Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to get some points of view from the witnesses. I really appreciate your testimony. We all recognize there are opportunities for the federal government to save money and provide all kinds of environmental benefits by having more energy-efficient buildings. The challenge is overcoming the hurdle when it comes to capital and cashflow, of making improvements, especially where the federal government is a tenant, which is the majority of cases.
Energy performance contracts have been proposed by a number of witnesses. I'd like you to describe your experience with that. In an existing lease, which could be a long-term lease, public sector or private sector, where the tenant proactively suggests a retrofit, everything is a negotiation on that particular building and the length of the lease. The tenant offers to put money into the building. In exchange, the landlord agrees to reduce lease rates. They work out the cashflow details through the energy performance contract.
I'll start with Edmonton, because you're addressing the committee remotely. Are there successful instances that you've seen in the use of energy performance contracts in a tenant-leaseholder situation?