Now, I just want to dwell on this, Minister, because is the Minister really telling this House and the New Zealand public that he thinks the following categories of people should have a capital gains tax placed on the sale of their family home? Let us imagine a scenario where someone is gravely ill. They have cancer, or their child has cancer, and they are told that the place where they live—let's say it's Hokitika—is no longer a good place to be in terms of accessing the regular daily treatment they will require for their particular kind of cancer. So that individual makes a decision that, whether it's for their good or the good of their child who has cancer, they are going to rent a property in Christchurch—or perhaps they're put up in the Ronald McDonald House—for a period of a year so that they can access regular medical treatment. What this Minister, I take it from what you've said in your answers to earlier questions, would do to that family—if they chose to keep their family home and rent it out; rent it out for the very good purpose that they're trying to get a little bit of income to pay for the rental in Christchurch while they're going through their medical appointments—is say, "Well, it's no longer your main family home. I'm going to put a CGT on you. I'm going to take tax from you because when you sold your house it was no longer meeting my tax definition of being the family home, because you had the temerity to rent it out." Now, I find that shocking, Minister, that you would breach what has been a clear commitment to New Zealanders, a very clear promise that Labour would not impose a CGT on the family home.