Thanks very much for those questions.
In terms of agile procurement, really we're talking about applying a business model to government procurement, which can be very difficult. Of course, in the business world things turn around very quickly. If you were to create, let's say, a shipbuilding czar in Canada in the form of the Minister of National Defence, then that person could drive the rebuild of procurement officers. As I understand it, there were 1,200 or 1,500 procurement officers working on the Canadian patrol frigate back in the early 1990s. We don't have that capability right now. That's the part you need on the government side. That office could also drive the business plans and business methods to bring agile procurement capabilities into the shipbuilding strategy. All of that would be driven from the top by the shipbuilding champion, so yes, it is absolutely a key role because technology changes so quickly.
In terms of the three different countries, all countries have problems with shipbuilding. Canada has its problems, Australia has had lots of problems and the U.K. has problems.
The U.K. I would say is responding most quickly to the problems it has had. The problem it had was that one big shipyard built its ships and got very behind, so they decided to break it up into several shipyards that would build different vessels. Also, they adopted an export strategy, which is another whole conversation. They are building in agile procurement and complex technologies through the process of breaking up the different locations into hull builders and technology components. A warship is about 80% computer and 20% hull. It's much different, let's say, from the AOPS or a Coast Guard vessel.
Australia has had a number of things it's learned in terms of how to build a ship, which are other things we can possibly apply here in Canada. One of the things that Australia learned was not to build modules in different locations and try to bring them together into one location, because they had trouble with that with their Hobart-class air warfare destroyer.
Britain is going in the opposite direction. It's building modules in different places around the country. I think Canada would want to take note of the solution that Australia found. Britain, of course, is a small country and can build things in different locations. I don't think Canada would want to do that. We're building our modules, let's say, at Seaspan and putting them together at Seaspan, and I think that's a good idea.
There are different learnings from the different countries. I'm not sure if I've answered your question.