Thank you for that question. I do indeed fully believe in and support the idea that excellence should be the defining criterion here. Let me just say that there is a third category that is practically universally present within granting evaluation, and that is the quality of the training program. That's part of it as well.
There are two points that I will very quickly try to make in response. The first is that sometimes, as was commented on by a colleague witness here, we want to include a recognition of diversity under some circumstances—that is to say, when it is appropriate—in research design. I will give you an example of why this can sometimes be absolutely vital.
Everybody's car has airbags these days. Those airbags are adaptive. That is to say, the weight of the person in the front seat and the proximity of that person to the airbag determine how strongly those airbags will explode onto you if you're in a collision. When those airbags first came out, they tended to kill small women and also children. The reason for this was that the research that was done to back this up was basically done on young men. The initial proposition around airbags was to protect young men 25 years old and under who didn't wear seat belts. The result of not including gender in the consideration here was simply that you killed a lot of people who really didn't need to die. It can be very appropriate for research design to consider aspects of diversity.
The other part is the training program. That's where—