Thank you.
This question is directed, at least initially, to Mr. Morrison.
Just as a back-of-the-envelope calculation, it looks like the Government of Canada has spent upwards of half a billion dollars on aid to Mali since 2007. As I look at what's happening on the ground there, and I'm aware from testimony today and elsewhere how those expenditures have helped the population, I do kind of step back and look at the security situation, the collapse of the armed forces, the coup d'état, and of course insurgents who have now come in from elsewhere in the region and perhaps elsewhere in the world.
I'm not asking you to second-guess how that money was spent, but going forward—and Ms. Buck, you're welcome to hop in here as well—I wonder if, as part of CIDA's evaluation, Canada has to do a better job of looking at the security on the ground, whether it's military or police, in countries where we're investing significant tax dollars to ensure that if we're spending money on civil society, education, and health outcomes, the government itself is able to protect its borders and its population so we don't have a situation like there is now.
I recognize there are a lot of factors here, particularly insurgents, but is that taken into consideration? Going forward does that have to be a greater part of the evaluation in countries not only in Africa but around the world to ensure that as moneys are invested, institutions are going to be there for the medium and long term?