Okay. I see where you're going with that.
I'm going to move on to the real estate and the capital cost allowance. It's an interesting proposal.
I know Mr. Jean asked you a question on it, and I'm curious. If you were to go down that route—and I guess where I get into trouble is that a lot of times real estate doesn't depreciate in value, it actually appreciates—how do you justify to taxpayers that we should allow depreciation every year on the real estate, yet we all know that 5, 10, 15 years out that property is going to appreciate? How do you tell taxpayers that's still fair?