Speaker, let me explain that. What is not clearly understood is that executive remuneration gets determined in October and not at the beginning of the financial year. So, when you have your annual financial statements, they often reflect executive remuneration that spans two years - the previous year and the year thereafter. That is why the annual financial statement reflected it in that way, and that is where you had the addition of a previous dispensation added into the other year because it fell within that remuneration period.
The question was not that the executive did not perform, but that they wanted them to perform better. In fact, what they did achieve - which was a phenomenal achievement - was a R22 billion saving in operational costs. That actually provided them with the base to be able to provide the continuing energy provision for us in this last period of time. So, it was a significant achievement in that way.
But I do agree with you. I don't think it's an absolute ideal state to be separating these remunerations, but they just felt that they wanted to do proper performance management and to actually hold those people to account on the R22 billion.