It's never good enough, I think is the answer. We take responsibility for that as well. That's not something we can just throw back to our government colleagues.
There is a body called DIAC, the Defence Industry Advisory Council. It's at the senior official level. It does meet regularly and it tackles some of these issues in a very non-political sort of way. So it covers a spectrum of the government, a spectrum of the country, and by and large does a good job.
I would also say personally--as opposed to with my chairman of CADSI hat on--that industry could do a better job contributing to that process. This is not a situation where the government officials involved deserve any criticism; they deserve kudos for trying to do it.
I alluded to the fact that it doesn't cover the full spectrum of government interests, and that's what we're talking about here. How do we get--I'll use the words probably wrongly--a more enlightened top-down view of these issues that includes a political level? So when we get these very good questions, like the one you asked on shipbuilding, there's an informed opinion from across the broad spectrum of interest. There's industry and all levels of government, including political.
We think there needs to be dialogue in that regard. There is no real venue to do that. We do it bilaterally and ad hoc with Mr. Hawn and other interested parties. For sure it's to their credit, but there's no formal mechanism beyond DIAC that I'm aware of to have that discussion in a defence-industrial context.