I'm glad you asked that, because there is a trend that is occurring. Some of you may be aware of this trend in the private sector, where firms are selling.... For example, Scotiabank is selling their head office, and the Royal Bank is selling their head office, because they've realized that they're not in the property management business. They've sold the buildings and received a one-time capital gain. Then they rent or sign long-term leases with the developer or property manager for that building.
It suggests to me that if the private sector is doing it, it's because there's an efficiency there. There is a logic to it. It suggests, therefore, that government should be looking more closely at getting out of the property management business and at signing long-term leases with people who are expert at creating buildings: designing them, building them, and managing them. Then, at least with buildings, you've dealt with the maintenance problem, because the private company will maintain the asset. For that matter, bridges can be dealt with in that mode too. Bridges can be—theoretically—privatized. There are private bridges in this country. I believe there's one across the river to Detroit.
Again, it comes back to the proper role of government in steering versus rowing. There is an extremely important role for government as the referee of the hockey game, which is the metaphor I like to use all the time. That's a very important role. Regulating the banks, regulating whatever capital markets...but that doesn't mean the government should be in there playing on one of the hockey teams or telling the hockey players when, where, why, and how to score hockey goals.