No. I am talking about centres of excellence. I am talking about directing Boeing to specific areas. This is language we have not heard, at least in the defence and security industries. Have we heard of the technology list? You bet your bippy we have heard of the technology list. In our view, it needs to be expanded. It is light on the soldiers' systems technologies, it is light on marine and land capabilities, and we have offered our views to the Department of Industry as it relates to that.
I would be happy to share that material with you, if you are interested. As it relates to the performance versus the detailed specs issue, our view is that it is very much in the definition. What a performance-based spec is depends on whom you ask. As an association, we would be delighted—and I'm sure my colleagues would be as well—to sit down with this committee and with others to discuss our take on exactly what a performance-based spec should look like.
Finally, on the C-17, if I might just quickly, the reality is that if the Government of Canada has identified a requirement for a strategic lift capability, the size that is the C-17, there aren't that many options around the world for it. Again, the question is how competitive a process is it, and when does that competition period begin? On C-17, they have one of the only two pieces of equipment in the world that could respond to the requirement that was defined.
I appreciate your comments and would be happy to follow up with you as it relates to the technologies list we think should be expanded.