Let me ask you a question about the Geneva Conventions. You are familiar with the debate that's gone on in the newspapers, with the military saying something on the ground and the minister in the House appearing to say something different. The military said these insurgents have the prisoner of war treatment, but not the prisoner of war status. I'd like you to tell me what the difference is between those two things, and why we can't afford them the status.
Second, I would like to know whether or not Canada, as a state, is making the effort it's obliged to do under the Geneva Conventions. There is a provision there that says “despite the fact that all of the conditions may not apply”, meaning in terms of the insignia people wear, uniforms they wear, whether they have a structured command, those kinds of requirements, because those conventions were drafted at a different time in history, for different kinds of armies fighting. We don't have those kinds of armies fighting, obviously, right now.
Are we making the effort with respect to that provision, which says that despite the fact that the combatants might not fit the profiles, implicit or explicit, in the conventions, we are to endeavour to apply all the provisions of the Geneva Conventions?