I note for posterity that I agree with Garnett on this.
I have two points.
As a federal Parliament, our most appropriate invitation would be to China's ambassador to Canada, not a consul general. If the ambassador wanted to include one of his consuls general from Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver or wherever, that would be fine. I want to make sure that we are on the same page on that. I am also supportive of having Canada's consul general to Hong Kong.
The second point is that I think it's appropriate to finish our work plan on Hong Kong. I think we then need to have a subcommittee on agenda and planning look at what we do after that. There are important issues around world events, COVID and security, etc., and we need to rejig that a bit. If this means the subcommittee needs to do a little extra work so that we don't lose too much time, I think we'd all agree to that.
I just don't want to assume we're back exactly where we were before, when we were finishing the Hong Kong report.