Mr. Erskine-Smith, it's nice to have the opportunity to converse again. It's nice to see you.
Chair, I'll just respond very quickly, in part by addressing Mr. Erskine-Smith's suggestion that we knew all we needed to know and that the government made a decision appropriately on not having a national security review.
I think it's a very contested view that lithium carbonate is a less important derivative of lithium than is lithium hydroxide. It's certainly contested in the Neo Lithium corporate documents. It's contested, certainly, in some of the public expert discussions about the future of lithium carbonate and its uses. I would note that the Neo Lithium pilot plant project in Argentina was producing lithium carbonate at what it described as a 99% purity level for use in batteries. Again, I'm not an expert on this aspect, but I think the black-and-white notion the government has advanced that lithium carbonate is of no strategic value, which I think was the suggestion from Mr. Fillmore, is probably incorrect—