I've been watching the story of the Arctic offshore patrol vessels with a great degree of interest, because in my own opinion I'm a little bit skeptical as to the design of the vessels. An icebreaking vessel is purpose-built and specially designed for just that, for operating in ice. They do not make effective offshore vessels or vessels for operating in no-ice conditions because of the nature of their hull and how they're designed. The thought that a vessel can be built to operate both in ice and in an offshore environment has been tried. There was some success, but generally the vessels from a cost perspective are not overly successful.
If we're looking at an expanded naval presence or operating presence in the Arctic, then another icebreaker or more dedicated icebreakers are what is required. That's what you need up there. Those are the vessels that are designed to be up there. If you're looking at maybe something that's more cost-effective, maybe a coast guard vessel with a naval presence, or a naval presence with a coast guard special operating group on board, however that works. But that's at a larger scale.
Immediately, I think that enabling Transport Canada to carry out dedicated inspections of vessels moving into the Arctic is important--that we say whether an operator has the ability, whether their crew is sufficiently trained, whether the ships are officially able to operate in an Arctic environment, and also ensure that we have a Canadian ice pilot on board.