Oh, yes. Thank you.
This is a bit of a tricky question because, on the one hand, when you think about who is best placed to judge what's good research and what's not, it's people in the same discipline, but the danger is that people in the same discipline share orthodoxies and are unwilling to fund research that breaks those orthodoxies. This is especially an issue in Canada, because we're not actually a very big country. In any given discipline, there might be a few hundred researchers, and the people who are on the grant panels tend to be the same sort of senior people. If you say, “I want money to disprove what you built a career on”, sometimes that person will say, “I don't actually want you to disprove what I built my career on. I want to fund people who actually have the same approach.”
That's another argument for why we should be much more open-minded and have a broader basis of funding for research, because senior people especially can sometimes be very wedded to their legacies in a way that can be counterproductive.