What I would say is that I think if we recognize that the fight against climate change is in many ways fundamentally different than the fight against foreign adversaries is, then we might actually expect there to be different pools of prospective applicants for these two different types of roles: the Canadian Armed Forces on one side as a war-fighting entity and then some kind of resilience corps on the other.
As we think about the communities that have been affected by major climate disasters, it's all manner of people from all walks of life who will have seen their own lives, their own homes and their own families implicated in those kinds of disasters. I think that for a range of reasons relating to, on the one hand, flexibility around accommodating other work or students and so forth, for people who might see joining the forces in one capacity or other as not being compatible with their other priorities, their other life goals, joining some kind of locally based entity that will be able to continue to maintain the integrity of their community in the face of climate change might be quite a bit more appealing.
I would also note that I think the current conflict in eastern Europe, the invasion of Ukraine, is a clarifying moment in terms of the function of the Canadian Armed Forces as a war-fighting and ultimately alliance-oriented military. While that is separate to our discussion here, I do think that many people in Canada may well look at the CAF with a kind of renewed sense of its core military functions in light of the current conflict.