The firewall I was referring to is exclusively to how the Canadian state operates when it's abroad. There's one side, where you would be having political dialogue or having certain diplomatic exchanges, for example with Honduras—or you can take any other country. Take South Africa for example. There's a different part where you're going to be trying to strengthen the commercial relations.
What happens if you have a fallout with South Africa, for example, on the political side? I think it is good public policy that fallouts in political diplomatic relations do not affect Canadian businesses operating in South Africa. That's why a firewall is important. For that firewall to exist, it means that if there are issues that have to do with commercial matters, for example with South Africa or with Honduras, the political dialogue is not affected either.
For example, let's take Venezuela. There are Canadian companies operating in Venezuela. The Canadian government does not have good relations with the Venezuelan government for political reasons. I think that should be fine, but if you have all the diplomatic assets of Canada in Venezuela supporting our trade relations with Venezuela, then what? Do we have to say that we agree with whatever the Venezuelan government is doing towards its people and its human rights, and so on? I would say no. I would say that we could still remain critical to whatever the Venezuelan government is doing. At the same time, we're supporting our business. Then you need to have a separation between the diplomatic and the commercial sides.