Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank you both for being here today and for sharing this with us. I guess I'm a little bit flabbergasted. First of all, you've said emphatically that there is no change in policy, there is no change in the direction the government is going in with the use of the language, and that we are abiding by the same language that is used on the international front to use the terms that are common for this. I think what I'm hearing today is you saying, “What part of 'no' don't you understand?” That's really what you're saying.
I find it somewhat an affront when there's this constant push, an underlying attempt at ideology to be presented, and obviously what you're saying is that the Conservative government has not done anything to undermine the language that is used, and the language that has been used by previous governments as well.
I guess my question would be, because this committee does have a history of basing recommendations and motions on one opinion, can you speak to the wisdom of a motion being made on one article or one opinion? Would you make a recommendation based on one article or one opinion? You review documents on a regular basis. Would you make a recommendation to the government based on one opinion, to change language that the foreign affairs department is currently using?