Thank you, Chair.
Thanks to both of you.
In another life, I was down at Colorado Springs and, as part of the committee, talked to General Jacoby, and I think it was General Perraut at the time, about this strange relationship we have over ballistic missile defences. It got to be some sort of theatre of the absurd that once it was identified as a threat, somehow or other our guy had to leave the room and it would be handled by the Americans and only by the Americans.
I was struck by Philippe Lagassé's comment that “Canada's current abstention acts as an obstacle toward closer cooperation”. Ferry de Kerckhove says: “To me, it's...very simple.... We are [all] in it together.” Then Lagassé said that, really, we could get into it at no cost to Canada, and de Kerckhove said no, that there are going to be cost implications, let's get real here—I added “let's get real here”.
So the threshold question is, should we at this point decide that we should go back in? Second, is it going to be costless? In 25 words or less....