Thank you.
I'd like to follow up on the questioning of my colleague Monsieur Godin.
To me, that's still the heart of the accountability piece. Obviously, at the end of the day, going forward is the priority, but in order to do that, you have to understand where you've been.
I share Monsieur Godin's concerns. If this were brand new, I would hear your argument: we need to have a master plan, we need to know what we need, and then we'll decide what components of the various housing provisions will meet that need. That all makes a lot of sense. But we've been doing this for—what?—more than 100 years. You said that the last time you didn't quite get it right.... I'm sorry, I didn't write down your exact words, but they were to the effect that you didn't quite get it right, or it wasn't acted on. How was that? How could that be?
Again, you said that things have changed. I agree with my colleague. You still go to sleep in a bed at night; you still get up; you have a washroom; you have a kitchen. There are basic needs. How did that change? I'm still not satisfied that there has been proper accountability as to how we got here on a subject like this, when the answer you're giving is one that a committee such as this should have heard 100 years ago. Then, as things go on, you revise it, you tweak it, and you improve it. But to come in and say you're going to look at a master plan doesn't explain why the last one failed.... All you have said is that it wasn't sufficient.
Why did it fail? Where did it fail?