There are a couple of questions there.
There are lots of ways to provide mentorship and leadership development in a model like entrepreneurs-in-residence, who are essentially experienced entrepreneurs providing some long-term coaching to leaders of SPOs and tech companies.
That kind of long-term mentorship is critical. You can't really learn IP in a boot camp. You can't learn how to run a company or an organization in a boot camp or a workshop. I really think we need to invest in long-term mentorship and coaching to support these leaders who help to solve really hard, complex problems. Again, this stuff doesn't happen in a workshop or boot camp.
With regard to community benefit, there are a few different ways to think about it. I want to first say that it's not going to make sense that the government or a determining body keeps the licence, royalty or shares for every piece of IP that comes out. I think it's worth exploring some conditions when perhaps the size of investment justifies that the government or some entity keeps some value that would be held by the Canadian government and controlled by the Canadian government, but not to the detriment of the entrepreneur.
Really, if there was an acquisition, an exit or ongoing significant revenue, some of that benefit should come back to fund more intellectual property development, including social purpose organizations and a long-term social innovation strategy.