Document de discussion et questions

To download the discussion paper, including all survey and idea board questions, glossary and frequently asked questions, please click here.

Objective

The objective of this consultation is to gather input, advice and ideas for the renewal of the National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure and Canada's overall approach to critical infrastructure resilience.

Background and context

Canada's 2009 National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure (National Strategy) was developed to build a safer, more secure and more resilient Canada. The National Strategy sets out a national vision for critical infrastructure (CI) protection through information sharing, public-private partnerships, and a commitment to an all-hazards approach to risk management. The National Strategy includes ten critical infrastructure sectors: energy and utilities, finance, food, government, health, information and communication technology, manufacturing, security, transportation and water.

As part of the commitment set out in the National Cross-Sector Forum's Action Plan for Critical Infrastructure 2018-2020, Public Safety Canada reviewed the National Strategy to assess its relevance, and concluded that a renewed approach to critical infrastructure is needed. COVID-19 has also highlighted areas of weakness, such as limited domestic stocks of essential medical supplies (e.g., personal protective equipment) and the vulnerability of some critical supply chains to major disruptions. These weaknesses highlighted the need to reassess whether the National Strategy has truly captured the full extent of critical infrastructure or services that ensure the safety, security, health and economic well-being of Canadians.

The renewal of the National Strategy is an opportunity to shed light on what is going well, what needs to be improved and what our vision for the future should be.

Strategic Objectives

Through meaningful engagement with critical infrastructure stakeholders, a renewed strategy and comprehensive approach to critical infrastructure resilience will be created that:

• Modernizes the understanding and definition of critical infrastructure, including the degree of dependency of critical infrastructure assets and systems.
• Prioritizes the most critical infrastructure, while recognizing that what is considered essential may change depending on circumstances.
• Assists critical infrastructure stakeholders in managing risks associated with complex and evolving threats.

 Key Considerations for the Renewal of the National Strategy

Canada's critical infrastructure faces an evolving range of threats and pressures as it delivers goods and services every day, contributes to Canada's economic prosperity, and maintains essential services. Increasingly, critical infrastructure must address cybersecurity, environmental and security risks. A renewed national strategy must support critical infrastructure to address these challenges.

Digitization of systems and processes

The use of digital systems to operate physical infrastructure, from water treatment plants to agricultural equipment, has improved service delivery to Canadians. However, the use of electronic systems and the Internet has also created vulnerabilities. The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security found that cyber threat actors target critical infrastructure to undermine public safety and national security, and that more than half of the victims of cyberattacks reported in 2021 were owners and operators of critical infrastructure.

Cyber attacks on critical infrastructure can have damaging consequences. An attack on a health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2021 resulted in the cancellation of appointments, surgeries and other medical procedures. Cyberattacks in allied countries have led to the poisoning of drinking water, power outages and disruptions to internet services. Malicious actors, both international and domestic, are developing new strategies to disrupt infrastructure services, steal personal data, spy on governments and exploit Canadians.

Environmental risks

Canada's climate is changing, with multiple and complex impacts on critical infrastructure. Increasingly frequent, intense and unpredictable floods, fires, earthquakes and other disasters are wearing down physical infrastructure across the country. As a result, buildings, roads, railways and other infrastructure age prematurely and are increasingly exposed to catastrophic failures. For Canadians, communities and organizations that provide essential services, emergency management efforts have become larger and more complex. The 2021 flooding in southern British Columbia is an example of how extreme weather can lead to cascading failures in several critical infrastructure systems. The flooding, which was likely exacerbated by the summer 2021 wildfires, destroyed several stretches of highway and rail lines, and made the Port of Vancouver almost inaccessible. As a result, the movement of goods and people in the region has been effectively interrupted. In addition, many farms were flooded, machinery and other infrastructure were destroyed, and many animals died. Public services were also affected for several weeks. The sewage treatment plant in the town of Merritt experienced a complete outage, resulting in the evacuation of the entire population of the city. The insured damage from the 2021 B.C. floods was tentatively estimated at $450 million, and the loss of economic output was estimated at between $250 million and $400 million.

