As we were just discussing, it's important that investigators, if they have ideas thought to meet a bar of excellence, have the freedom to pursue those ideas. The knowledge is generated. The training of young researchers, not just for the research community but for society as a whole, is a really big benefit of that. That's always done through a peer-review process to ensure that you have the highest standard of research quality.
When it comes to mission-oriented research, it may be that, as we were discussing, there are different ways to identify the priorities and what you're trying to focus on as a target. If you want to get the best quality of research in support of those targets, you still need an assessment of the excellence of that research. In the case of something that's more mission-oriented, you could see it being in two parts: What we are shooting at—what our target is in terms of what we're trying to achieve—and then how we ensure that we get the best quality of research that will support that goal.
That latter part is something where you want to have an independent review of excellence to make sure that the research can deliver. That's how you can do both with the same model.