Sure.
I think we have to first acknowledge that we are significantly delayed on this defence modernization. A lot of our allies started this process around 2015, in response to the Russian invasion in Crimea and the Wales summit.
The United States and Australia have tried to streamline significant parts of their process. They've identified that new technologies are critical to the competitiveness of their military capabilities. They've developed new streams to sort of short-circuit some of these issues.
If you look at the United States, you see things like other transactional authorities, such as what is called an 804 program and a mid-tier acquisition model. What these are trying to do is identify where you can acquire something really quickly, remove some of the existing process—in the United States, it's the federal acquisition rules—and get a capability into the hands of what I would call a warfighter in a much more rapid fashion.
I think that has been a challenge we've faced in Canada for quite some time. The Defence Investment Agency is an approach to deal with some of this, but I think that to some degree, what our allies have done is just taken their entire system and started reforming the fundamental operation of that system, rather than just creating these separate pathways, realizing that this is a way to get innovative new technologies in.
You're starting to see that right now in the United States. The FoRGED Act and the SPEED Act, which are within Congress right now, are really trying to create a much more responsive system, because the nature of capabilities that we see in defence right now is changing. These are increasingly becoming software-enabled systems—
I'm sorry. Go ahead.