Actually, this is the part where I can say what I think it should be, but I have no idea what's in the actual legislative framework.
This is the way we were thinking about it in our report: You should have differently scaled missions. Let's say there's a new accord with Europe on food security. Well, you could have both governments committing to putting x million euros or dollars for mission-driven calls. Capstone would get that envelope, and they could tier it, depending on how its scientific directorate would see what has more bang for the bucks. They could say that they'll be funding $50,000 exploratory projects and funding five million projects. They could be very small teams, medium teams or large teams.
I guess the biggest change with the existing councils is to have the legal framework that allows it to be agile in terms of programming. For example, for the next five years they want to develop quantum security, quantum cryptography, and they would do the calls. Five years later, they could do something else.