I think that, as a whole, the Indo-Pacific strategy is quite comprehensive and sweeping. I would say its statements and desires are quite well laid out.

What we have to make sure is that we follow through. Without follow-through, the policy won't mean very much in the end. It's about pushing the Indonesia trade deal to a close, pushing the ASEAN trade deal to a close, using those as building blocks for growing our broader trade relationship in the region, and using the RCEP to diversify our trade in the region so we're not completely dependent on China. At one point, if you talked about trade in Asia, China was the only thing top of mind.

Similarly, although it's out of my remit, we've re-engaged with Japan and Korea on our trading relationships there, which I think is also very important. Korea and Canada have a very robust trade agreement that hasn't been taken advantage of, from my observation, as much as it should be. Japan and Korea are both very major players within the ASEAN region, with their investment in the region, their ownership of some of the factories and the trade infrastructure that goes on there, and their diplomacy, which was noted in the previous panel—particularly Japan, a very trusted partner in the region.

I think all of these are important steps for us to take: getting our agreements in place to build on our trade relationships, and consistently engaging with ASEAN. As I mentioned, it's taken us 10 years at the CABC to get to the point where we've been given such an accreditation as an organization. There have been a tremendous number of ministerial visits on the trade side—and by others—in the last couple of years. All of those touchpoints are very important in this part of the world.

When we launch policy, we need to follow through with the commitments we make.