Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to all the witnesses.
Ms. Cetinkaya, thank you for bringing more light here on the ongoing horror that is the Uyghur genocide.
From my observations, the ESG movement in practice sometimes feels like the “E only” movement. It ignores social and governance impacts in the rush to achieve specific environmental objectives. There is a major risk that the new battery economy is strengthening our strategic adversaries, undermining Canadian workers and causing untold suffering among Uyghurs, as well as people in the DRC who are often exploited by Chinese companies. Therefore, we need to be smart about how we respond to these changes, yet some, in spite of these realities of social and governance impacts, press forward with their one-track mind.
I think we need to have an approach that aligns with our economic interests, our strategic interests and our moral obligations. That is why Conservatives have pushed for strong measures to counter the strategic efforts of the Chinese Communist Party to dominate the market through tactics that are both anti-competitive and immoral.
You spoke in your opening statement about the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. It's a bipartisan bill passed in the United States that creates a reverse onus. Essentially, it's a presumption that those companies operating in East Turkestan, or Xinjiang, are using forced labour.
Why is this presumption reasonable, in your view? Should we adopt legislation in Canada that aligns with this bipartisan legislation in the United States?