Expanding EQC to other natural hazards does raise some questions with me. There is a scheme in the UK called Flood Re, which is to deal with flood-prone housing in particular. It's, effectively, what EQC is doing: socialises the cost of insurance across the whole market. The problem that they have with is that is that it, effectively, locks people in to areas which are flood-prone when, actually, the better long-term solution would be, in the really worst places, to have a managed retreat from those areas. I mean, we can think of Westport, where we've had several floods there recently. That's a very serious issue, and maybe we should be looking at that. I don't want to see EQC expanding their mandate to cause people to be locked into those homes—