The process of ESG is that if there is a company that's suspected of being involved with forced labour, as an example, a Canadian pension fund would be expected to engage with that company to see how it could improve its record on forced labour—which, within the context of China and the Chinese state apparatus, is a non-starter, really. That process won't go anywhere. As other witnesses have pointed out, these companies are working hand-in-glove with the Chinese state and they're legally required by Chinese laws to do so. Therefore, the process itself is quite flawed. I think that increasingly, for a lot of pension funds, it's become a bit of a tick-box exercise.
As Ms. Calverley has already pointed out, it's heavily slanted towards focusing mainly on the environment, forgetting about human rights.