I can probably kick off. Yes, yes, yes.
Upon reading the documentation for the Canadian surface combatant, because it's in the news, there is a sustained effort to make it contingent that anybody who bids had better plan on transferring a huge amount of work to Canada, be it with equipment into the ship, or with investing in Canadian companies, or bringing manufacturing companies to Canada. That's the plan.
However, you also have to say that some Canadian companies, primarily because of the huge step-up that the Canadian patrol frigate gave them, have developed a massive worldwide market in the most sophisticated capabilities in the world. I speak of L-3 MAPPS, integrated platform management systems, the things that run your ship. They don't sell tens, they don't sell hundreds, they sell thousands to the most demanding customers in the world: the U.S. navy, the Israeli navy, the British navy. And ditto OSI, integrated bridge systems, again, hundreds of systems, and DRS Technologies, communications systems that are in the crown jewel of American shipping, the carriers, the nuclear carriers.... So we have the capability, and people can use something like the national shipbuilding strategy to lever themselves to, quite candidly, world dominance in those areas. Nobody is doing as well as we are in those areas.
However, when you decided to stop building CPFs in 1996 and start building AOPSs in 2015, a 19-year gap, how many companies have the capacity to live through 19 years of drought exclusively on export orders? It's a tough demand, ergo the national shipbuilding strategy's intent is to go to a continuous shipbuilding program.