Would you characterize this report as a tool to flag the deficiencies—obviously there were some deficiencies in this process—and a guide to ensuring that we move in a proper manner to replace the Canadian fighter fleet, to make sure it's robust?
Some people obviously don't want to see us have a replacement. There are those, even within the parliamentary precinct, who don't believe we need more equipment for our military. Some people would say this report is designed to completely put an end to the process to replace Canada's fighter fleet. Would you concur with their assessment, or do you think the greater intention is to flag the deficiencies?