Well, my understanding was that there was actually a submission going to Treasury Board, which would have had money for this kind of training, so I guess I would just say that it's too bad this didn't go ahead, because you might have gotten an answer earlier. I know my colleagues down here would have appreciated that before they signed on to the deal they signed on to, but that's their deal.
If I may, Mr. Luxton, I have a very simple question in terms of the work you do. One might say the best way of dealing with IEDs is to have people stop planting them--I'm sure you've looked at that, and you look at the sources--as opposed to just having people trained to be able to take them apart. One of the issues, I would imagine--and I certainly heard this from our folks on the ground--is that they keep on changing methods, and you're trying to catch up to them. It reminds me of what happens with hackers and computers.
One of the more innovative ways that people have dealt with computer hacking and the kinds of damage they do is to actually take the people who were involved and get them on our side. We already have the Russians we're retraining as our special agents looking for the Taliban now. I'm just wondering whether that kind of approach has been taken, so that you have people who were actually involved on the other side now helping you out or helping coalition forces to deal with the IED problem.