Security threats

Terrorism, violent extremism, organized crime and intellectual property theft are all threats to the security of Canada's critical infrastructure. For example, melting sea ice is generating renewed interest in Canada's Arctic resources from states hostile to Canada. This poses a threat to critical infrastructure in the North. Canada's Arctic and Northern Policy Framework outlines the threat to the region, stating that the region "... is attracting increasing international interest and competition from state and non-state actors seeking to take advantage of the region's rich natural resources and strategic position. This comes at a time when climate change and technological advances have facilitated access to the region."

Threats to the security of Canada's critical infrastructure can also be national in nature. A recent example is the blockade of several border crossings and the occupation of the City of Ottawa, which led the federal government to declare a state of emergency under the Emergencies Act. At the time of writing, it was estimated that between $3 billion and $6 billion worth of goods had not crossed the border due to the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge. The total financial impact is likely greater, as supply chain disruptions can interrupt manufacturing. For example, Ford of Canada had to reduce production at its plants in Oakville and Windsor, Ontario. In addition, the occupation of the site in Ottawa endangered public safety, as parked trucks prevented emergency vehicles from moving freely in the downtown core. In addition, emergency service lines (911) were overwhelmed by false calls from protesters and their supporters.

Economic prosperity

The resilience of critical infrastructure is critical to Canada's long-term economic prosperity. Resilient and reliable critical infrastructure drives growth by creating jobs, improving productivity and fostering business confidence, which in turn contributes to investment growth and the creation of new economic opportunities. Infrastructure Canada's recent report, Charting a Path to 2050: Moving Forward with the National Infrastructure Assessment, notes that the overall value of public and private infrastructure to the Canadian economy "has reached more than $900 billion over the past decade, equivalent to about 46% of GDP [gross domestic product]. It plays an important role in the success of the country. »

Much of Canada's critical infrastructure is aging. The 2019 Canadian Infrastructure Report Card indicates that 30-40% of public infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, as well as water infrastructure, is in poor or very poor condition. Governments have historically struggled to plan and prioritize investments, finance new infrastructure and maintain existing infrastructure. Support is needed to bridge the gap between the current state of infrastructure and Canada's future needs. Reliable and efficient critical infrastructure that can withstand threats is needed to encourage investment and innovation in the development of new technologies and applications. Ensuring that physical and cyber systems are secure and resilient is an important competitive advantage that signals that Canada is a reliable, credible and attractive place to do business.

Survey on the Renewal of the National Strategy

Note: Information from this consultation is being collected for the renewal of Public Safety Canada's National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure to inform a modern approach to Canada's most vital assets and systems. Please do not provide personal information or opinions in your responses that could identify you or another person.

1. Critical Infrastructure Sectors and Definitions

The 2009 National Strategy defines critical infrastructure as:

all processes, systems, facilities, technologies, networks, goods and services necessary to ensure the health, safety, security or economic well-being of Canadians and the effectiveness of government. Critical infrastructure may be self-contained or characterized by interdependencies within a province or territory, between provinces and territories, and nationally. The disruption of this critical infrastructure could result in loss of life and adverse economic effects, and could significantly undermine public confidence.

The National Strategy includes ten critical infrastructure sectors:

1. Energy & Utilities
2. finance
3. feeding
4. government
5. health
6. Information and communication technologies
7. Manufacturing
8. security
9. transport
10. water

The Critical Infrastructure Definition and the Ten Sector List provide an agreed-upon national picture of critical infrastructure and form the basis for critical infrastructure consultations with the federal government. Representatives from all ten sectors are invited to participate in periodic cross-sectoral meetings, workshops and other critical infrastructure events. The definition and the ten sectors were also used to develop the Guidance on Essential Services and Functions in Canada During the COVID-19 Pandemic. However, the ten sectors may not reflect the full range of Canada's critical infrastructure.

Other countries have lists of sectors that roughly correspond to the ten Canadian sectors. Some notable differences can be seen in the United States, for example. These include the commercial facilities sector, which includes mass gathering and recreational venues, and the public works sub-sector of the emergency services sector, which refers to the combination of physical assets, management practices, policies and personnel required by government to provide and maintain structures and services. Commercial facilities and public works are not considered critical infrastructure in Canada's sector configuration. In addition, the United States has a sub-sector of national monuments and icons in its government facilities sector; these elements are also not considered critical infrastructure in Canada. Other countries with significant differences include Australia, whose 11 sectors include a higher education and research sector and a space technology sector, which are not part of the Canadian sectors.

