There are different measures. I think we align very nicely with international standards and, where needed, we customize for our particular situation. I think most countries look at housing as an asset and then in inflation look at it as a consumption over time. You have to start to look at things like the valuation of the asset, the opportunity cost of what you would do. Not everybody has a full mortgage or the same size of mortgage. It isn't that you couldn't apply other measures to come at some of the questions that have been asked. It's just not the way that we, I would say, generally look at an asset that has a shelf life and that then has to be depreciated, and you have to look at what the opportunity cost is that one may forgo. We're pretty confident that we remain among the avant-garde in how we keep these concepts pure and make sure that these things are working.
The second reason we feel confident in the numbers is that we confront these data sources with others. When you break down that somebody is looking at an average cost price and we look at an index of certain things, it gives you a good sense that, yes, the measure that we have withstands that kind of scrutiny. Then we look at the comparability of the macro level or the aggregate component, as well as the different subcomponents over time.
All three of those areas give us the confidence that we're able to provide policy-makers with the information they need to have a good debate and to make sure that they're making decisions based on good quality data.