I think it's important to recognize that when we were all coming together across the country and representing different regions, we had to clear the room from politics and had to recognize that we had a specific goal in mind. That goal was to get housing dollars out, or innovation dollars out, to as many innovators as we could across the country. From our perspective, we were looking at this as a status-blind approach. It didn't matter to us if we were first nations, indigenous, Métis or Inuit or urban, although we did recognize the importance of each of our roles in that room.
We quickly came to a consensus model before we started any work, and we utilized elders and traditional teachings to get us to that point. Once we got there and got over the hurdles of doing away with the politics of how we're going to allocate funding, the rest of the process was fairly simple. We acted in good faith with on another. We used our traditional beliefs. We acknowledged one another and we selected leaders among that council.
That's a very good model to look at. It's an opportunity to assess something different. That's in addition to the model we currently use through the Reaching Home program for community advisory boards to have input. I think those are two really good models to look at.
Also, again, coming back to section 56.1 of the National Housing Act, that piece of legislation still exists; it's never been repealed. It's something that we could utilize to help create this process moving forward.