Of course, toujours.
With respect to your first question, it has been difficult for us to get clarity as to where difficulties or concerns may lie. We've certainly heard, as you have this morning, on a number of different occasions, an assurance that consultations are under way. We've been very aware of some of the particular issues that are the focus of those discussions and don't doubt at all that those discussions are happening.
Because of the lack of transparency with respect to the coordination of international human rights processes in Canada, there is no public reporting of that. There's no ability for civil society—and I would suggest to you it's even difficult for parliamentarians—to get any clear, concrete sense of the status and nature of those discussions, to truly understand, for instance, if there is an emerging problem that could benefit from some political leadership, for civil society groups to know whether there are particular issues that we should be stressing or highlighting in our overtures to governments, or public education even, to generate the kind of awareness and understanding that build support for initiatives of this kind. But when we don't know what the progress is, when we don't know where the difficulties, if any, may lie, it's difficult for all of us, parliamentarians and civil society, to play the kind of role we should in advancing something so fundamental to what this nation must stand for as the question of how we're incorporating and bringing into our national fabric our international human rights obligations. So I'm unfortunately not able to shed any further light for you as to whether there may be some difficulties on that front.
With respect to a strategy, I think some of the questions have been asked here about whether it's time, for instance, to really push for a timeline and a calendar to start to be developed with some clear expectations as to when the consultation process needs to end, when some clear recommendations are going to come forward to various governments so that political-level decisions can be made. I have great respect for civil servants, federally and provincially, who are engaged in this work, and I know many of them personally, and I know they share the same passion I do with the need to eradicate torture in this world. They understand the role Canada can play in that regard, and they're doing a lot of technical work that is necessary, but we need to see things happen at the political level as well. I think clear direction needs to come at senior political levels, federally and provincially, that this is an issue that matters. There's an expectation politically in this country that Canada needs to be ready to do this and to do it soon; four and a half years is long enough to wait. By demonstrating that degree of political support and concern about the process, I think that bolsters the efforts of many within the bureaucracy who are trying to advance the technical work as well.
I think it may also then reach a point where we're going to need to see, for instance, federal ministers speaking with each other. If there's one department that is a little bit more reluctant than the other, then we need to see our justice minister engaging with our public safety minister, or whatever the case may be. Similarly, we need to see federal ministers engaging with provincial ministers to make sure a shared political vision emerges with respect to the importance of this instrument as well.
The last thing any of us would want to see is another four and a half years go by, with the consultations continuing and good technical work happening—and I'm not trying to suggest that it isn't—without that clear political direction being in place.