdown, is something that the taxpayer is comfortable with, something that we are comfortable with. And, as I said in my answer to Adam Price, no investor should fear the due diligence process.