One question is a major concern for me. You said—it was reported that you said—in English, once again:
that Rights and Democracy “can be fixed internally by concentrating on programs and leaving policy to the Department of Foreign Affairs”.
However, yesterday we heard two former presidents of Rights and Democracy speak passionately. They contended precisely the contrary, stating that the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development Act is such that it sets development aid as an objective, but in an entirely impartial manner without any partisanship. Its purpose is not to develop Canada's position nor that of the United States or Israel. That's what they told us.
In view of what you said, how do you distinguish yourself from other organizations, CIDA or the Department of Foreign Affairs? Rights and Democracy loses its uniqueness in light of what you said.