I definitely would like to comment on that.
I'm a member of a number of organizations. The organization that actually gave the presentation was the National Anti-Poverty Organization. I have been, in the past, the chairperson of NAPO. I am still a member of NAPO, a paying member because I've grown up in poverty, I still have family living in poverty, and I support the initiatives of that organization. I understand that under our Constitution I have the right of association, and that's protected.
I guess what I'd like to do is to address what was said.
Mr. Warkentin, the only thing that was actually truthful in what you said was that you had not met me. You don't know me. You put an attack directly on my integrity and my honesty, and you left that impression with the public. These are public hearings, and I have what you said right here, sir. I think it's unfair. If you're looking at the future of an organization, you don't attack the people within it unless you actually have proof that they have done something wrong. And you don't even assume that there is a possibility that they have done anything wrong. I think we all know what the word “assumption” means and can mean.
I would ask for an apology for the impression that this has left, because there's no way that I would ever step over the bounds of conflict of interest with the court challenges program, or any other program that I'm associated with in this country.