Let me start by saying that I think it's obviously important that we focus on a number of countries, but we can't spread the funding too thin. In the past we've had more than 80 focus countries. I think right now between 20 and 25 would likely be a strategic investment, because that number would allow us to have impact and to take a transformative approach to have a lasting impact and to achieve lasting results.
As for funding multilaterals—obviously I think my colleagues would concur, because we've had these discussions within the sector—it's important that Canada make bilateral funding arrangements, fund multilaterals, and fund Canadian civil society organizations. The reality is that a lot of times the multilaterals look to organizations like Plan International and those represented by my colleagues here to actually do the implementation on the ground.
Oftentimes, we are not afforded the right overhead costs to be able to do some of that, so we have to be able to match that funding with private donations by Canadians. The reality is, under the current environment, we are not seeing private donations growing at all, so there is more pressure on us if we don't receive funding both bilaterally and from multilaterals.
In terms of focus, again I would say it's important that we focus on vulnerable populations as opposed to on a specific theme. However, I will say that Canada has led in the area of gender equality. This is a commitment that this government has made. Again, I go back to taking an evidence-based approach, which continues to show that women and girls continue to bear the brunt of poverty. They also present a significant opportunity, because investing in women and girls has proven to be one of the most effective ways to break the cycle of poverty.