Canada-China Relations Committee on Dec. 8th, 2020

[Dominic Barton]

Mr. Chair, I think the issue about investment in countries is a critical one. The thing that I think they look at in particular is the Investment Canada Act. Again, I don't know if I'm getting at the honourable member's core question, but that's the core element: What is the process by which investments will be screened and allowed? I think there's a concern because of what they're seeing in other parts of the world, from their point of view and where it is. I think that the Investment Canada Act and where it is provides a lot of provision for being able to check on the security side and making sure that we're not putting ourselves in a vulnerable position on that front.

To me, the core of where they're—

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I appreciate that this would be a concern of yours, but my question more specifically is whether the TPPA has ever been raised by the Chinese officials with you as something that they would insist upon in particular circumstances.

[Dominic Barton]

Honourable member, I'm not sure I'm going to be able to answer. I need to follow up with you. Do you mean the CPTPP, the trade agreement?

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Yes, the trade agreement that has been called very one-sided in China's favour, as you know.

[Dominic Barton]

Let me get back to you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you, Ambassador.

Thank you, Mr. Harris.

We continue with Mr. Paul-Hus for five minutes.

Mr. Paul-Hus, you have the floor.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Ambassador, in my first question, I would like to come back to the conditions of detention of the two Michaels.

You contacted them. However, do you have any information on the conditions of detention? I have a report in Mandarin, which I had translated, of course. It provides a lot of details on the conditions of each one. At the time of the report, we knew that Michael Spavor is in Dandong and Michael Kovrig is closer to Beijing. Do you have access to detailed information on their conditions of detention?

[Dominic Barton]

Mr Chair, I couldn't hear anything in the first part, but I think the member asking about the conditions of the two Michaels.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Your Excellency, I'll ask.

Mr. Paul-Hus, I have stopped the clock and I'm going to ask you to ask your question again, please.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Okay, Mr. Chair.

I want to know whether you have any details about the detention of the two Michaels. I have a report written in Mandarin that gives a lot of information on the conditions of detention. I am told that Michael Spavor is apparently detained in Dandong, and Michael Kovrig, south of Beijing. I want to know whether you really have a lot of information or very little.

[Dominic Barton]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Again, I'm somewhat limited by what I can say on the details due to the Privacy Act, but as you saw in that report, Michael Spavor is in Dandong, which is near the North Korean border, and Michael Kovrig is in Beijing, about 15 to 20 kilometres from the embassy.

They're in different detention centres, and they're with different numbers of people. That's all I'm really going to say. I'll just say again that they're both physically well and they're mentally well, which I think is quite inspiring given the conditions they're in.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

That's fine, thank you, Mr. Ambassador.

On November 17, I asked Shawn Steil from Global Affairs Canada a question. I wanted to know whether any protective equipment against COVID-19 had been purchased by Canada in China and whether that equipment had been manufactured in labour camps in Tibet or in Xinjiang.

Can you confirm this or were you consulted? Are you aware of this?

[Dominic Barton]

Mr. Chair, as you know, Canada has purchased a lot of PPE from China. We are obviously very committed to the protection of human rights and not having forced labour in there. We made it very clear in the process of the supplier selection that the integrity of the supply chain—in other words, there cannot be any forced labour in that—is essential to what happens. Other countries are also dealing with this. We've had many conversations with the British, the Italians, the Germans and the French about how we can ensure that this is the case.

I think it's very difficult to say with 100% predictability where everything is, but all of the standards and the processes have been put in place. We've made that absolutely clear to the suppliers. We've been working with the other countries that are in a very similar situation on that because that's the last thing we want, and everyone knows how important that is to us.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Champagne, told our committee on November 23, 2020, that the China of 2020 is not the China of 2015. Yesterday, Canada's former ambassador to China, David Mulroney, stated that Canada lacks leadership on strategic issues with China. Even Mr. Champagne mentioned in his testimony that we need to keep our eyes open. You are our eyes in China.

What do you need to do differently from the former ambassadors who were there in other years? What is very different for you today?

