I think my answer is no. I think NATO defines it very broadly. They're very open to countries deciding what dual use means when they do their defence spending.
I think there needs to be more focus over time on what exactly dual use should mean for Canadian priorities. That will be a process, but I think it is essential to not incentivize companies and institutions to try to turn fundamental research, which we've heard so much about in terms of how important it is, into targeted defence research when it doesn't have to be. I think we need the demand signal to get research to support the defence needs rather than the other way around, most of the time.