Again, I don't want to belabour the point, but had I known that amendment NDP-3 was beyond the scope, I probably wouldn't have incorporated it into my remarks. Had the two been within the scope, it certainly would have been a building of concerns.
I think what is really outrageous is that if this bill fails to pass, or it has amendments that send it back off to the other place, where other bad things start to happen, then that will be much more difficult for the person you are looking at in Xinjiang.
I just want to clarify the point that Ms. McPherson raised about the minister's mandate letter. I read that mandate letter. It says nothing about due diligence. So I don't think that is, with the greatest respect, a valid argument.
With that, I will leave my comments there and again urge colleagues to defeat amendment NDP-2.