Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Bouchard, for answering Mr. Tochor's question so effectively.
Now perhaps we could get back to capstone. Clearly, the concept—I think we all understand—is an overarching body supported by pillars to coordinate research activities, specifically with international collaboration, and also on a mission-driven basis.
However, having said that, I would really like your opinion on how this should be structured. We've talked a little bit about the board of capstone— obviously, its being interdisciplinary, etc. There is a request for funding specifically, as I understand it, for the projects that capstone would be announcing after full consideration, but what happens to the tri-councils? I don't quite understand. Will they continue to receive applications for research, or is there some mechanism to ensure that applicants, researchers, are so aware of the capstone's priorities that in future, researchers will attempt to fit into one of those priorities? On the other hand, will there be two sets of research activities that will, therefore, require a board for each of the tri-councils and a CEO to remain? On the face of it, it looks like a bit of duplication.
Could you just flesh that out a bit?