Mr. Kevin Cardiff:

Well, I'm ... I'm not presenting any position. This is what I understood at the time was the law. But, remember, later on we were able to share burdens but later on it became clear - more and more clear - that there were real loesses there which under ... which would've undermined the bondholders' entitlement to ... to sue. So, what you could do in 2009 and 2010 you might not ... you might not have been able to do in ... in ...in 2008. And remember, too, we did bring in SSR legislation later but, as I recall it - maybe I'm recalling wrongly - but I think that was even at that stage constitutionally controversial enough that it was referred to the Council of State - I don't think it was ... it was signed by the President straightaway. And remember, too, that the new SSR legislation is, you know, I imagine has a different ... situation because it's perspective. So, a bondholder buys a bond now knows he does so in the context of legislation that's already there. So, how can he claim later that we're interfering with his property rights? Whereas if the legislation comes after the bond is bought, I think that is probably different. But, almost certainly, the Attorney will either tell me I'm wrong or tell you I'm wrong or have a very different and better way of explaining it. The former Attorney.