You talked about keeping up the pressure. We see no downside to keeping up the pressure on the Chinese government.
In the context of bilateral dialogue, we recommend that the session that is to be held now be postponed to enable this subcommittee and Canadian society to start a debate.
We think it would be important to establish parameters for this kind of dialogue. We think that would be useful in the case of China, but also in the case of a number of other countries, some of which have been mentioned, such as Burma, for example. That would make it possible to reassess and to have a more general human rights policy.
We don't recommend completely cutting off dialogue, but that the session that is to be held be postponed so that there can be a broader debate in Canada, which would include the organizations of civil society.
To answer Mr. Cotler's question from earlier, I'd say that a lot of organizations have a series of concrete recommendations to make on how the dialogue should take place and on its parameters. I have somewhat limited time to answer that.
We don't advocate a boycott of the Olympic Games in Beijing in 2008, because, among other things, there hasn't really been a debate on this subject involving the union movement, either in Canada or internationally. The idea is more for us to campaign to have certain fundamental occupational health and safety standards complied with, because there are serious problems with preparations for the Olympic Games. We view this more as a pressure campaign.