Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Fergusson, could you provide more details about the options you are proposing in your report? One of them is to maintain NORAD's operational status quo. However, my understanding is that decision-makers could then give more weight to the interests of organizations other than NORAD, which might marginalize NORAD. That is my understanding based on what I have read.
You also propose that NORAD go back to its original mission, drop the maritime warning mission, expand its early warning and attack assessment mission to include space, cyberspace, sea, land and air. In other words, you are referring to all the environments that might imply threats for North America. You add that these possible options will always entail decisions plagued by political and sovereignty concerns, command, organizational and jurisdictional issues, as well as legal obstacles.
Do you think that we, as elected representatives, should give priority to some of these proposals in our studies? Do you think we would be able to deal with the challenges that will automatically accompany the desire to make the slightest changes to how NORAD works?
Thank you.