Evidence of meeting #5 for Canada-China Relations in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chinese.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Thank you.
I didn't name any names. I am saying this is not about you; this is about Canada's relationship with China.
I'm no expert on China. On my trips to China, however, if I had a dime for every time Norman Bethune's name was mentioned, I would be wealthy. It is a constant thing.
On my most recent trip to China, I thought that it would help the Chinese understand the importance of the relationship. What I heard was a different thing from Chinese officials, which was that they expected we would then understand them better. That becomes a complex thing. We were talking like this: they saw an extradition process as being one thing; we saw arbitrary detention as something else. We weren't speaking the same language.
Can you tell us how you're trying to pull those two vectors together to get us on a common language?
6:40 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
Sure, because I do think there are, as I said, from the history and the culture, different perspectives and views on the world. I think that what we first tried to do was move away from what I'd call the “speech-reading” on both sides, which literally was, first, “You are lapdogs of the U.S. You've done this and that and the other”, and why they were so upset with that. We were saying, “We're following the rule of law in what we did. We have an extradition treaty, and this is how it works.” You did see that, but part of it was because there was no discussion. It was just talking at each other and there was no time for discussion.
What I find to be helpful—again, we have to get results, otherwise this is activity with no impact—is to unpack it a bit and say, “Do you know what? We actually have this long-standing relationship. Our people like each other.” Do you know what I mean? There's, “Let's go back to what we like about each other. Let's not forget that. Let's talk a bit about why that is the case. What are some of the things we did for each other in the past?” Just build trust and open the ears on both sides on where it is.
There are going to be differences. We're never going to be singing from the same hymn book on this, but we can start to find some common areas that we can work on. We have a lot of things to work on and a common agenda out there.
When we think about this challenge we have, let's not lose the forest for the trees. I don't know if I'm answering your question properly, but that's....
6:40 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
I am hopeful.
6:40 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
I'm hopeful because, just by definition I'm an optimistic person, so you have to take that, but I actually believe there are small steps.
We did not have any formal communications. A lot of it was informal. We now have very good formal relations. We have real discussions where we can argue and debate, and say, “Let's try to figure this out and understand where things are.” There's a momentum. I think they want to have this sorted and we want to have this sorted. I feel like there's a broader discussion. There are small steps.
Again, I'd go back to the meat and the pork. I had nothing to do with that. The Prime Minister was very nice to say it, but part of it is that we couldn't even get to resolve the issue because we couldn't communicate or talk. Now that we can communicate we could actually resolve the issue.
These things start to open up other opportunities, and those are signals or green shoots. Sorry, I see lots of green shoots.
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you, Mr. Oliphant.
I'm now going to give two and a half minutes to Monsieur Bergeron and then to Mr. Harris. After that, if members agree, we'll take a five-minute health break, if that's all right. Members can let me know their views on that.
Mr. Bergeron.
6:45 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
I have two and a half minutes. Is that right, Mr. Chair? I can see that I do.
I hate to go back to questions that I've already asked, primarily because I'm wasting precious minutes, and also because I feel as though I'm putting you on the hot seat, which isn't my intention at all.
I know that you were appointed after Meng Wanzhou's arrest. That's obvious to everyone. To your knowledge, was the embassy contacted? Was the advice of specialists in relations with China sought when the International Assistance Group had to make a decision regarding Meng Wanzhou's pre-trial custody?
6:45 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
Mr. Chair, again, I wasn't there, so I don't know, but my sense from the way it works with Justice is that they just decide. They make their decision; it's a case that comes through. My sense of it was that there was not any sort of broader discussion of it.
6:45 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
You're therefore unable to assess the extent to which the precedent of the Garratt couple in 2014 could have been taken into account as a warning of what was to come.
6:45 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
Again, my sense is that Justice has quite a strict process—that they deal with all of these. I don't know how they looked at it. I don't think that it was more broadly discussed.
6:45 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Officials at the Department of Foreign Affairs have repeatedly told us that they're seeking the support of a number of countries to lobby on behalf of detained Canadians.
I have two questions about this.
First, is this really an effective way to put pressure on the Chinese authorities or, on the contrary, will this make the Chinese authorities more firm in their position?
Second, doesn't the new Chinese silk road initiative undermine, so to speak, Canada's efforts on the international stage?
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Mr. Bergeron, your two and a half minutes are up. However, I'll let Mr. Barton briefly respond.
6:45 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
I didn't take good enough notes on your first question. I'm sorry about this. I'm happy to go over if you want.
6:45 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Doesn't the strategy of seeking international support run the risk of making the Chinese more firm in their position?
6:45 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
Quickly, I think it's a good thing to do, but it's not sufficient. It's sort of like necessary but not sufficient. I don't think it's going to unlock it, but it's a good thing to do.
On the silk road or the belt and road initiative, as I think we say from a government point of view, there are many good aspects of it in the sense of the trade opening, but there are many concerning aspects about the transparency and the debt that's in the system. It's not black or white in where it is, and that's I think the view we have on it.
6:45 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you. I'll ask a quick question that's similar to Monsieur Bergeron's.
You were very bullish, of course, as you say, on China, but also on the one belt, one road blueprint. We've gone into the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or the CPTPP, with other countries specifically to attempt to strengthen economic ties and not to be dominated by China. Do you think your work and enthusiasm for the Chinese project runs counter to that strategy and does that cause problems for you?
6:45 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
Again, I am the ambassador for Canada, so I'm going to be pursuing what the government is saying. My understanding of what the government is saying is that we want to be very careful about certain aspects of the belt and road initiative, again, on its transparency and debt and whether or not it beholdens some of the people involved in it. On the other hand, there are aspects of it that are positive in opening up trade, which benefits Canadian companies that are actually on that.
6:50 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you. Fair enough.
I have one last question. It has to do with the question at the beginning—the point of order—with regard to the 14 countries that support Canada and the others who say they do but won't say it loudly enough for others to hear.
Is there any comprehensive strategic plan for working with them? We've heard nothing about a task force with other countries—as we have seen in the Iranian situation—and special efforts in the PMO, for example, to work with all of these people in a systematic way.
Is something like that going on, and would it help?
6:50 p.m.
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the People's Republic of China
There is. With the 14 countries, there are conversations.
One of the first things I did when I got to Beijing was to thank the ambassadors of those countries for doing that and continuing it. That continues in where it is, but as I mentioned to the chair in response to a previous question, it's a good thing to do but it's not going to unlock.... We have to do other things in addition.
Yes, it continues, but we also have to look at other means.