Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and through you to the witnesses, thank you for appearing today.
It's always interesting to hear people use words that mean different things to different people, such as smart defence. To some people smart defence means being capable and able, as you articulated at the beginning of this—in your deck actually—and also through some of the questions. To some people, smart defence means the primary function of our military should be to be able to deliver aid to foreign nations using the military as the means by which to do that, and that anything we do should have a nice warm cuddly feeling—make a bonfire, lock your hands, pass the sandwiches around, and sing Kumbaya. To other people, it means we should be able to stand our ground in the world against anyone who poses a threat to the values that we believe make us the country we are.
I would suggest that a smart defence policy would be something that the hockey coach and the football coach says—that a good defence is a good offence. In other words, you're capable of defending yourself.
Would you also agree with me that one of the best ways to ensure that is to be able to be a valued partner to the rest of your alliances in the world, whether that be the United Nations that tends to use NATO as its muscle, and would you agree that if you want to be a valued partner, you need to bring something to the table? That means, in a modern era, a capability of going by land, air, or sea, and being a nation that can be counted on to exercise foreign policies through existing organizations that have a global value in a positive way.