Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would also like to welcome the general. It is not the first time he has appeared before us, but perhaps his first time as military leader of NATO. I think his presence here is very important and will allow us to learn a bit more.
A few delegates, some members and myself recently attended a NATO meeting in Madeira. As you know, that is where the parliamentary assembly took place. Several issues were raised. I, personally, was particularly interested in some.
I'll start with the importance of cardinal points. That is what I started with over there. There is no place on earth where cardinal points are more important than in Afghanistan, because there is a major difference between the north and the south. I wanted to check with you the possibility of rotations, not necessarily as of 2009. There is a price to be paid for Canadians in the south. Moreover, there is joint funding within NATO. It's been discussed for a long time, but it hasn't yet been done. And God knows that a theatre like southern Afghanistan is far more expensive for a country like Canada than what has been established in the north, for instance in Fayzabad, where I went with NATO and where essentially patrols can use Jeeps. The cost is therefore very different between military presence in the north and in the south, and there is also the human cost in terms of lost human lives which is very, very different. I know the Germans lost three soldiers recently, but we have lost 56 and I consider the cost to be very high. How can we and through which forum may we ask for a fairer sharing of the burden and for action to be taken in this regard? How was the first selection of soldiers done? Why did the Germans go to the north and we the south? Would it be feasible to better share this burden by 2009?