Other than the greenbelt, for example, being mentioned by name and the boundaries being defined in the Ottawa official plan, in terms of actual guidelines of what can and cannot be done with the greenbelt, I'm not aware of any, sir.
Occasionally it's been our experience that there's some sort of a development proposal—for example, the one that comes to mind is the building of a large water theme park in the west end of the greenbelt. This happened just after the previous greenbelt master plan was completed. I don't think the ink was dry when it was announced that the commission was strongly supporting the development of a rather large tract of greenbelt land that had been defined in that plan as ecologically very significant—a natural area that linked the Stony Swamp waters with the Ottawa River—and yet they wanted to proceed with building.
We took this case to the Ontario Municipal Board and tried to resist it as much as possible. Fortunately, the business plan itself was faulty. We don't have the climate here to make a water theme park profitable, but it does indicate the constant and relentless pressure the greenbelt is under.
I should be fair. The NCC at that time was still under the amendments of the Nielsen task force, which allowed them to sell land and retain the proceeds. Since then, Minister Baird, as you know, restored the capital portion—I think $10 million annually. He has restored that, having removed at least for now the incentive for the commission to sell land and shore up its own budgetary needs.
The pressure remains. It's always there. There's road widening now with the proposed new rail system.