Thank you for the answers.
Now I would like to move to Dr. da Mota.
You argued that Canada risks overdesignating too many technologies as dual use, which could misallocate funding and make it harder for DND to identify genuinely strategic investments. In your view, is the federal government currently using the term “dual use” too broadly, and could that lead to taxpayer dollars being spread across projects that do not meaningfully strengthen Canada's defence capabilities?