No, no, you're not embarrassing me, and I also don't want to embarrass anyone.
I wouldn't categorize it as an error. I don't think any prime minister goes out to make errors in foreign policy in this case or in others. It's obviously an issue Mr. Harper feels very passionately about, that he feels is a fundamental aspect of our relationship, and I accept that at face value. I have no qualms with Mr. Harper feeling passionately about human rights.
I also happen to believe that former prime ministers also felt quite strongly about those kinds of basic values. It's also then a question of judgment, it's a question of style, it's a question of the rapport that one enjoys in terms of asking how we advance these values, and how he can advance this cause. Mr. Harper is free to choose the style and the approach he thinks is going to work.
In terms of the CCBC, we have no quibbles with Mr. Harper on the passion that he brings to respecting the human rights of Canadians in China and ultimately to try to influence Chinese thinking and policy on how they treat their own people. But we happen to believe that if you want to show success and if you want to move the file forward, you need a much more comprehensive, balanced approach, but ultimately one that is predicated on a strong relationship.
Even if it was briefly, we were pleased that in Vietnam Mr. Harper, with his Chinese counterpart, at least were able to put a face to one another beyond the G-7 meeting that I think they had briefly in St. Petersburg. It is my hope, built on these last ministerial visits, that Prime Minister Harper one day soon—not necessarily in a third country, but I hope in Canada or China--can build that chemistry and rapport. We are convinced that if that happens we will be more successful in seeing gains on those issues he feels so strongly about.