The UK and France also see space as a separate critical infrastructure sector.

Questions:

1a) Does the current definition of critical infrastructure adequately reflect its essence?

1b) If you think the definition of critical infrastructure needs to be updated or changed, please explain how.

1c) Canada's critical infrastructure is currently classified into ten sectors. Do these sectors adequately represent the extent of critical infrastructure in Canada?

1d) Are critical infrastructure sectors missing? If so, which ones? (Select all that apply).

1. Space (including ground segment infrastructure that supports space activities, i.e. GNSS systems, PNS)
2. Academic institutions/higher education and research
3. Natural/green infrastructure
4. National monuments (and other symbolic infrastructure)
5. Commercial facilities (i.e. gathering and recreational venues such as stadiums and shopping malls)
6. Democratic institutions
7. Community Infrastructure
8. Other (please specify)

1e) Please justify the addition or deletion of critical infrastructure sectors.

2. Interdependencies

Critical infrastructure sectors are highly interdependent, meaning that sectors rely on each other to deliver the goods and services Canadians need. This means that critical infrastructure failure in one sector can have multiple impacts on other critical infrastructure sectors. For example, in January 1998, an unprecedented ice storm hit southwestern Quebec, eastern Ontario, and southern New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Ice accumulations caused power transmission lines to collapse, leading to large-scale power grid outages. These have led to failures in telecommunications, transport, banking and financial systems, and drinking water. Power outages also led to the death of livestock, as farmers could not provide water or ventilation in their stables. About 4.7 million people experienced power outages (some lasted 32 days), 30 people died, and it is estimated that the disaster cost Quebec alone $3 billion.

In addition, Canada's critical infrastructure is interdependent with the global critical infrastructure that produces and ships goods and services such as medicines and fertilizers. International trade provides Canadian critical infrastructure with access to supplies that are not, or cannot, be produced domestically. However, a trade dispute, international conflict, transportation problem or disruption in another country could affect the ability of Canada's critical infrastructure to acquire important goods and services.

Some of Canada's critical infrastructure sectors and systems are more interdependent than others. For example, as many critical infrastructures become digital, they are becoming increasingly dependent on information and communication technologies (ICTs) to communicate, pay bills and run their systems. An ICT disruption could have a significant impact on the ability of many critical infrastructure sectors to deliver critical services. Similarly, power outages can lead to failures in many critical infrastructure systems, as many rely on the energy and utility sector for their day-to-day operations.

Questions:

2a) How could the government help critical infrastructure owners and operators better understand their interdependencies? (select all that apply)

1. Education and training
2. Guidance documents
3. Modeling tools
4. Impact Assessments
5. Other (please specify)
6. I don't know

2b) Do you have personal experience or examples of recurring issues related to interdependencies in your sector or area of expertise? Please explain.

3. Identification of critical critical infrastructure

By understanding which critical infrastructure sectors are most vital, governments can help protect these systems and assets, which are important to the well-being of citizens. Canada's current National Strategy, however, does not identify specific critical infrastructure assets, businesses, systems or other entities. What can be considered critical infrastructure in Canada is very broad and there is no analytical model to prioritize or distinguish one type of critical infrastructure as more vital than another.

Identifying the most critical critical infrastructure systems or assets could allow all levels of government to prioritize resources to protect and restore the most critical critical infrastructure. Depending on the situation, this prioritization may include clearing roads after an ice storm or protecting water treatment facilities before a flood. Governments could also provide incentives, allocate resources, and implement standards and regulations for the most critical critical infrastructure. Establishing standards and regulations for critical critical infrastructure would improve the overall resilience of Canada's critical infrastructure. Some countries take this approach by identifying or designating specific companies, organizations or assets as critical infrastructure. Entities designated as critical critical infrastructure may be subject to service standards, information sharing requirements or other regulations. In New Zealand, for example, any entity that provides water, electricity or telecommunications services is designated as a vital public utility under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. Operators of ports, airports and other special infrastructure are also designated as vital public services. Vital public services must, for example, be involved in the development of the national civil defence emergency management strategy and civil defence emergency management plans. In the United States, the Cyberspace Solarium Commission's 2020 report recommended regulating systemically important critical infrastructure to address the growing need to identify and protect the most critical critical infrastructure. A facility, system or asset is considered "systemically important" if a threatening event may result in:

• Interruptions affecting energy, water, electricity or emergency services that could result in massive losses or evacuations.
• Disruptions to financial markets, transportation systems and essential technological services that could cause catastrophic damage to the economy.
• Degradation of military, defence, aerospace, intelligence and national security capabilities.
• Widespread compromise or malicious intrusion into the cyber ecosystem.

