Thank you very much for the question.
With regard to selecting a fund manager, as was previously indicated, the government's intent was to stand up the growth fund quickly so that it could start making the investments to achieve net zero at the speed and scale required. In selecting PSP Investments, the government considered an experienced and independent fund manager that is currently owned by the government—those were some of the criteria—and in addition, an investment fund manager that has already experienced investment teams so that we could quickly stand up a team in order to invest the growth fund.
Just in terms of the distinction between the pension management mandate and the growth fund management mandate, those will be two very separate mandates. Obviously, the PSP will be able to provide some economies of scale by already having investments teams, such as being able to quickly staff up an investment team for the growth fund, but the assets of the growth fund will be managed separately. It will be a separate portfolio with a separate financial mandate to achieve the growth fund's financial objectives and recover its capital, whereas PSP will continue to invest the pension funds with the mandate to maximize returns without undue risk or loss.