Evidence of meeting #7 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 china's.
A video is available from Parliament.
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
Lenore Zann Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Thank you very much.
Mr. Calvert, what have you learned as a diplomat or professor about the best way to engage China, even when we have disagreements with them?
February 24th, 2020 / 11:20 a.m.
Senior Fellow, China Institute, University of Alberta, As an Individual
I would say two things.
One is that tone is important, as it is with any kind of relationship, and that while public statements are sometimes useful, they are also blunt instruments and have to be matched with other kinds of engagement that takes place out of the public eye.
Second, I would say that the more you can provide a business case for convincing them that what you're trying to, let's say, advocate for China is in their interests and not just an extension of our own values, the more it can be effective.
For example, on human rights issues, if you can make the argument.... For example, on the coronavirus, if you want to talk about transparency and governance, you can make a business case for China right now, behind closed doors, saying, “Look, you lost a month of potential activity that could have possibly contained this virus, because of your system, because of the way you control, with the lack of transparency and your crackdown on the very people who were trying to draw attention to this. This should tell you something.” Basically, you can argue that respect for human rights and for more democracy is ultimately more stable and ultimately provides more possibility for addressing challenges and long-term challenges in any country.
Also—for example on the Uighur issue, which is abominable in the way they're treating them—we can bring Canada's experience to bear and say, “Look, we have our own experience in the way we have treated our indigenous people. It has been very costly in social and financial terms because of the incredible mismanagement of it.” The more you can present issues in that way, the more you're going to find some kind of willing listener.
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
Lenore Zann Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Excellent. Thank you.
I have one last question. This is for you, Mr. Evans.
How much room do we have for pursuing an independent China policy that might cut across the American policy of treating China as its strategic competitor, adversary or enemy—as for example, with Huawei?
11:20 a.m.
Prof. Paul Evans
The Huawei question is exactly the right one to ask, because it is where these forces come together, and the challenges of a made-in-Canada decision are really important as a signal of where we're going to go.
I think the consensus in the United States is somewhat cracking on the Huawei issue, even if it isn't represented at this moment among their elected officials. Business think tanks and others see the dangers of decoupling and are backing off from that hardline full confrontation.
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you.
I'm sorry, but we have very little time for each of our members to ask their questions.
Mr. Bergeron, you have two and a half minutes.
11:20 a.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Thank you Mr. Chair.
I understand that Canada's policy on China has been completely revised. I noted Mr. Burton's comment that we also need to change our approach to China, as we did with the United States. What role do you think the provinces can play in that change?
Next, I'd like to ask a question that could be addressed to all three of you and that we can hardly ask of the officials at the Department of Foreign Affairs: how well equipped is Canada today in terms of personnel and analysts?
Finally, I'd like to refer back to one of Mr. Calvert's interventions in response to a question from Ms. Alleslev: is Canada well equipped to deal with this paradigm shift we're seeing with respect to China?
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Please tell us which of the three witnesses you would like to hear first, Mr. Bergeron.
11:20 a.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
My first question is for Mr. Burton. Please proceed, we are wasting time.
11:25 a.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
Certainly we've had some very effective representatives in China from our provinces. I know of some from the province of Quebec, when I was serving in the embassy, who were particularly strong not only in trade but also in general in the discussions that occur between diplomats in that posting.
Do we have the analysts we need to defend our interests in China adequately? I would say that we do not. It's very difficult to get people with the requisite expertise in understanding the Communist system, fluency in the Chinese language and the willingness to spend a lot of time engaging with their Chinese colleagues. This is not a problem simply for Canada, but it is a big problem for Canada.
The thing is that there is no short-term solution. Many countries at present are providing scholarship incentive programs to graduate students to acquire this expertise. We really have to get serious about it, but it's not something we can solve in the short term.
11:25 a.m.
Prof. Paul Evans
Thank you.
I think the question of the province and Asian competence is very interesting, because it takes us back to our universities. I think one of the areas that the committee could be of great value is in looking at the role of the universities and the challenges they now face in dealing with China. Some of those are opportunities in terms of recruitment of students, but there are whole new challenges about protecting—
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you. Sorry to interrupt, but the two and a half minutes are up.
Mr. Harris, you have two and a half minutes.
11:25 a.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you, Chair.
A lot of Canadians, as we all know, are very motivated by concern for human rights in China, whether it be the Uighurs or the case of the imprisonment of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig. Throughout the history of our relationship, we've always demanded that the Prime Minister raise the question of human rights in meetings with the leadership of China. These things have been going on for 50 years. My question is this. Are the international human rights mechanisms that are available capable of playing a role in solving this issue, or do we need other things? We have public statements, we have normal diplomatic channels, etc., but are there any other things that we could or should be doing that could help us?
Could each of you address that? Is there anything else that we're missing here?
11:25 a.m.
Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual
Mr. Harris, the UN institutions are not very effective. I note that North Korea has ratified both of the main human rights covenants. Clearly, we're not able to get them to be in compliance. From that point of view, I think some of these institutions to some extent have been co-opted by the power of China in the UN to prevent nations from supporting exposure of Chinese human rights abuses.
As I said in my opening statement, we do have the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, the Magnitsky list, and I think it's a glaring shortcoming that the country that has committed the most human rights abuses on the planet is excluded from our Canadian list.
11:25 a.m.
Prof. Paul Evans
I think this is a very interesting problem that you've identified: what we are going to do with China on human rights. I would say that public attitudes are quite interesting. When we ask Canadians what they think our government's major priority should be with respect to China, human rights consistently comes up fourth on the list, after trade, after co-operation on global issues and after protection of Canadian values and institutions at home.
How far we put this as a priority is important.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
11:25 a.m.
Senior Fellow, China Institute, University of Alberta, As an Individual
If we want to change China as a whole, that's going to be very difficult. We have to find specific, small, concrete issues and work to convey to China why it's in their interest to do this, find areas where we can work together collectively and build out on what we can do from there. We used to have a human rights dialogue—
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you. Sorry about that.
I thank the witnesses very much. We do deeply appreciate your time here and your understanding of the fact that each member only has so much time, so we have to roll through these quite quickly. I invite all the witnesses to send additional information in writing to the clerk if you wish to do so.
We'll suspend for five minutes—
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Excuse me. I mean I want to move a motion. I move:
That the clerk of the committee make the necessary arrangements for a working lunch on Thursday, February 27, 2020.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
We'll come back to that after the break.
We'll suspend for five minutes to allow the witnesses to leave and to get the new witnesses and teleconferences in place.
Thank you again.