Mr. Chairman, those were very important questions. There was first the graduation of countries from the GPT. Some countries have been graduated and I am sure the hon. member means South Korea and Singapore. They have been graduated by the Americans for example and are no longer in that group of countries. Others such as Europe and Japan have not done that to these countries.
The question of whether these countries should be removed from this group which gets the advantage of the GPT is something we can look at at any time. If a member wishes to raise it for a particular country or if any standing committee of the
House decides it wants to examine any of these results that can be done at any time. It is not a closed situation at all.
The question of whether Canada should graduate the countries the hon. member mentioned is one which could be considered at any time. It is not difficult to make a change but we have to realize it has not been generally accepted to do that.
The other question was on the use of the GPT as a lever to human rights questions. That has been done on occasion. Where there is a general consensus usually through the United Nations or something similar that has happened. It is possible to do that.
With respect to China, I remind the hon. member that China is a major developing market and its record on human rights may have some questions. China is a major developing market for Canada. Canada has had a great interest in the opening up of China right from the very earliest times. We were one of the first western countries to recognize China and we have had very good relations.
It is extremely important that we retain our influence in China through the acceptance of the GPT to have the largest benefit from this. But there are a lot of other benefits on the other side as well in that Canadian companies have been opening up business there. The GPT helps Canadian companies in their general relations with China.