Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to extend my greetings to the witnesses here with us for the second hour of this study.
My first question is for Ms. Laframboise from Evidence for Democracy.
It seems that we're going in circles. Today, we're looking at a capstone research funding organization. This organization was previously proposed in 2017, in the Naylor Report, by the committee that the government created. A few years later, we're working on this again. In 2022, another consultation was requested. It came out in 2023. A year and a half later, the government woke up and said that it might be time to consult people publicly. Evidence for Democracy has already released a report on the recommendations made in the Naylor report. Today, people want to talk about a new capstone organization. However, this topic has been on the drawing board for a long time. The two reports were released eight years apart. Eight years of work requires a great deal of consideration. We want action.
I would like you to tell us, as a representative, what you want the government to do. We're familiar with the recommendations, strategies and consultations. How can the federal government ensure that the scientific ecosystem is better represented in this capstone organization, but also more effective, particularly in the interdisciplinary field?