I don't think you do, but you could have sat on New Democrat benches, because we argued the same thing. We said that if you're going to insert this amount of government into the home building environment, certainly do it for longer-term benefit than a new marble counter top for somebody who was going to spend $5,000 on it anyway and didn't necessarily need the cash, as opposed to the $330 million that we're seeing saved by Canadians every year now, going out, because energy prices are only going to go one place.
The government said they needed to cancel the program to assess the program. I'm a bit confused by this methodology. I assume that the government could both run a program and assess it at the same time, because it does it every day. Do you find any logic in the argument that the only reason the program has been terminated is to permit assessment?