Mr. Chair, we're currently having a very interesting debate, and I think it's important to refocus a bit. Let's face it: the government didn't follow the lead of the other parties in the House of Commons on the issue of recognizing the genocide of the Uighurs because of political and trade reasons. Unfortunately, these considerations will always be present.
However, the issue of the genocide of Uighurs was well documented by the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. Despite that, the government continues to say only that something concerning is happening in the People's Republic of China.
Without the least study by the Subcommittee on International Human Rights or any committee, the House of Commons recognized the genocide of the Tamils with a simple motion, and cabinet members voted for that recognition. Were there fewer political, economic or trade considerations in that case? I leave it to you to judge, Mr. Chair.
What must be said at this stage is that it has to start somewhere. Better an imperfect and incomplete bill than no bill at all. I share Mr. McKay's concern: we can indeed try to achieve a perfect bill that will meet all expectations and address all concerns, and that will reflect all the details, but in doing so, the bill risks not being passed.
I therefore agree with what the sponsors of the bill told us about the need to take the first steps, which I hope will allow us to go further one day. It has to start somewhere, for sure. As a result, while there are people at the table, including the sponsors of the bill, who are prepared to consider amendments, let's ensure that those amendments don't put the bill's passage at risk.
How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?