In regard to your first question, with respect to safety, COG is not, to clarify, an advocacy organization. We don't do marketing campaigns or anything along those lines. We are very much a technical organization. What we do is work with our members to identify where there are opportunities to improve safety margins, to improve environmental performance, and so on.
I want to note that the performance of the fleet today is already very high, but we want to get ahead of problems. In the world of nuclear safety, we have an expression in our industry that nuclear safety is like riding a bicycle: if you're not moving forward, you're falling off. You need to continuously move forward.
What we do at COG is look ahead. We identify where the aging mechanisms are likely to be, what the safety margins associated with those aging mechanisms are, and how we can get ahead of the problem as the fleet of reactors ages with time.
We have been very successful so far, because performance, 40-some-odd years later, continues to be very high. Our members in turn—OPG, Bruce Power, and New Brunswick—can then use this information as a mechanism for public discourse. It is they who would be engaging with the public in shaping public opinion, not so much the CANDU Owners Group.
With regard to the question around what we are doing to improve constructability, we're not involved in that. That is very much a design engineering issue with companies such as SNC-Lavalin that are marketing the new reactors, and we don't become involved in that. We become involved as soon as they're into the commissioning and operation phase. At that point, we are involved and help to provide support through collaboration.