Canada-China Relations Committee on May 3rd, 2021

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

We don't know the future, but we can certainly look back through history and see that free nations have out-competed those that have been closed. I'm not just talking about the 20th century; I'm talking about why China fell at its height, and then fell behind the west. It was because of its system of government.

Professor Evans, you said that person-to-person exchanges are important. Could you explain why that is? I certainly recognize that there's a difference between the citizens of that great country and the politburo in Beijing, but why is it important, when citizens in China can't vote and can't influence the government?

We've seen that when they do speak out, they could lose their job or at times disappear. Why do you think that exchange is so important, when they are in fact powerless to determine the direction of their government, unlike citizens in free countries around the world?

[Prof. Paul Evans]

We need exchanges with many different kinds of Chinese. They can be with cultural associations without always fearing that they're connected with the United Front. Those are real people in all of our ridings and neighbourhoods. We need discussion with top scientists and researchers, as far as we can do that, and we need to train them. We also meet up with Chinese government officials.

The most useful collaboration I've ever had on the Chinese side was with people from their ministry of foreign affairs on how we build multilateral institutions in Asia. These things have to be looked at very carefully on a screen, and what kind of information is being provided, but we need multitiered activities with Chinese colleagues.

It becomes a really difficult problem as to who we shouldn't be working with in China. Is it because they are members of the Chinese Communist Party or because they're connected to the military? Making those distinctions demands an enormous amount of discussion on our side, but also intelligence and due diligence about who those partners are. Often, we don't have it.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Could I ask you both, as I only have a minute left, if institutions need direction for fear that if you do the right thing and hold back research, your competitor in another province or city might not? We actually need standards from Ottawa to ensure that we have fairness toward the active institutions and that everyone is complying with them as well.

[Prof. Gordon Houlden]

I would concur with that as long as those standards are sophisticated and involve back-and-forth between the universities and are not just a diktat from the federal government to an autonomous institution. The risk is not just for another city or another university; the risk is also for another country. Most western countries are deeply engaged, university to university, with China, with all the risks and advantages that this engagement conveys. What is needed is a sophisticated balance of risk and opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you, Mr. Williamson.

We'll go to Ms. Yip for five minutes.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for coming back to this committee.

My question is for Professor Evans.

How do we build multilateral institutions in China? You had just referenced that. Will that help relations with China?

[Prof. Paul Evans]

Getting China into multilateral institutions was a major part of Canadian policy from the time we recognized China, and helped it get into the United Nations. We have to face a whole new challenge in working with the Chinese on multilateralism now.

We don't teach them how to play the game; they are designing the rules for the game. That challenge exists in how we work with them on very difficult issues, like sovereignty over disputed islands in the Arctic. Those are the kinds of matters in which China is a multilateral player with other countries.

We may still, on occasion, have room to influence some of its thinking. I don't think it's preordained that China is on a path to overt supremacy in the world, but it does want to dominate.

Where we see something important, we must not only work with the Chinese bilaterally but also co-operate with our Australian, Singaporean and other friends in having those discussions that are so difficult and that the United States often cannot have because of its overt confrontation.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Where is there room to influence or make changes or maybe even prevent certain actions from China?

[Prof. Paul Evans]

As an academic, I have a lot of difficulty finding ways to influence or have impact even in my own country, in Ottawa, with the people at this table, but if we look at it from the perspective of Chinese short-term and long-term advantages, if we see through their eyes what they want out of peacekeeping, we won't like some of it, but some of what they want to do in peacekeeping we can encourage. That's the thing universities can provide in a way that government-to-government engagement can't. We can spend five years talking with the Chinese group about what they want from the Arctic. Does that add up to influence? Maybe. It's hard to predict, but it's the inevitable path that we must try.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Thank you.

Professor Houlden, it was mentioned that there are 140,000 international students from China here in Canada. Should we continue to open our doors to Chinese international students? Often the cultural exchange is invaluable, and they do boost our economy, but should we be wary of any political influence they may bring or have any concerns about intellectual property being taken?

[Prof. Gordon Houlden]

That's a good question. I actually think the number is closer to 200,000. The PRC embassy says 170,000-plus, and I think that's closer to the truth.

Very quickly, for students, we don't know the effect yet, but roughly a million Chinese students are abroad at any given time. We don't know what the long-term effects of that will be. It took one Chinese person, Sun Yat-sen, to help bring down the Qing dynasty. We don't know what the effect will be of the millions of Chinese who travel abroad and who come to this country. About a third of them stay here and about two-thirds go back. Buried within that are ideas they've been exposed to; young people are rather receptive to new ideas. On balance, I'd say it's a good thing.

