But to turn that argument on its head, if the figures that Gerry Holtham has produced to support his case—you know, the 67 per cent rise that’s coming our way in the short term in non-residential care costs—it would in incautious, of course, not to find a means of funding the quality of care that we, in a decent society, would want to provide. I think that it’s a very, very interesting proposal. Of course, it’s based in a European tradition of social insurance; it adapts that to this particular case, and some innovative examples of inter-generational equity in terms of a sliding scale, in terms of the level of funding, and even a suggestion of a lottery prize once a year, maybe, to sweeten the pill. It’s certainly the kind of example, I think, of—yes, a creative and innovative proposal, but it really goes to the heart of one of the key problems that we’re facing—there are others—I think, in economic development. I think the Bevan Foundation suggested looking at innovation tax credits. The Irish have responded to the OECD’s proposals in terms of differentiating business taxation to encourage investment in tangible assets like research and development—having a different corporation tax rate, a so-called knowledge development box of 6.25 per cent, I think, for R&D activity, exclusively, by companies. So, there are interesting proposals out there. The Cabinet Secretary has already referred to a wide-ranging review of property-related taxes, and that’s both in the personal field in terms of council tax, and in terms of business rates—that opens up a whole other debate about land value taxation that has been around for over 120 years, and I’m sure that other Members will look forward to joining that debate in due course.