As an addition, there is a comment published by thehub .ca. I don’t completely with everything, but it has many good points regarding China:

China is not the answer for Canadian prosperity – (Archived link)

… Strengthening ties with like-minded partners—through our trade agreements with the European Union, South Korea, or through the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership—builds resilience without compromising our principles. True diversification extends our reach while reinforcing our values, not undermining them.

[There are] profound obstacles to “restoring relations” with China. They are not mere irritants, but deep incompatibilities between Canada’s democratic values and Beijing’s authoritarian conduct. Since joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, China has gamed the rules of global commerce by propping up state-owned enterprises, dumping subsidized products, and weaponizing non-tariff barriers against its critics. Its human-rights record at home and abroad is appalling. Domestically, the persecution of Uyghurs, Tibetans, Falun Gong practitioners, and underground Christians; the crushing of Hong Kong’s freedoms must not be ignored.

Here in Canada, the election interference and the intimidation of Chinese-Canadians through fake police stations should not be overlooked. Not to mention the imprisonment of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor for 1,019 days on fabricated espionage charges. To gloss over these realities is to erode the moral foundation of our foreign policy …

Emphasis mine.

As an addition, there is a comment published by thehub .ca. I don’t completely with everything, but it has many good points regarding China:

China is not the answer for Canadian prosperity – (Archived link)

… Strengthening ties with like-minded partners—through our trade agreements with the European Union, South Korea, or through the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership—builds resilience without compromising our principles. True diversification extends our reach while reinforcing our values, not undermining them.

[There are] profound obstacles to “restoring relations” with China. They are not mere irritants, but deep incompatibilities between Canada’s democratic values and Beijing’s authoritarian conduct. Since joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, China has gamed the rules of global commerce by propping up state-owned enterprises, dumping subsidized products, and weaponizing non-tariff barriers against its critics. Its human-rights record at home and abroad is appalling. Domestically, the persecution of Uyghurs, Tibetans, Falun Gong practitioners, and underground Christians; the crushing of Hong Kong’s freedoms must not be ignored.

Here in Canada, the election interference and the intimidation of Chinese-Canadians through fake police stations should not be overlooked. Not to mention the imprisonment of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor for 1,019 days on fabricated espionage charges. To gloss over these realities is to erode the moral foundation of our foreign policy …

Emphasis mine.

I was quite sure that ‘China defenders’ would respond in a way to discredit the source, the OP, whatever they think would help.

This is an interview with the chief executive at the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturer’s Association. He has said the same elsewhere. It has nothing to do with the topic.

Canada should deal with other democracies. China isn’t a reliable alternative.

As Mr. Gere rightfully said, no country has ever benefited when collaborating with China. And they have threatened democracies with violence whenever Beijing deemed it appropriate, and so they’ll with Canada.

China is not far right? You are concerned over ‘fascists’ like Orban (do some research over his ties to China) but you’d see China as a current option?

This doesn’t add up. As I said, we should improve our democracies. China is definitely not among the options.

It’s mentioned in the report and even the title.

Posted this already in another thread, but it fits here, too.

We should improve democracies rather than collaborating with just another country that has turned to fascist rule

unfortunately, many other democracies are in the process of electing far-right whackadoos and mini-trumps. we don’t have an abundance of choices.

You are concerned about the “far-right whackadoos and mini-trumps” but are fine with collaborating with China over an alleged lack of choice?

That’s not the right way. We should improve democracies rather than collaborating with just another country that has turned to fascist rule

Addition:

Your claim that “China is not actively threatening us” is not true. It may not be that obvious, but the threat is here.

CSIS director warns that China and Russia continue to target Canada

I refer to my other comments in this thread. China is not a reliable partner, it frequently engages in coercion and bullying it’s “partners,” Canada can’t ignore human right issues in China.

There is no other way for Canada to diversify it’s trade and becoming independent from individual countries, especially China and the U.S.

China has been trying a lot to become self-sufficient, but in some areas they failed. Food is one of them. China is a major food importer, it’s imports exceed by far the exports (often with ration of 20 and 30 to 1).

But even if China would be able to grow canola domestically, it wouldn’t mean too much as Canada must diversify its trade anyway. Just because China isn’t a reliable partner and engages in coercion whenever the government deems it appropriate. Diversifying trade is the only way, not in the least as Canada and other allies can’t ignore human rights, e.g., China’s genocide in Xinjiang and Tibet, its aggression against Taiwan, and so on.

China cant’ find the canola in the relevant quantities and qualities elsewhere. The game Beijing has been playing with Canada this year is the same as in other countries.

More importantly, Canada must diversify its trade anyway - not just regarding the U.S. but any other state that poses a threat to its autonomy. And China is well known for its coercive practices. It’s simply not a reliable partner.

deleted by creator

The government is also promising new support for canola farmers and other sectors hit by U.S. and Chinese tariffs, all with measures that could have a positive long-term impact. For example, the budget proposes $75 million in the next five yearrs (starting 2026) to the AgriMarketing Program “to enhance the diversification and promotion of Canada’s agriculture, agri-food, fish, and seafood products into new markets" to “strike new trade agreements.”

Tariff-affected sectors (such as canola, lumber, steel, aluminum) will get access to the announced Strategic Response Fund to help producers find new markets, while impacted workers will be supported by “a major reskilling effort.”

[Edit typo.]

I got it, you can just also take China as an example. The story is more or less the same: Critical thinking is only allowed if it doesn’t contradicts the state narrative, belief in the leader’s thought first and foremost, historical knowledge is poor due to censorship (younger people have never heard about the Tiananmen Square massacre, for example, and barely know about genocides such as in Xiniang), state propaganda is prevalent, and it is easy for the Party to implement a totalitarian agenda.

So it’s basically the same thing.

I know about this. I would have just expected to read about specific sacrifices after reading the headline. So now you can make your own guess as it’s more a clickbait headline imo.

to better serve the conservative hierarchical system

The underfunding (of 260 per student) isn’t good, of course, but this interpretation is a bit odd. Educational systems in Canada and other democratic countries aren’t some sort of propaganda tools like, say, in China, where students learn about “Xi Jinping thought” and similar propaganda (such ‘courses’ are mandatory in Chinese schools and universities).

Maybe it’s just me but I don’t get what 'those tough choices" will be Canadians could soon face. The report discusses mostly the use of the word “sacrifice” by Carney and others, while only one expert makes a very rough guess what that could be in just one sentence at the end of the article.

I provided an archived link in the body :-)

Yeah, the sad thing is that here on Lemmy are a lot of accounts pretending to be pro-Canada and pro-democracy while actually spreading Chinese propaganda normalizing genocide in Xinjiang and Tibet. Basically the same thing.