[Dominic Barton]

I think, as the minister said and I tried to say in my part, the relationship with China is evolving. It's become a tougher, more authoritarian place. That means we have to stand up for more issues of human rights and our interests. Those, by the way, include interests on the economic side and what we do. This standing up is critical.

I don't know what it was like before, but what I would say now is that there's a lot of interaction with the MFA. They get mad at us for what we say, and we get mad. There's a lot of interaction going on as we push for things: visits to Tibet, visits to Xinjiang to see what's actually going on out there, to the other regions where there are Tibetans, and to Inner Mongolia to see what's happening with....

We're out there because we have to be. We have to be very proactive in all those dimensions, and there are many issues.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Paul-Hus.

We will now go to Mr. Oliphant for five minutes.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ambassador Barton, thank you for being with us tonight, for your work representing Canada and for being our eyes, as Mr. Paul-Hus just said.

I want to follow up on some of Mr. Genuis' earlier questions and put into the record what Ambassador Rae said, with some follow-up, and then give you a chance to comment.

What Mr. Rae said to the CBC was:

There's no question that there's aspects of what the Chinese are doing that fits into the definition of genocide in the genocide convention.... But that then requires you go through a process of gathering information and of making sure that we've got the evidence that would support that kind of an allegation.

Following that, when Minister Champagne was asked about a comment, he said:

We will stand up [and] we will speak up whenever we feel it is appropriate.... We have done that [in] respect to Xinjiang. We have done that with respect to Hong Kong more recently and we will continue to do so.

Under his leadership, Canada was among 39 UN members who jointly criticized China for its treatment of the Uighurs last month. The countries have also demanded China allow independent investigators to visit Xinjiang and see the situation for themselves.

I have a simple question. Is there any light between you, Ambassador Rae and Minister Champagne?

[Dominic Barton]

Zero. That's what I thought I was trying to say.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I just wanted to make sure that it was clear to everyone.

Now that's out of the way. I want to go to Tibet.

You went on a delegation with representatives of nine countries. You've had discussions with other ambassadors and heads of missions since then. You had discussions before then.

What do you think Canada's role is in leading with respect to the issues around Tibet, or what do you think Canada's role is in following other countries? How do we work together? What is the best situation for Canada to work with Tibet?

[Dominic Barton]

As I said, Mr. Chair, I think this engagement with Tibet has to be broad and ongoing. This is one vignette, if you will, a three-day trip there.

I think as Canadians, as an embassy, we should continue to reach out, to be there. We're planning our next round of trips to these other regions where there are a lot of Tibetans, and we actually have engagement there. We'll be going back out there in two months. We need to keep doing that.

The other part of what we're doing is we are convening.... I don't want to exaggerate to make us look like we're the.... We are convening other missions here, particularly for the ones who weren't able to go and who want to go, and we're saying, “Look, if you do go, and we think you should, please ask for this and that.” We were able to get the agenda changed from the first trip to the second trip. They didn't see a school, for example. We just have to keep working together to push that.

There's a commitment from the group of like-minded countries to do that so that we work together to try to get more access, not only for other countries here but more broadly. That's on the ground. We can do a lot, and we will take leadership, if you will, to try to pull that through.

I think the other area is what your committee recommended in your motion, that we are encouraging of this dialogue. Again, I think there are probably diplomatic ways to try to get that moving, but that's a very important issue. I think it has some urgency to it, as I mentioned before.

Many people ask, “Why are you even saying anything, given that you guys are in the doghouse?” I think that doesn't matter. We will always stand up for what we feel and where we are, no matter what the case is.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

That's exactly what I was going to ask you. Is being in the doghouse limiting us in any way from standing up and speaking out about human rights, civil rights and political rights?

[Dominic Barton]

It's not. I can tell you it's not very pleasant. What I have learned in this role is that you play the shock absorber if people get mad. That's okay, though. That's what we do. We cannot be held back on that side. They know we're going to be consistent.

Again, on Xinjiang, on Hong Kong, on Tibet and on global issues, we will have a voice. We're a G7 country. We're an important country that needs to be listened to, no matter what it is, and we'll keep talking.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you, Ambassador.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Oliphant.

We'll start over here with the six-minute round.

Mr. Genuis, you have six minutes, please.