Thank you, Chair.
You're all so eloquent. Thank you.
Ms. Scott-Parker, I offer all the best as you come to full term. I appreciated your story.
We had World Vision here at a breakfast last week. They said that when it came to issues around children, the MDG 4, we had roughly reached 40% of capacity. When it came to women, MDG 5, we were at 9%. Now, I don't know whether those figures are fully accurate; you can correct me. But it seems to me that as we're coming into a G-8 meeting that is dealing with child and maternal health, we have such a huge, long way to go that I'm not sure $1 billion will do it. That's from Canada alone; I realize they're looking for over $40 billion worldwide.
My question is as a person who has done development in the past. Usually what happens is that when funding is not as adequate as it perhaps needs to be, it becomes scattershot. People start funding a whole bunch of different initiatives to try to keep everybody happy. My question for you is, as this money is doled out, what are the delivery mechanisms that are so important?
I commend the government for choosing this as a subject for the G-8; I think that's great. But what I've been hearing over and over again is around micronutrients and also direct support at the place where it happens, front line service.
I guess my question for you would be, how then do you see this? If the government is going to make this commitment, it's one thing to announce the money; it's another thing to determine how it's delivered. Can I ask you what mechanisms you think are the best ways to do it? What do we do about partnering countries that have struggling health care systems that also need to have capacity built up during that time?
I know it's a bit of a loaded question. I don't mean it to be, but I just wondered whether you could take a kick at it.
Was it that bad?