Thank you, Chair.
Thank you to both of our witnesses for joining us today.
Professor Fergusson, leaving aside Canada's relationship with the United States, where there is a defence production agreement that covers a lot of territory and a lot of our industry going back many decades, you seem to have the view that the Arms Trade Treaty is...I won't say of no consequence, but you seem to think it doesn't add anything to the mix. I'm concerned about that view. I'm questioning it to some extent, obviously. Looking at the treaty itself, there's very significant attention paid to the whole issue of diversion. A whole article is devoted to it, with many provisions suggesting how one could handle this and how to make it possible for it to work.
I want to ask I guess an open-ended question. It's not specifically related to Turkey, although Turkey shines a bright light on this whole issue of diversion and end-user assurances. Let me put this to you: If you don't have a proper end-user regime, you don't have a program, and you don't have effective rules and measures to control and prevent diversion, then effectively you have no arms control at all. Is that a fair proposition?