I think if it's available, off-the-shelf procurement is appropriate for every case. If you can actually get something off the shelf, that means it's fully developed, perhaps with the exception of naval vessels. But if you start talking about aircraft or trucks or guns or whatever for the military, we really want to acquire proven products. When we acquire some vehicle or machine or weapon, we want to know what it will cost to maintain, the breakdown rate. We can project the cost of maintaining this piece of equipment into the future, so we really want it off the shelf. We want to avoid development. We had a history of developing over a period of decades. We used to call it C1. We had to Canadianize everything.
If two or three or four first-class militaries can use a piece of equipment for a certain function and we need it, why can't we use that? Why do we have to take it and fiddle with it? So we're reducing development work on equipment. We're trying to take equipment that is available. There are some exceptions. I mean, I won't get into it, but in software there may be unique things you have to do. But ideally we try to get equipment off the shelf.