Chair, could I try to give some element of response?
From what I understand from the policy, I think government recognizes that government itself is perhaps not the best to commercialize things. As was being explained earlier, many of these contracts don't say they are to develop an intellectual property; they're maybe to develop a new computer system or a new whatever. If there can be further use and commercialization that can go on beyond what government may need, it's better that the private sector do it.
There is an issue, though, that we're bringing up. When these contracts are made, there should be, to the extent possible, some identification of potential intellectual property, so that the government protects itself. In this way the complete title doesn't rest necessarily with the private sector, and if government wants to modify something, it doesn't end up paying the private sector for something it has already paid for, and it has access to those rights. There could be other considerations that go into that. It's very important that this be recognized up front and that there be some thought given to what will actually happen to intellectual property that comes out of these things.