I have two quick points. One of them is very minor, and I think it's just a translation thing. In the second line of the English version it says, “gives an official apology”. I think “offers” is the correct term, both in terms of the intended meaning and in terms of the translation. Offering an apology seems a bit more in keeping with what we're talking about.
Secondly, I think all the more reason for us to express an appropriate apology is the fact that Monsieur Diouf was incredibly generous and gracious and indicated that he was doing his part to go more than halfway to say he wanted to restore the most positive possible relations. I think, as Canadians, through the official representation that we're calling upon, the Foreign Affairs minister, an appropriate apology should be offered—since he has gone more than halfway—rather than an expression of regret, and then we should put it behind us.
I think then it won't be something that's an open sore; it won't be something that remains as an irritant. It clears this away, and that's the end of it. He's already indicated that he is so disposed. I think we need to hear that from this committee as an all-party gesture, and we need to hear it from our Foreign Affairs minister.
I hope we'll support this motion.