Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think I want to bring this down to its being a study on language changes at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. Again, I believe we only have three areas around which we've perhaps heard concerns. For two of the areas—gender equity and the equality between women and men—I am very comfortable with the interchangeable use, and I hear strongly that it's not impacting programs, policies, or where we're going as a country. As to the words around the international...the children in armed conflict, again I think that has been very well described.
I guess my final comment or point is the discussion around “impunity” versus “prevention”. I talked to the lofty goals of prevention. I think it's absolutely incredible that anyone could suggest that there's anyone in this committee or in Parliament who is not absolutely horrified and who does not believe that Canada should be doing everything they should in terms of some of the things that are happening in the Congo, for example.
So I guess I would put that final language around “impunity” versus how we talk about “prevention”, and of course, to me prevention is a big envelope, and under it are all sorts of different strategies around how you ultimately prevent such horrific abuses in countries. Could you maybe talk a little bit about that particular aspect?