You kind of had me at the first sentence, actually. Yes, absolutely, very much so. We would like to see if we can change the scale of our sector.
If you look at some of the non-profit housing providers with multiple portfolios in different places, they're looking at some very dynamic business models going forward.
What we're faced with in Canada, however, typically is a housing cooperative that has about 50 units on a single site. Probably the site is largely, although not always, built out, and it's very difficult to leverage that asset.
We want to convince our members of the benefits of doing exactly what you suggest, combining in large groups. I even actually put a proposal before our federation, which is called a blue sky proposal. What if there is only one cooperative in Ottawa, instead of 40? Could we still preserve the sense of community but at the same time leverage enormous benefits of scale, and the asset value you talked about? Instead of pooling reserves individually at the project level, you'd pool them together.
This is a model that's been copied and that's been put into place in Melbourne. It's another good example of an international best practice that you might hear about.
But yes, definitely, it's something we are interested in. I think the smaller private non-profits are faced with exactly the same issues that you describe.