I'll make a similar comment as I made to Monsieur Trottier, and that is that we're facing a multitude of settings that present distinct challenges in terms of being able to provide services.
As I said earlier around health, it's similar services, similar challenges, when it comes to the psychosocial dimension of SGBV survivors. Oftentimes, even within cities, you would have populations that have taken over abandoned buildings, for example, which have stopped being constructed because of the current crisis. It sounds benign, but locating, registering, and then providing services to those families is difficult. First identifying where they are is a challenge, and then being able to provide services in those kinds of physical environments, where privacy, for example, is a key concern, is even more challenging.
With regard to camps, the Kurdish government is doing a decent job at setting up camps—the physical structure of them. They should be set up to provide the physical space for those kinds of services, but then finding the appropriate partners who have the trained individuals to provide that is not easy.
I think it's also important, especially within Kurdistan, to emphasize that as humanitarian agencies and especially the NGOs are coming in, there's a start-up phase to these processes. Essentially, you sort of sequence the services and put into place the services that you can, based on, in our case, either private funding or government funding. I think the words we've heard over and over again today are being able to be flexible and adaptable to the dynamic situation.
As for parliamentarians, it's important to keep in mind that as we think of a displacement crisis, we so often think that these only take place in camps. We see the images of camps. Certainly one thing I took away last week was that this is one side of a very important study, but there's another side that's equally important. These are these informal settlements, where it's even more difficult to provide services to displaced populations.