I totally appreciate that and I appreciate that there will be time, but what we have now is a technology cycle that's shrinking and a procurement cycle that's growing, and that's a really bad place to be. To put things in perspective, these security concerns and 100% offset and 20 years of in-service and support have been there forever. The CF-18 that we have now first flew in 1978, and we took it first in test. We took delivery in 1982, from 1982 to 1989. That's not a long time. We're looking at some airplanes that have been flying for years. I appreciate what you're saying. We have four departments that have their fingers in the bubble here. We have Treasury Board, DND, PSPC and ISED. All of them have significant influence on this process, yet none of them are ultimately accountable. To me that's a bit of a problem.
A number of our allies do things differently. I know the Australians have a single point of accountability. The Brits have a single point of accountability. I would love to ask your opinion on that, but I'm pretty sure nobody at that table is going to give me their rendition of whether they think that's a good idea. But certainly there's something we can do better than we're doing now. If we remain in this space, where the technology cycle gets smaller and smaller and the procurement cycle gets larger and larger, we are not going to deliver what we need to our people in a timely fashion, and that's going to hurt us all.