The Canadian Parliament’s Standing Committee on International Trade recently held a hearing on Mark Carney’s trade deals with China. The full transcript is now available.

In my testimony and Q&A responses, I forecast that turning to China to hedge against "America First" will carry significant risks. The CCP's objectives include dividing and weakening the West, seizing the commanding heights of advanced technology and manufacturing, and increasing other countries' dependence on China while minimising China's reliance on others. That’s not a free trade agenda — it's aggressive mercantilism that's harmful to Canada's interests.

The narrow commercial benefits from increasing economic relations with China need to be weighed against the asymmetric costs of protecting Canadian society and democracy from foreign influence and interference — and the risks of helping the CCP achieve goals that threaten Canadian and allied sovereignty.

Trading without structural discipline risks relegating Canada to a second-class role as a commodity supplier depending on Beijing for the technologies of the 21st century. Replacing lost manufacturing exports to the US with commodity exports to China isn't diversification — it's the erosion of Canada's remaining industrial depth.

On FDI: direct Chinese investment is likely to arrive as highly automated final assembly plants with limited employment. The CCP will restrict technology transfer. Canadian firms would compete against state-backed giants designed to absorb losses and subsidise market share until competitors exit.

The bigger picture: Canada risks falling into a trap of asymmetric dependence — the CCP offers inducements, builds constituencies, expects political deference, and readily resorts to coercion. That's not a deal Canada should take.

Ephemeral stability purchased through accommodation today invites more coercion tomorrow.

Much more in the transcript: