It seems that when we get into these situations it takes a high-profile case, a high-profile individual--whatever we may be talking about--to bring these issues more to the fore. One of the concerns I'm seeing come out of this is that there are those, for positive reasons and perhaps political and perhaps other reasons, other high-profile individuals who come forward to protect or speak on behalf of the individual in question. In this case, it is high-profile enough that the leader of the opposition actually indicated his support or his belief of his colleague versus the caregivers who presented to this committee.
I ask you not specifically about what he said, but would you not at least comment on the fact that a very high-profile person, the leader of the opposition, actually indicated his belief was of his colleague, versus the caregivers? Does that really do justice to what we're trying to accomplish here?