Mr. Speaker, it is obvious there is no easy solution. Nevertheless, there are some possible actions I can suggest to my colleague.
The first is to significantly and effectively increase the money available for international aid, most particularly in the area corresponding to this bill. Internationally, Canada, which was one of the first counties to vote on this bill, should also be in the avant-garde and not the rear guard of international aid.
The second may appear to be a bit of a stretch, but I think it is actually very closely related. The bill splitting up the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade must be withdrawn. It is important not to create a distortion such that, in our trade policies, we would no longer consider the human aspects, the impacts, and the decisions we make on the international level. I think that would be an important idea to follow up on here.
Also, as quickly as possible, we must come up with a foreign affairs policy that integrates trade and diplomacy issues as well as questions of international aid, so there will be guidelines, so all departments know which way we want to go. The NGOs must also get much more support than they do now. For example, Doctors Without Borders works in the field and is often at a loss when they have drugs but not the people who can administer them, because the protocols and support do not exist, or because there are not enough nurses. Those are the kinds of steps we should be taking.
I will add one final point. Parliamentarians should go into the field and see what conditions are really like in Africa. When one returns from such a trip, it is impossible ever to forget the importance of having a bill such as the one before us. In addition, for a developed society like ours, we must devote a bigger share to international aid.