Excellent. Thank you.
Dr. Byers, I know that the topic of NATO in the Arctic has been hashed over. I'm surprised how much discussion there has been around that topic tonight, when yesterday there was only one question. Notwithstanding your comments...and I agree with almost everything you said, that we don't want to go in there and spend billions, that there is currently no sign of aggression from Russia, and that it is thousands of kilometres away.
I think back to your comments in your opening remarks—excuse me if I paraphrase them a bit and get them wrong—where you had a conversation four years ago with somebody about the relevance of NATO, and that person at that time felt there was no relevance, and probably NATO shouldn't be. Now there are election issues, referenda, cyber issues. You used the term that we were better together. There is no question that in today's environment we need NATO and we need to be involved in NATO.
I'm wondering if you know what that professor, or that friend of yours, would say today, just four years later. I'm tying that to the comment about NATO in the Arctic and how there is no current sign of aggression from Russia...albeit there are thousands of kilometres in between. I'm interested to know whether or not you've spoken to that gentleman again. Do you know whether they've changed their mind on the relevance of NATO and our participation in it?
I'm sorry it took me such a long time to get that question out.