Mr. Paul Hogan:

That is a perennial problem in planning. To be honest, one of the weaknesses in area planning for us is the fact that property rights tend to override planning objectives, particularly where there is a multiplicity of landowners. We are not saying that someone would not be fairly compensated where critical land is required. Take the example of a UDZ. It is really important that if an area needs parks, schools and roads in certain places in order for everyone to be able to get around optimally, there is a mechanism to be able to deliver that because we have not been able to do that to the extent that is necessary. People are still compensated where maybe there is a conflict. One of the advantages of the LVS mechanism, however, is that it does set a new set of ground rules for value as well, so the LVS contribution would need to be factored into that compensation.