If Finance has any information, it would be useful because that is the program that we keep pointing to as being the one way that the government supports heritage outside of the ownership within the federal ownership. I maintain that we can do better than $1 million per year and I would like to see us do significantly better than $1 million per year.
You talked about the subsidy of private homeowners through taxes as an example and that this may benefit particularly the wealthy. I know in my time working within the heritage conservation field, Parks Canada used to offer—I don't know if they still do—a fantastic conservation workshop aimed specifically at windows in heritage buildings. I think that sometimes we make the assumption that a house may have leaky windows and you can simply go to Home Depot and spend some money and, without spending anything more than that, it equates to a subsidy.
The fact is that many of these heritage buildings are very intricate and ornate, even elements that are important to the character, so there are associated costs. In many cases the trades that are involved are very much the middle-class Canadians that our government is working so hard to support. The fact is we want to see these trades survive and thrive and maybe do proper heritage conservation. In the restoration of windows, there is a cost beyond going out, as I say, to a local supplier with a contemporary window form. Is there something wrong with that? What am I missing that—