I think Mr. Martin just made a good argument for putting this in. Why on earth would we want to disallow the good things this country does to not be definable as official development assistance? Other countries do.
Is there some reason Mr. McKay's bill should have the intent of embarrassing the government by suggesting we don't do our fair share of official development assistance, because we can't define it and we've tied our hands with this piece of legislation? There's no reason on earth we wouldn't accept this as a friendly amendment, to make sure we are recognized for what we do.
I absolutely support Mr. Casey's amendment. I think it's absolutely critical. We listened to the witnesses. We just heard the testimony that we need this. It's absolutely unimaginable that we wouldn't want to put this in.