Yes. Thank you for the question.
All I would add is to draw attention to what seems to be—I will use the term, if you will forgive me—the “dual use” nature of some of the tasks and training that such a climate core or resilience core would actually be equipped to perform.
To Professor Kikkert's point, the existing kind of volunteer groups that do some of this search and rescue or emergency response kind of work are extremely well trained and extremely highly qualified individuals. They are also individuals who—admittedly there is going to be variation in different ways—spend a lot of time in the outdoors in nature, have excellent outdoor skills and wilderness and orienting-type skills. When we take a step back and think about the application of those potential skills, there is actually a range of tasks that such a group might also be able to fulfill, if they were being properly remunerated and supported.
We have these very acute kind of emergency situations, which is the focus of our discussion, and I think appropriately so. There are also other kinds of circumstances.
For example, at the moment we're dealing with this debris washing up on the western shore of Vancouver Island from this marine disaster. It's a volunteer-led initiative to be pulling all this plastic garbage off the beaches of western Vancouver Island. That's another role that this kind of a corps would be quite well suited to, I think. It wouldn't be the most urgent of their responsibilities, but it would seem to be in a universe of relevant skills that people who are being properly compensated might be quite eager to spend their times doing because of the direct benefits to their own communities, their own regions and to the environment as well.