Thank you.
I held my tongue when I was listening to the answer on Algeria. I tend to think that it is such a complex case that it does a disservice to this committee if people who don't know the topic talk about it. I would hope that we can speak about Algeria later, at an appropriate time, with witnesses who actually know something about both the consular nature of the case and the extremely difficult situation that is ongoing.
However, I also want to ask Ms. Deif if she can list the number of times that Canada has led the way in the last year, either writing with pen or co-sponsoring resolutions at the UN Human Rights Council. What was our role as a Canadian government with respect to Ethiopia and the Tigray situation? What is our role at the International Criminal Court vis-à-vis Ukraine? What are the many ways in which we have engaged in the Human Rights Council, as well as the UN, on these important issues? If she can provide a list of those, I think that might be helpful for the committee.
I think it's equally important to talk about the difference between shaming and engaging, and about how diplomats take it very seriously when we do public discourse about human rights situations and when we do quiet discourse. One is not zero and the other is not a hundred. They are actually thought about as different important methods of engagement on important human rights issues.
Does Ms. Deif have any comments on that?