I would like to add one point.
From what I've been able to observe on the army side of things, a great number of the budget increases we've seen have been driven by wartime necessity; therefore, we are currently entering a period of post-war retooling as we've seen in the past. A great number of officers and the senior leadership of the Canadian land forces understand that to meet wartime demands.... Some institutions, some capabilities, are created very roughly, not necessarily without thought, but without the time to do the kind of review that can normally be done in peacetime when time is available, because equipment needs to be made available to people.
So there's an awareness among many of the officers I've spoken to that it is time to take a look at moving into the future with new kinds of equipment in a more efficient fashion. That includes taking a look at what types of specific military capabilities were developed for the mission in Afghanistan, which of them were purely mission-specific for that task and will not serve any purpose in the future, and which new kinds of ideas and capabilities make good sense and should be institutionalized, given what's likely to happen in the future.
That process, as Admiral Murray suggested, is what armed forces do. So I can safely say I'm comfortable that the senior leadership at least understands that some degree of reduction is necessary.