Thank you.
First, briefly on where Canada stands, I think it's important to remember that we have a very long tradition of clear commitment to the elimination of nuclear weapons. I want to pay tribute to Canadian officials who pursue that objective with great skill and determination. I've been on some of the delegations and I speak with first-hand knowledge of the extraordinary impact that Canadian officials have in these meetings, and the commitment with which they pursue that goal. But it also requires political leadership. The level of energy and initiative that can be taken by officials depends on leadership. And the kinds of statement that you just referred to of the Minister of Defence, which has this kind of compromising element to it, don't help with the level of energy. So that's why these clear political statements are very important to continue.
At the CD, I think there were great hopes. Ambassador Meyer will speak much more directly and effectively on it, but there were great hopes that the issue would be resolved and there would movement toward a negotiation of a fissile material cut-off treaty in particular. They were dashed again when states refused to agree to it.
We've often said that if we can't do it within the CD, we need to find another forum in which to do it. I think Canada was part of a tentative effort in 2005 to move it to the General Assembly. That had a very positive impact on the working of the CD. Now it's time to do that again, but that's going to take political leadership and a recommendation from this committee to explore alternative ways of pursuing an FMCT would be a very valuable thing.
Thank you.