Thank you for your question.
To make sure my comments are understood, I prefer to answer in English.
The actual allocation of awards is one of the most important things the federal government can do, and I feel very proud to have been part of a very long fight to ensure that there is not a leaky pipeline in the awarding of Canada research chair positions, for example, so that women and men get their fair share, so that racialized and Indigenous people and colleagues with disabilities get their fair share.
The disability data is less available. Tina perhaps will be able to speak to that.
It's true that, directly speaking, once a chair is appointed, it's up to the individual institution to set the salary, but it certainly falls within the ability of the federal government to influence the awarding of the awards, and in fact I think it is a completely appropriate policy that universities that fail to meet equity and diversity targets will find their future chairs withheld until they can meet the objectives. I think that is an appropriate mechanism for the federal government, despite the controversy it has raised in Quebec.
The larger question, of course, is that we're trying to find a light hand that recognizes both institutional autonomy and a federal interest in equity. This is where some of these intermediate mechanisms of data and reporting go a long way to helping both parties build more fairness.