However, we don't want our universities to be completely dependent on Chinese funding. That's a given, but on balance, that openness.... We can, I believe, protect intellectual property and protect our national security by perhaps controlling the programs in which some students are allowed to participate, and perhaps only opening them to Canadian nationals or to certain nationalities, but I think closing the door would actually in the long run serve to strengthen the hold of the Communist Party of China on its people. I think that exposure is a good thing.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

On the flip side, what can we do to insulate Chinese international students in Canada from pressure coming from their own consulate or embassy? Witnesses have said in the past that international student activities are heavily monitored for dissent.

[Prof. Gordon Houlden]

I think one of my recommendations was a web portal, run perhaps by one of our security agencies, whereby any student or any professor who felt that there was untoward or undue influence upon them by a foreign government or an individual could approach it, because they're often rather shy about reporting these things, particularly in the case of Chinese culture. There needs to be a way that they can reach out for this to be pushed back. CSIS is a key player in that regard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms. Yip.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Mr. Bergeron, we now go to you for two and a half minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Evans, when you appeared before the committee in February of last year, you had this to say:

I think the coronavirus can be a significant plus or a significant negative in our relationship with China.

That was over a year ago. How would you say the Canada-China relationship has fared this past year?

[Prof. Paul Evans]

Mr. Bergeron, I wish I could give you a positive answer. I would say that some of us had hoped that once we get the three Ms problem solved, difficult as that might be in the time frame, we can revert and go back to where we were and the storm will subside. I've come to the view that we are now in a context not just of a storm with China but that we have entered a new season. Many of the behaviours, the strengths and the tensions that we face from China are going to be with us for a matter of years.

On my worst days, I think that not only have we entered a new season that is going to be colder and last for a while, but that we may see evidence of climate change. If the U.S.-China relationship deteriorates further, if that cold war comes, we are into an entirely new game.

Now, that's well beyond the three Ms problem, but we certainly have entered a new period and we have to scale our expectations accordingly.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Do you think the west has lost the diplomacy battle, given how China has extended its influence around the world, particularly in developing countries in Africa and Asia?

[Prof. Paul Evans]

Yes, unquestionably, but it's not perfectly received. China is not seen as the great benefactor of the world, but they're seen as pretty useful.

It doesn't mean China is going to dominate, but it does mean that China is going to play a much bigger role. The balance of forces is changing. China and other non-western countries are much more important in this multi-polar world than we could have imagined even four or five years ago.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

We now have Mr. Harris for two and a half minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, with regard to concerns that have been raised about academia, CSIS and some U.S. agencies have warned that some Chinese companies and academics are being compelled by their government to share work that they've carried out with western researchers with China's military, security and industrial apparatus. That seems to be an area of potential conflict that has to be resolved.

Would that be one of the things you need to understand more, as academics, before you can accept the fact that there might be some changes?

The second question is more tantalizing.

China's diplomats tell us, as individuals, that there are things on which China and Canada can co-operate and work together, such as fighting climate change. Is that an area where we could, in fact, try to do something positive with China once we resolve the issue of the two Michaels, who need to be repatriated as quickly as possible?

[Prof. Gordon Houlden]

Could I tackle the second question very briefly, Paul?

First, I'd say that there is no solution to climate change without China. They are far and away the largest producer of greenhouse gases. The effects of mercury landing in our north from Chinese coal generation and electricity generating plants is unstoppable without Chinese collaboration and co-operation. We cannot do that on our own, but perhaps with our American and other allies we can reach a consensus internationally with the Chinese to reduce those threats.

Despite the rocky record of COVID-19 originating in China and this failed vaccine, the reality is that 70% of the medical supplies needed to fight COVID in Canada in March and April of last year were arriving from China and 40% of our medical supplies that are necessary to fight COVID are still coming from China. In medical terms, that vast number of doctors is going to be a benefit. My son's hand operates because of Chinese micro-surgery techniques. Medicine should know no boundaries. We need to be open to those collaborations.

Picking carefully, I would say that climate change, environment, health and perhaps some dimensions of culture would be the safe areas where there are good prospects for collaboration once we get beyond the three Ms.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Harris.

Colleagues, I'm going to propose that we end this panel here. I hope Mr. Chong got the answer to his question.