Well, sir, that's not the assessment of the very well-known trade lawyer, who talked about it as one of the most seriously one-sided agreements in Canadian trade history, but I hope you're right. We haven't seen the full effects of it yet, and we'll have a long time to wait.
I agree with you on the foreign influence transparency business. That has to be addressed—and unfortunately it hasn't been yet—by China and by other countries. We've seen the example today of the Saudi government state actors or proxies interfering inside Canada, and that's something we ought to address very, very quickly.
As you pointed out, we've had the experience of China being very heavy-handed with individual countries. I have in front of me an excerpt from the deal with Norway. When a Nobel Prize was awarded to a Chinese person imprisoned for eight years, China had nothing to do with Norway, and then in order to get back in its graces, Norway had to sign an agreement:
The Norwegian Government reiterates its commitment to the one-China policy, fully respects China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, attaches high importance to China's core interests and major concerns, will not support actions that undermine them, and will do its best to avoid any future damage to the bilateral relations.
That's a very strong act of humiliation in order to restart that free trade agreement. That China has that kind of power over a country like Norway, which is normally independent and self-sufficient, shows that there has to be more than just an agreement among nations; there has to be a real coalition to act against China.
Would you happen to agree with that, that we have to get countries like Norway and Canada and whatever others we can get together to counterbalance the Chinese power?