We've had a constructive exchange of viewpoints that didn't agree to change anything, but we very clearly made the case that's significant for portions of the coverage, because our face can be science. And we call them in the future if they were going to headlines that they need to be scientifically accurate. We also put the case clearly to them that it is essential that the Daily Mail is on the side of the science. And not just getting coverage to unsigned, if it's science, it's Britain's future and the wider planet depends on it. And the Daily Mail's conscience on their heart has to be open to take your hospital line from that one. But no, thank you. Everyone has said it asked us to follow up with some specifics. And we promise to present the occupied minds to Paul Dagen, the age of two, to get back to the point. I think the things this say is that we do have to give the Mail credit for having had a meeting with us. They listened. What will matter is not what we're seeing there, but what happens here is on the pages of the Daily Mail in the coming days, weeks and months, particularly leading up to the Paris Climate Tours. That's the really key issue that we want to see that we need to need to monitor and watch and highlight whether they do the right thing or the wrong thing. But I do think it was rather nice to hear that they were very pleased to say how hard they were working to cut the carbon emissions of this building. So I think what we'd like to see is perhaps see them boasting about that in their own pages. And if they identify that as an important issue, then actually they could make sure they're telling their readers about that, giving an important issue as well.