Identifying critical critical infrastructure is very challenging, as the role and importance of infrastructure can vary from region to region and over time, and many factors must be considered. For example, a small airport in a community may be more essential to residents than a small airport in a city where other transportation options are available. Identifying critical critical infrastructure in advance of an emergency helps governments keep Canadians safe in emergencies and routine situations.

Questions:

3a) Should criteria be developed to identify and prioritize the most critical infrastructure sectors, organizations and/or assets?

3b) What factors would you consider in determining the most critical critical infrastructure? If you have used a methodology used by your organization to prioritize its critical goods or services, can you describe it?

3c) Should the most critical critical infrastructure be identified? Please explain your answer.

4. Incentives and Obligations to Ensure Resilience

When a natural disaster, pandemic or cyber threat strikes, it can prevent critical infrastructure from providing the essentials for sustaining life, such as clean water, electricity and medical procedures. Recognizing the importance of critical infrastructure and the threats it faces, some countries require critical infrastructure owners and operators to meet regulatory requirements to ensure safety in all sectors.

For example, in Australia, approximately 165 critical infrastructure organizations are required to provide ownership information to help the government monitor the links between critical infrastructure and hostile foreign governments. Some organisations are also required to report cyber security incidents to the Australian Cyber Security Centre within a specific time frame. In certain circumstances, government assistance is provided to help organizations respond to cyber security incidents. In addition, Australia is developing industry-specific requirements for a risk management program that will require critical infrastructure to assess and report on the hazards to which its assets are exposed. In New Zealand, vital critical infrastructure utilities are legally required to develop emergency management plans and submit them to the government upon request. In the United States, the Cyberspace Solarium Commission's 2020 report recommended codifying the concept of systemically important critical infrastructure in legislation. Entities responsible for the most important critical systems and assets in the U.S. would receive special assistance (financial support, information sharing and liability protection) and would assume increased responsibility for additional security requirements, such as meeting certain performance standards and mandatory incident reporting.

In Canada, infrastructure, businesses and other organizations are regulated according to each sector of activity. There are no cross-sectoral mandatory requirements or additional benefits to ensure the resilience of critical infrastructure in a broad sense. Canada's current approach to critical infrastructure is based on voluntary sharing of information and participation in emergency exercises, workshops and other missions.

Questions:

4a) If certain critical infrastructure is identified as vital, what incentives should be available to help owners and operators of critical critical infrastructure meet their obligations?

4b) If certain critical infrastructure is designated as vital, should those responsible for it be subject to additional obligations to ensure their continued resilience?

4c) What obligations should be imposed on owners and operators of critical infrastructure that is designated as critical critical infrastructure? (select all that apply)

1. Provide property information
2. Reports on Business Continuity and Emergency Management Plans
3. E-Practices Report
4. Other (please specify)

5. Support for the critical infrastructure community

Each level of government (federal, provincial, territorial, municipal and Indigenous) offers programs, incentives and supports to help critical infrastructure owners and operators improve their resilience. At the federal level, lead departments offer sector-specific support programs. In addition, Public Safety Canada offers a variety of critical infrastructure products and services to help private sector stakeholders, other federal departments, provincial/territorial and municipal governments improve emergency preparedness and support emergency management. Various networks (described in the next section) also foster partnerships between all critical infrastructure sectors.

While there are many forms of tools and guidance, critical infrastructure owners and operators are not always aware of the programs or how to access them. To better support the critical infrastructure community, other countries have established critical infrastructure centres that provide a single, trusted source of information, tools and other resources. For example, the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is the primary access point for critical infrastructure across all sectors to increase their resilience to all risks. CISA provides advice and training on natural disasters, cybersecurity, pandemics and other threats. It also coordinates emergency response, issues threat alerts and supports collaboration within the critical infrastructure community.

