Mr. Nelius Lynch:

The analysis carried out to date has been an examination of the impact in terms of winners and losers and the sectors that have won and lost. We have not asked anyone else about that. As the commissioner said, there is a compelling argument in favour of revaluation and even though the theory stands up to examination, that theory must be constantly tested to see that what happens in practice follows through. To date, we have looked to see whether the results are within the expected range as to the winners and losers and to what degree they have won or lost. A range of plus or minus 20% might be acceptable. We examine how many are in the extreme position. As the commissioner pointed out, we examine the extreme positions in more detail and review them. There is an explanation in some cases. One cannot simply look at the percentages and sometimes one must look at the absolute increase as well. Some of them can be explained and then one is left with a small number. One then makes a judgment based on that number and the process of representations and appeals, the time gap between the 1988 valuation and the new valuation date. It is a case of judging whether the results brought about by the revaluation are within the expected anticipated range and if the revaluation process is working. On this occasion we would have no objection to going further if that can add to the analysis.