Thanks.
One of the good things that came out of this strategy is the pivot towards a more mutually beneficial relationship. A lot of the language was very positive on that. As you mentioned—and as other officials from Global Affairs Canada mentioned last week when they were here—it's because we heard that's what a lot of African stakeholders and leaders want. They want an equal partnership. They want trade and commerce. To your point, and maybe in answer to Alexis's question earlier, I think trade and development should work together. It is a positive development to integrate trade and development better.
However, there are pitfalls. Tied aid is a pitfall we don't want to fall into. We also have to remember that trade is a two-way street. We often hear Canada talking about trade, and that's normal. We say, “Well, we want to export our products to the continent.” That's true, but it's also about promoting and buying African products here. We're trying to look away, sometimes, from our neighbours to the south in terms of products we want to get. For example, we don't want to get orange juice from Florida. South Africa sells excellent orange juice. We can look to that. It's the same with things like coffee and chocolate. Supporting African countries develops greater value addition.
Let's not get into tied aid. That just doesn't work. Let's remember that trade is a two-way street. It's not just about pushing our things. Let's also remember that, although we want to see trade and development more closely integrated, not every development project is about trade. If you're providing humanitarian assistance, you're not there to make a business deal. You're there to save lives and provide assistance.