Canada has funded research and development that contributes to the resilience, reliability and protection of Canada's physical and information technology (IT) facilities, networks and services. This includes grants and contributions for research and development in the areas of cybersecurity, climate change adaptation, emergency management and emerging technologies.

Questions:

5a) Who does your organization go to when it needs support? (select all that apply)

1. Municipality
2. Province or territory
3. Federal government
4. Professional/Industry Association
5. Other (please specify)

5b) What supports do you think are missing? (Please explain.)

6. Collaboration within the critical infrastructure community

Many opportunities exist to help the critical infrastructure community share information on risks, threats and vulnerabilities, as well as best practices. They are effective mechanisms for sharing important information, expertise and building relationships within and across sectors.

The National Cross-Sector Forum (NIF), established under the current National Strategy, meets twice a year and brings together critical infrastructure leads from industry and federal, provincial and territorial governments across the ten sectors. This is a key opportunity for the critical infrastructure community to collaborate on cross-cutting and all-hazards issues. It sets priorities, discusses emerging issues and identifies cross-sectoral interdependencies. The Multi-Sector Network engages working-level representatives from all ten critical infrastructure sectors (including provinces, territories and international partners) to promote information sharing and collaboration.

These collaborative working groups, established as part of the National Strategy, have been successful in establishing and maintaining the critical infrastructure environment. However, some gaps in representation were identified. For example, while municipal governments are responsible for the operation and maintenance of critical infrastructure, such as roads and drinking water infrastructure, they are not represented on the National Intersectoral Forum (NIF) or the Multisectoral Network. Indigenous communities are also not represented in either network. In addition, while critical infrastructure sectors have themselves established mechanisms for collaboration across industries (e.g., boards, associations, and committees), these entities were not designed for large-scale, multi-sectoral collaboration and exchange. In addition, the COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated that collaboration between government and industry players is a model that makes sense. The partnership puts in place the key elements of resilience: communication, planning, risk assessment and operational activities, including incident response and recovery. Networks can also be leveraged to quickly transmit threat intelligence to members when needed.

Questions:

6a) How could collaboration be improved? (please specify for each)

1. More active collaboration within your respective sector network (e.g. energy sector, ICT sector, etc.)
2. Strengthening partnerships and networks across sectors
3. Building partnerships between different levels of government and the private and industrial sectors
4. Creation of thematic cross-sectoral working groups or forums (e.g. supply chain disruption/cybersecurity/events or risks)
5. Diversification of critical infrastructure stakeholders (e.g., by including municipalities, Indigenous representatives, academia, others?)
6. More networking opportunities
7. More communication products
8. Other (please specify)

7. Objectives for a Renewed Approach to Critical Infrastructure

The 2009 National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure was based on the three objectives listed below. A renewed approach to critical infrastructure could keep these objectives as they are, develop them or propose new ones.

1. Build partnerships. The National Strategy established sector networks for each critical infrastructure sector and the National Cross-Sector Forum (NIF) to bring together stakeholders from across the critical infrastructure community. These networks and the NIF come together to identify issues of national, regional or sectoral interest, exchange advice on challenges, and develop tools and best practices to strengthen critical infrastructure resilience.

2. Implement an all-hazards risk management approach. Risk management refers to the ongoing process of understanding, managing and communicating risks, threats, vulnerabilities and interdependencies within the critical infrastructure community. The critical infrastructure community must work collaboratively to conduct all-hazards risk analyses that consider accidental, intentional and natural risks.
3. Promote the timely exchange of information between partners, as well as the protection of this information. Information on threats and vulnerabilities must be disseminated in a timely manner so that effective action can be taken. At the same time, sensitive information must be protected in the interest of national security.

Questions:

7a) Please give priority to the three objectives, 1 being the most important, and 3 being the least.

Building partnerships

Implement an all-hazards risk management approach

Promote the timely exchange of information between partners, as well as the protection of this information

7b) In your opinion, should these objectives remain unchanged, or are adjustments/new objectives necessary?

7c) What adjustments would you propose?

8. Closing Remarks

8) Do you have any other comments for a renewed critical infrastructure strategy and approach?

9. Consultation satisfaction question

9) Do you have any other comments on the consultation process? Are you suggesting other ways to gather information?

