Thank you for those two questions.
Regarding the private press, we don’t really have any large corporations or powerful press magnates as there are in western countries or other Asian countries. We have, instead, small publications that basically depend on advertising and are mono-industrial, in that they are only involved in media such as magazines, dailies or radio. Our regional press is somewhat developed. But all of these structures are still very weak and would need, notably, greater financial assistance. This would allow them to be more viable in the future. Perhaps Parliament and the Canadian government could consider providing support to them.
I will give you a very concrete example. Of course, financial or trade sanctions can be imposed on Myanmar, but you have to see whether this affects the population more than the government. That is why we are considering, together with other non-governmental organizations, having certain cases tried under the famous Magnitski law. That law was first introduced in the United States, but other countries have enacted similar laws. It would make it possible to really target those who are responsible for repressing freedom of the press, through the use of visas and the seizure of their assets abroad. Many of them, however, have assets in China, which complicates things considerably. Despite that, a message can be sent. If we can seize the assets of the leaders, of those who are in command and who make the decision to curtail freedom of the press, we could make people think.