They referred to a number of observations I made, out of 36, or 30-plus, regarding what I saw in the country. They also referred to two or three paragraphs at the end of the report. I felt that in writing this report I had to speak to Canadian actors principally, and that if I was writing at the end and making suggestions or sharing thoughts with Canadian companies and with our own ambassadors and diplomatic staff in the field, I should also try to talk about the role of Canadian development and advocacy NGOs.
In the Honduran context, which by my own admission is very complicated and not so easy to understand, from what I could tell, I felt that there could have been more constructive approaches than some that were taken. We tried to meet with both local NGOs and Canadian counterpart NGOs in the field. In some cases, our requests to meet and understand from their point of view what was going on were rejected in advance. That made it very difficult for us.
To be honest, I struggled with those few paragraphs. I spent days trying to figure out how I could shape this in a way that would not be totally negative or destructive, that would have some constructive impact, but would be honest. That's my response to that.