The government of the day has been supportive certainly of my employer, in the sense that it has given them considerable funds over the last year and a half to complete the ACR-1000 design. We appreciate that.
As I try to mention, the issue of isotope production, when you look at it from an industry perspective, is just one thing. Most people don't appreciate that the NRU was built as a reactor not to make isotopes, but to carry out physics experiments, to test fuel, and to do those kinds of things. The nuclear medicine business was developed over a period of time.
The bigger issue, I think, for us in the industry is that we would like to see an NRU replacement down the road, not just for isotope production, but also because a viable industry needs to have a research reactor. I don't believe the support is there for that. I think that starting the isotope production reactors—if it's possible to start the MAPLEs—would solve that particular issue, but it wouldn't solve the bigger issue, which is to have a viable industry.
Personally, no one likes to say that so much money is not enough. I think there has been money there for certain projects, and it's appreciated; but an investment in a research reactor is a 40-year investment in the future. It's an investment in physics research; it's an investment in isotopes; it could be an investment in many things. It could cost a billion or a billion and a half dollars, but we gave the auto companies $10 billion that we may never see again. This would be a billion or billion and a half dollars that would keep on giving.