I just want to follow up on the one issue that's sort of dangling out there, and I'm going to go to Lieutenant-General Leslie on that very point.
When you read that description on page 27 of the auditor's report, it appears from the documentation and recommendation coming from National Defence--and this is for the LAV vehicle, which I assume is a replacement for the Bison--that this vehicle was the best option. But when the analysis was done by the forces, it wasn't at all.... In fact, it wasn't even one of the preferred options. So there seems to be a discrepancy between what the forces are saying and what the Department of National Defence is saying. Do you have any comment on why that discrepancy is there in the audit?