Thank you, Mr. Brison.
I'm just going to finish up. I wanted to clarify a couple of points.
Mr. Corbett, in your presentation, on page 3 you state that “Big-science projects requiring large-scale investments and long-term commitments in particular need government science leadership and in-house capacity to succeed.”
I was at the synchrotron earlier this spring. If you analyze that particular big-science project, you have the infrastructure part, which is funded largely through CFI, the institution, the provincial government, and other sources. You have the human resource side, which is funded by the granting councils, by the university. You have the institutional costs, which are funded by the indirect costs program federally as well as the university itself. You have the operating costs, which the university raised as an issue that they want this committee and the government to address. Then you have the industry involvement.
So explain to me from your members' perspective why the synchrotron needs in-house capacity to succeed. Where do they fit in that picture?