Given that our focus is response, our general philosophy about building response capacity—and I think I would say the same about marine infrastructure in the Arctic and I'd use the same logic—is that it should be developed as the circumstances require. It goes back to the previous question about first nations and Inuit. As their aspirations are met, and as economic development takes place, I'd underscore, in an environmentally responsible way, given the particular environment we're talking about and its need for particular defence, I think infrastructure investments can essentially keep pace as circumstances require. I don't know that we would express an opinion on whether infrastructure investments need to be made as an expression of sovereignty.
As the general said, sovereignty exists. It's exercised. We could go through a long list of different ways in which, just in the marine space, that sovereignty is exercised. Infrastructure can develop with context and as needs dictate.