Thank you, Chair.
It's rare that we have such a divergent view in a panel of two before this committee, but your views are equally interesting on both sides of the fence, I must say.
Also, we're very wide ranging, although we're studying the defence of North America. I will ask one question about the overarching issue we're dealing with, the joint strike fighter. Of course, stealth is one aspect of it. It's being challenged daily as to how stealthy, and when, and what the technology will be, and if it really is going to last, even if it was perfected for now, and how long it would actually be effective.
Also on interoperability, we've been told by the general in charge of transformation for the NATO alliance that interoperability has to do with how you work together, and that the NATO allies—28 nations—all bring what they have to the table, and their key is to figure out how all this works together and that interoperability was not the same aircraft. So that's also a debate that we're confronted with.
I will ask both of you, in terms of the defence of North America, we being the second largest country in the world, with a huge coastline and sovereign space. Is there a geographical imperative with respect to Canada's situation that might determine what kind of aircraft, or what kind of capabilities we might need to be able to patrol that space, to provide domain awareness, to provide interceptability, for example? Would these things play as equal or greater a role than having the same aircraft as somebody else?
I could ask both of you to deal with that.