Let me first add a caveat to this, which is that we've already made certain decisions, as you point out, so there is a certain path dependency that imposes itself. We have already chosen to build up our airlift capacity. The question then becomes, given that airlift capacity, whether it is also necessary for us to invest in a joint support ship, which would give us sealift capacity. Perhaps that money might be better used augmenting our C-17 capability so it's up to six aircraft that are fully operational at all times, precisely for those types of missions, and relying on other allies or the private sector when it comes to our sealift capabilities. Those are the types of decisions I think we can ask sincerely.
Similarly, when it comes to the army, does the Canadian army really require, over the long term, the type of mechanized direct-fire support capability that it is currently planning to acquire or that it has acquired? As you recall, in 2005 General Hillier called that into question and sought to have more lightly deployable forces. I don't think that issue was ever fully discussed, and therefore that is another area where I think we can have more serious discussion about what kind of army we need and how light or how heavy it should be.