No, it doesn't. Basically what I was saying was that this was a great program to be part of. It benefited National Defence in many ways, and there were other benefits. We were learning a great deal about autonomic logistics, about composite frames, about the ways you can manufacture and develop things better, have the better systems. All of that was great for us. At National Defence we were learning all about it. At the same time, interoperability was obviously a factor.
Let me talk in terms of interoperability. I'm sorry about this, but I'll use a car analogy again. If you are travelling from Ottawa to Calgary with ten of your friends in ten different cars, you all don't have to travel in a Ford in order to communicate. It's not the frame that determines interoperability.
You know, it's good that many of our allies would have the same frame and the same product--absolutely--but we operate today with many allies, with many frames. We're totally interoperable with NATO dealing with 16 standards and everything else like that. Many of our allies after this won't have this one, and a lot of our allies that buy this have others as well.
So it's not the frame that determines interoperability, it's the systems inside. And while buying this jet may be the best for Canada and may ensure that interoperability is enhanced, all I'm saying is that if it is, let's go through the front door as opposed to the back door in getting it.