Well, we have a number of systems up there tracking various movements. We have the NORDREG traffic vessel system. We have RADARSAT-2, and we're hoping it has further capabilities in the near future. We also have the north warning system. So we actually have quite a few mechanisms for surveillance. We also have things such as Operation QIMMIQ, which Joint Task Force North operates on a regular basis, with the Auroras that go out to have a look at what's happening.
I think we have a lot of surveillance information, and that's why NORAD has always been so key in the Arctic. I guess the issue is whether these are sufficient for the threats that we are seeing now or anticipating in the future.
My concern is that if something happens to the north warning system—and remember, we've already had one of their radar sites burn to the ground—or if there is an interruption of the feed by the north warning system, that really would impinge on the ability of NORAD to see what is going on. That's why I am drawing the committee's attention to the need to start thinking about paying for a future north warning-like system. We can leave to the engineers the question how best to configure it, but it has been and still is one of the best sources of information for NORAD.