It was mentioned a little while before that the old-style government lease, which in fairness was designed, I presume, as a cost-saving measure because it eliminated the right or the need for the government as a tenant to pay for certain expenses, i.e. for capital items and so on, basically created a disincentive for the building owner to spend on capital items. As a result of that, you end up in the situation you're in as a tenant. While it might have seemed logical to ask why you should spend money on something if you don't own the building and therefore it's the owner's building, obviously the answer is clear: nobody wins, essentially.
It's no different from maintaining anything, whether it's your car or your house, or anything. When something starts to break, you have to start repairing it, and if you leave it for too long, the repair cost is a replacement cost, and it's huge. Our lease....
I'm sorry. If you want to....