I just want to ask a couple of specific questions then, because the advisers are here and we might get some work done this evening. The Waikato University economics professor Frank Scrimgeour is reported as saying that the extension of the brightline test could result in stranded assets. I feel very strongly about this. At the end of the day, you want a dynamic housing market, and there's lots of reasons why people's circumstances change—you can get older, you can lose your job, you can have a restructure of your family, and you end up in a divorce. There's all sorts of elements there that have to be considered. So do we not want a tax policy that actually allows assets to move rather than be stranded because there's tax incentives to hold on to them and there might be a greater benefit for somebody else being a different owner? So if we can't get anything done because everything's being passed under urgency, could we please look at that one aspect—providing some flexibility to the people of New Zealand to allow them to actually have some certainty around their lives? 