Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge for setting me up. I can hardly wait to hear what I have to say.
I was literally sitting here wondering what I could contribute to this debate. One of the hon. members talked about the chaos in this chamber. It is true. Question period was chaotic, and I have never seen the Speaker quite so animated or so angry. We have all contributed to the chaos that is here.
I actually wonder what Beijing thinks. In some respects, Beijing is having a good day, because we are fighting among ourselves. However, I have some confidence in colleagues that we can actually come to some point of resolution not only on the motion but also on the way in which we face the existential threat to the nation of Canada that is the government of China.
I think it is a fair observation that, as a nation, we have never faced such a threat from another nation. Another government wishes to turn us into a vassal, subservient state, a state where the belt and road literally apply to us. All roads lead to Beijing, and the belt is for our neck. That is the ultimate goal of the government of Beijing; stirring up chaos in our country is the technique. Part of me regrets participating in this debate, because in some manner, I am contributing to that chaos. As I said, I am rather hoping that by the end of the day, we may have some resolution or may at least be starting to move toward some resolution on how to deal with this existential threat.
I had the privilege of travelling to Taiwan with the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills a couple of weeks ago. I regard that member as a friend. I think that may be one of the first things that we could deal with. We are a little too partisan here. There are not many on that side who can say they have friends on this side, and there are not many on this side who can say that they have friends on that side. However, I do regard the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills as a friend. As a consequence of travelling with him in a delegation of 10 to Taiwan, all senior members of four parties, we had what I regard as an exemplary way in which Canadian parliamentarians can do good diplomacy and actually move the yardsticks in a serious area of diplomacy.
The hon. member and I, and other members of the delegation, I am sure, discussed the last election. Obviously, we did not get as far as some of the material that has come out in the last little while, but he was aware at the time that there were people who, strangely, were part of public events for him. We all live in a political environment. There are times when I do not know who is supporting me. I do not even know who is not supporting me. Sometimes, there are a lot of people who are not supporting me. That does not happen to anybody else, of course.
The point I want to make about the unanimity that is required in order to face this existential threat and to move our diplomatic interests forward is that we based part of our time in Taiwan on a unanimous report generated by the Canada-China committee. There are times when reports of committees hit the floor of the House and that is it. We never hear about them again. Interestingly, we took this report to Taiwan, and it was literally presented to the president by the chair of the committee. I will not say that she clutched it, but it was not too far from that. It was a show of unanimity by this Parliament and these parliamentarians, as well as a friendship to a government that is literally under an existential threat.
When we arrived, there were warplanes overhead, and there were warships surrounding the island. We all concluded that, frankly, one could learn a lot from the Taiwanese government and the Taiwanese people in terms of how to respond to existential threats by the People's Republic of China. That is the first point I want to make. We do, for the sake of our nation, need to come to ground on the way in which we respond to misinformation, disinformation, interference and intimidation.
One of the points that comes up in the motion is the issue of police stations. There is one in my community. From all reports that we can gather in the public domain, it is an intimidation operation run from local Chinese diplomatic authorities, and it affects the diaspora community in ways that we probably cannot even imagine.
In that respect, I think the motion has merit. However, I would just point out to colleagues that if we are to have integrity ourselves, then we also need to let the police move as police move, which is basically on the basis of evidence. As much as I would like to light a fire under police authorities in my community, or the RCMP, as the case may be, using the rule of law is the way we operate in this country. I do not think that we should deviate from the rule of law and the way in which we prosecute, even if we are virtually unanimous in our view that these police stations need to be shut down.
The other area in which I agree is the foreign agent registry. I think we are moving forward on that. The minister is moving forward. I do not know if it is the be-all and end-all, but I think it is a useful thing to do. Other nations have adopted it. I just take note that the same Canada-China committee has adopted a motion that calls for the Government of Canada to prioritize the introduction of legislation to establish a foreign agent registry. Interestingly, that was a Liberal motion.
I hope that I have contributed to the conversation here today.