Thank you.
You may not have seen it, but the Library of Parliament has done a little briefing note for us on the history of NORAD after the Cold War. There's a note about changes after the September 11 terrorist attacks in the U.S., which kind of changed the mandate in terms of internal threats as well.
I guess my question is again around agility. If you look at the history and then that change after 9/11, is there a formal change within the agreement and the allies partnership in terms of taking into account the changes in the nature of security and defence, or is it just reacting to extreme events? Do you constantly review the nature of the threat or do you wait until there is a large-scale event like 9/11?
I would argue that the Russian invasion of Ukraine should give us serious thought about the nature of combat, security and defence. Is there a formal process that you have to go into with our allies in the U.S., or are you constantly having these conversations?