Okay, I'll go first.
There are judgment calls and very difficult choices to make. I think we have to balance the notion of continuity, ensuring that we're not in a stop-and-go mode with the notion of accountability and the showing of probity in the management of the resources given to a government.
When CIDA withdrew in 2001, there were four basic conditions that pushed the agency in that direction. First of all, it was clearly evident that there was no political will on the part of the President at the time. For example, he named his driver the chief of the police force. The chief of palace security is now in prison in the United States.
Secondly, there was no budget line for the police force. How was this financed? There were examples of obvious corruption. Could we continue using Canadian taxpayers' money under these conditions? I think the judgment at the time was an appropriate one.
So we need some basic elements. We are observing today that some of these elements are there. We hope they will continue, and it is clearly something we have to monitor.
The current director general of the police force is a highly professional individual. Commissioner Muir, who replaced Commissioner Beer, has indicated so himself, and that director general is actually surrounded by bodyguards because his life is in constant danger from some of the actions he has taken to reduce corruption and imprison some very senior police officials. Indeed, we are more confident that these measures are there at this point.