Obviously, we're not thinking in terms of highest and best use, which I think would be a more appropriate response to a crisis.
Are you familiar with the project at Fisher Avenue and Baseline Road here in Ottawa, next to the experimental farm? It's been delayed by the Minister of Agriculture. I wonder if you have chatted with him about it. There is a 400-hectare farm in the middle of a metropolis of a million people, and the Minister of Agriculture is concerned about a tiny corner of that 400 hectares being affected by shadows, which, most of the time, will be only in December, when things don't really grow at the experimental farm, and yet it's being held up in delays. This is another example of the things that we're....
You're saying you're going to try to push municipalities to get out of the way with your accelerator fund, which is pouring more money. There are all kinds of examples where the federal government could just get out of the way and let the private sector build, but we make it more expensive.
I am wondering if you can help me understand that. In a crisis, it's about literally leaving no stone unturned. I've given you two examples. I can give you another example in the city of Whitehorse. You met with the mayor of Whitehorse last week. I did too. A really aging federal office building is located at 419 Range Road. It's not full. It's surrounded by new schools. The city would like it for housing, and they just keep being told that it's not surplus.
Is it the highest and best use of that land? Is this the response of a government that recognizes we're in a housing crisis? I am struggling here.