With respect to what Mr. Abbott said, or didn't say, it's part of the record. I would deem what has been said in the House to be part of the committee.
On March 15, 2010, Mr. Abbott said, “CIDA thoroughly analyzed Kairos' program proposal and determined, with regret, that it did not meet the agency's current priorities.”
On April 23, also part of the record of this committee, I would respectfully submit: “The criteria for the funding for Kairos are the same as the criteria for funding for anyone else applying for such funding. Kairos did not meet the criteria. It did not get the funding. There was no surprise there.”
In both instances, I would suggest that Mr. Abbott was certainly repeating the speaking lines as provided by the media inquiry, which was that after completing due diligence it was determined that the organization proposal did not meet CIDA's current priorities.
All of this, I would respectfully suggest, is part of the record of this committee. Therefore, Mr. Abbott must necessarily have been misled with respect to this particular application. Otherwise, what would be the reason for his apology? He, I respectfully submit, was misled. He feels badly about it. He did not intend to mislead the House. It was not his intention because he spoke out of innocence, I would respectfully suggest. This was part of the larger message of the government that it was a CIDA decision, not a minister's decision.