Thank you, Chair, and thank you to our guests.
I want to start off by saying that I think your timing is important, and not just in terms of the G-8 and G-20: there was a well-orchestrated editorial in The Globe and Mail, and any politician would love to know how that was done. Good luck is better than anything.
I'll put it in medical terms, perhaps. We've had a bit of a political virus here that has many people concerned, and hopefully you're an antidote to it. Most Canadians and those who are involved in the issue of development, certainly with the focus of the G-8 and G-20 on child and maternal health and poverty reduction, want to see us start talking about the solutions. The virus we've had is a political one, and hopefully what you've presented today, what we saw in the video, and what we heard from other voices, including what we saw in The Globe and Mail, will help us rid ourselves of that political virus.
If I may get to the point, what you've pointed out is the success of this fund. If we're going to continue to be successful, you've given us the three options. With Canada's role in heading the G-8 and Canada's record as a good donor, you give us the three options to continue our success. I obviously would like option three.
If we look at the amount of money you're asking for from Canada, would option three be the 50% increase? In other words, if Canada, commensurate with all of the other donors, was able to convince the other donors, would that be a 50% increase over what we're donating now? Would that get us to the third option of $20 billion?