First, maybe I'll just clarify your first comment, which is about the melting together or the melding of the councils.
What we're trying to do is drive integration but still draw on the expertise of those domain-specific councils, which have the natural science and engineering expertise or the health expertise. Sometimes you need to bring those together to address an issue like the pandemic, for example, where you need to bring disciplines together. That's going to be the role of the capstone. It will have an overall kind of governance responsibility for the organization as a whole. That's not to minimize the importance of the domain-specific research areas that feed into that.
With respect to the international positioning, I think one thing that the Bouchard report highlighted and was also true in the consultations that came forward is that Canada does really well in terms of researcher-initiated international collaboration, but it's not necessarily thought of from the standpoint of the strategic interests of the country as a whole. That's natural for a researcher. A researcher is going to find the best people to work with anywhere in the world to advance knowledge, so long as it adheres to some important principles around, in our case, research security or the research integrity elements.
However, individual researchers alone are not going to necessarily be able to say, collectively, that they have certain capabilities to bring to the table and that they want to work with their trusted partners to advance collaboration and research that can lead to economic benefits, greater security benefits or societal benefits for the country.
There could be big challenges internationally that we want to work on together. That's a bit of the role of the capstone as well. It's to bring that kind of coherent, coordinated voice to those international collaborations that may be there but are a bit more diffuse in the way that the system is now.