I appreciate that you highlighted a tension and one that I can feel today even in our witness testimony with the binaries that get presented between science and indigenous knowledge.
I don't have the answer. I think we really do need to speak with more indigenous peoples in order to understand that. Whether or not we stay within a capstone organization and have our own sort of distinct governing structure, which we're working towards with the SIRC plan, or if we go into something very distinct and separate as an indigenous research agency, more consultation is needed.
In terms of other concerns and recommendations within that, certainly we do see the need for an appointment of indigenous diverse representation on the advisory council on science and innovation. We also really appreciate being able to have a conversation with Dr. Nemer, hopefully in the not too far future.
Another concern is recognition of the transdisciplinary nature of our knowledge systems themselves and going beyond the disciplines. As you talked about earlier, our knowledge is rooted in land, place and peoples, and seeing that as a pivotal element must continue. I think that's a way for us to begin to break down some of these knowledge hierarchies and these silos that get created.
As you've already alluded to as well, we must ensure that we respect and protect indigenous collective intellectual property rights in all forms. Moving forward, it's also about concertedly looking at enhancing indigenous data sovereignty. I think that's an area of growth that we could really work towards.