Thank you for that.
I don't want to go into too many details about the things that have happened. I think everyone around the table is aware of Rights and Democracy and the issues surrounding it and some of the things that have happened, but one of the things in this is a money matter. Perhaps Mr. Cannon or Mr. White might like to answer this.
A number of private contracts have been given by Rights and Democracy for private investigation, for auditing, for legal, for communications work. I think the grant we're approving here should go to meeting the mandate of the organization rather than handing out contracts to private firms.
Let me just use auditing as an example. You know, Rights and Democracy is audited annually by Sheila Fraser. If they are now spending grant money to have a private audit, it doesn't make sense to me: there's something wrong--I suppose--with the auditing of Sheila Fraser.
Does that mean that perhaps you don't trust the work of Sheila Fraser to do her auditing annually on this organization, that they need to spend money on private auditing?