Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.
Our last study was on recruitment and retention, and it's fascinating how that touches so closely to what we're talking about today. Essentially, the Canadian Armed Forces is being pulled in multiple directions, as Professor Kikkert said, in going from the force of the last resort to the force of the first—or only—resort.
Dr. Greaves, you used a phrase I like: the increased “tempo” for domestic events.
We've had a number of witnesses over the last week or so speak to varying recommendations for a path forward. There were some distinct themes, and you touched on some of them today.
One is that there needs to be greater investment in civilian emergency response capacity, and that the military, to the extent they are called on to respond in a domestic capacity, get additional resourcing and specialized capacity, regardless of whether it's the regular force or the reserve force, as needed.
For both of you, I'm interested in your thoughts on the appropriate division of responsibility between military and civilians. Because time flies by, I'm also going to throw this out: When it comes to civilian capacity, how much of this can we expect to be built up at the provincial level? At the last meeting, we heard about the fact that this is essentially a provincial jurisdiction, but the provinces have the ability to reach out to the federal government when they need help, and the federal government rarely denies that help.
I know that I threw a lot at you there, but I would ask Professor Greaves to speak to that first, and if Professor Kikkert would like to speak to it as well, that would be wonderful.
Thank you.