Sure.
In terms of encouraging private sector investment, putting tools in place for increasing flows of money, tools in place for working with diasporas, there are a number of things that the IFC has developed. I would pull Dan back here, because he helped to create many of these. I wouldn't want to speak for him on that issue.
One last point is that in terms of evaluations, there have been some questions in front of the committee on whether or not this works, and on how we know that public-private partnerships work. Every year USAID has to submit a Congressional Budget Office justification, which is the equivalent of a Treasury Board request up here. You have 15 years of these, written in your language, using your terminology as legislatures, about the effectiveness of aid programs. You can look at this. And it's the same thing for the Germans.
My former agency, the Inter-American Foundation, has books—books—on our experience with public-private partnerships and working with corporations. This isn't something that development agencies have adopted out of faith. There are evaluations and analyses, with decades' worth of evidence. The changes in programs are designed to respond to this.
Again, Canada's late to the table, and a lot of this has simply missed us up here. But it's out there. I could fill this room with evaluations of public-private partnerships showing how development agencies have gotten maximum returns, and also where mistakes have been made, where we screwed up. There have been lots of those too. But if you don't make mistakes, if you don't fail, it simply means you're not trying hard enough, and that's an issue, I would say, with CIDA.