I think that there's a balance. I'd probably point to some of the stuff that the United Kingdom and Australia have done in the last decade or so. They've moved away from very rigid formulas requiring 100% domestic offsets for foreign-purchased equipment to more flexible arrangements that actually look at the value of what they're getting and at the development of domestic industries.
They also provide significantly large, direct investments from the government rather than trying to do it completely through the ITB format. I think it's a real danger that we have in Canada and you start to see real problems associated with it, especially now that you can alter the selection of military capabilities based on the value proposition, the number of ITBs, where they're located or the value according to the assessment criteria. So—