Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I promise to stay on the topic at hand entirely here, unlike some who have decided to waver off in different directions. Let's put it that way. I'll also be giving a few minutes to Mr. Zuberi, who is joining us tonight, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Barton, this question is similar to one that was posed by Mr. Virani earlier, but I want to ask it in a different light.
It's often the case that—and I am not just talking about Canada in specific terms here—liberal democracies will take an interest in a particular issue at a particular moment. It could be the case that the government of the day has an interest in that issue. It could be the case that an ambassador has a particular interest in that issue, and there could be all sorts of other variables that explain why a matter has become a subject of concern for a country.
My question is, how do we maintain an interest in Tibet? What will you do to continue to work on this issue?
I don't want it to be the case that we look 10 years down the road and there is no continued engagement. I wonder what you could say to that. Will you continue to work on this matter?