 Questions about the ideas board

In addition to the online survey, stakeholders have the opportunity to answer the following three questions:

1. Governance

Each level of government in Canada has distinct roles and responsibilities related to each critical infrastructure sector. Governments have various departments and agencies with distinct mandates related to the operation and resilience of different critical infrastructure sectors (e.g., health, finance, energy).

There is currently no intergovernmental governance structure in place to guide a coordinated and harmonized approach to prioritizing critical infrastructure issues across provinces and territories, or to address emerging issues as they arise. Emergency management, cyber security and national security each have distinct and established decision-making bodies, which are generally composed of representatives from federal, provincial and territorial governments. Governance, roles and responsibilities are often categorized by sector or risk. For example, federal decision-making related to critical infrastructure resilience is entrusted to various lead federal departments (e.g., Transport Canada for critical transportation infrastructure) or other federal regulators (boards, agencies, commissions).

In Australia, there are three levels of advisory and advisory bodies for critical infrastructure. The Critical Infrastructure Advisory Council (CIAC), which advises the Minister of the Interior on the government's approach to critical infrastructure resilience, is comprised of sector chairs and federal, state and territorial government representatives. There is currently no multi-jurisdictional governance structure similar to the CWC in Canada. The CIAC also oversees the Trusted Information Sharing Network (TISN). TISN's role is to disseminate information (e.g., threat briefings, exercises and teleconferences on issues of concern), present current and emerging issues to the ICCA for consideration, and contribute to policy development and implementation. It is composed of critical infrastructure managers from both the private and public sectors. Finally, the Resilience Expert Advisory Group (REAG) includes representatives from industry, academia, TISN, and federal, state, and territorial authorities. REAG advises TISN and CIAC on the practical dimensions of organizational resilience and on adopting an approach to organizational resilience in operations.

Question:

How can all levels of government create a more coordinated and harmonized governance model that would allow critical infrastructure to remain resilient to all risks?

2. Evaluation of the National Strategy

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) Policy Toolkit on Governance of Critical Infrastructure Resilience[11] identified the need for accountability and monitoring of the implementation of critical infrastructure resilience policies as a best practice. At the international level, many countries are measuring the implementation of critical infrastructure policies and undertaking reviews of critical infrastructure sectors to ensure resilience and compliance with applicable regulations.

At this time, Canada does not have measures in place to assess the non-regulatory collaborative objectives of the National Strategy, nor the results of the action plans that support it. A clear evaluation framework is needed to measure the security and resilience of Canada's critical infrastructure and the effectiveness of a renewed national strategy.

Questions:

What is the best way to measure critical infrastructure resilience?

How could the federal government measure the effectiveness of a renewed national strategy?

3. Academic Research and Expertise

The National Strategy does not currently have a formal engagement mechanism with academia and the scientific community to leverage their research and expertise. Participation is therefore ad hoc, rather than through formal networks such as the FNI.

Stronger and more formalized partnerships with academia and think tanks that study critical infrastructure security and resilience issues (e.g., infrastructure protection, climate change, digital infrastructure, cyber security, economic security, business continuity and emergency management) could provide valuable advice to Canada's critical infrastructure leaders. Some key federal departments have created participation and funding mechanisms to leverage the expertise of academics in their sectors. For example, Natural Resources Canada's Cyber Security and Critical Energy Infrastructure (CEEIP) Program funds research to improve the cyber security and resiliency of domestic and cross-border energy infrastructure, in support of Canada's National Cyber Security Strategy.

Other countries benefit from academic expertise in a coordinated manner. For example, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology Department has created Centers of Excellence that provide advice, intelligence and tools to support the broader critical infrastructure community. An example of a current center of excellence is the Critical Infrastructure Resilience Institute (CIRI), which is led by the University of Illinois. CIRI focuses on research and education on critical infrastructure resilience. More than 17 universities are partners with CIRI, alongside several industry partners from across the country.

Questions:

Can academia play a more formal role in the National Strategy?

If so, how can public and private sector critical infrastructure stakeholders partner with academics and other subject matter experts to benefit from their perspectives?

4. Open-ended questions

Have we forgotten something?

Are there any issues related to the renewal of the National Strategy that you would like to raise?