Canada-China Relations Committee on June 7th, 2021

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I understood 10 and a half minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

We won't get an answer to that question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I may be to blame. I did not express myself well.

Now we will go to Mr. Harris for two minutes and 30 seconds, please.

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

That was clear. I thought it was 10 minutes as well, Mr. Chair, but I'll have to settle for two and a half.

Mr. Garneau, the security issue comes to light every now and then. Before our committee, we've heard some security concerns about equipment being used or contracted by the Government of Canada. Nuctech, for example, has a standing offer for X-ray equipment in our embassies. In Beijing, our immigration department contracted a company being operated by the Beijing police to look after collecting data for immigration visas. You mentioned the 43 export permits being denied to China these last number of years. Is it fair to say that in the past we took less seriously these issues of security with respect to China? Is that something that the government is prepared to admit, or is everything going according to plan all the way down the line?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Well, in a general way, as I've said, our policies with respect to China are evolving. I can't speak in detail about specific things that happened prior to my arrival.

I will say, on the Nuctech situation, that we have said very clearly that we have not purchased any equipment from Nuctech and we will not use the Nuctech standing offer. However, we did learn from that. We did learn that we need to identify opportunities for improvement with respect to future procurement of security equipment. We've been public about that. We're taking action to implement improvements to the procurement process that were recommended in the review related to that.

With regard to the visa application centre, we're acutely aware of the risks of operating in any foreign environment. We have a rigorous procurement process, led by PSPC, for our contracts abroad. The role of the visa application centre in the immigration system is limited to logistical and administrative support. IRCC officials closely monitor the activities of the visa application centres to ensure that strict privacy standards, as detailed in the contract, are met. We have a lot of proof to show that we monitor this very carefully, so—

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

—we are not concerned about VFS Global in China.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Harris.

We have a few minutes left. I guess we have time for four minutes for Mr. Williamson and four for Mr. Oliphant.

Mr. Williamson, you have four minutes.

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

Thank you.

It's good to see you, Minister Garneau.

Mr. Garneau, the House of Commons was notified by the law clerk that the minority Liberal government has refused to comply with an order of the House asking that all uncensored records on the firing of the two scientists from Winnipeg's National Microbiology Laboratory be provided to the Speaker. Minister, I thought you were a democrat. This response from your government is surprising: You're going to ignore an order from Parliament to produce these documents. Why is that?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Williamson.

Yes, I'm a proud democrat, but you will also understand that we have a responsibility as a government to ensure we don't jeopardize certain information that touches on privacy and commercial privacy and may also have security implications. That is why Minister Hajdu offered to send all of the unredacted information to the NSICOP, which is the ideal committee to examine it in detail and includes members from your party.

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

Do you think, then, that parliamentarians are incapable of safeguarding those concerns you raised, that the measures put in place whereby House officials review them to ensure they're not released are inadequate, that the House is not up to the job?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Mr. Williamson, you'll recall—because you and I were there, under the Harper government—when we were seeking all sorts of information about things that had happened in Afghanistan. We made similar arguments. It's probably very natural to make those arguments, but in the end, because of security requirements, it was not possible to share unredacted information on those matters with the committee.

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

That's very true. In fact, Speaker Milliken urged parliamentarians to be cautious. The order that was passed in the House last week did just that. It didn't call for those documents to be released immediately. Rather, they were to be sent for review, first by the law clerk and then by others who would review them to ensure the issues they dealt with—criminal probes, privacy and national security—weren't compromised, so you're wrong on that. The motion addressed the concerns. This is an example of the government not complying with the democratic will of the House of Commons.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

In fact, you just described what normally happens before documents make it to a committee. They are examined by government officials—not by politicians—who make decisions about which information has to be redacted. That's the normal process.

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

You see no difference, then, between Parliament and the Government of Canada reviewing them. To you, it's just one big entity and it does not matter that accountability safeguards are in place and that parliamentarians are in a position to review these documents.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Well, that's precisely why the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians was created. I think it is a rather elegant solution.

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

It serves the government's, not Parliament's, interest, because it is—

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

No, it's all of Parliament.

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

—in fact reporting to a committee that reports not to Parliament but to the Prime Minister. These members can be removed by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister can change the report. It is not arm's length; it is actually an instrument of the Prime Minister, not of Parliament.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

You know, it is different from the standing committees, but because of security implications, it is also important to find an acceptable way to do it. I think that the NSICOP is the right way to do it.

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

Then the Liberal members on this committee who voted for the process in the House were wrong to have voted that way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you, Mr. Williamson. Thank you very much. We'll go on now to Mr. Oliphant for four minutes please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you again, Minister, deputy and officials for being with us.

On that last topic, it might be important to remind the committee that it is established so that the government, whether majority or minority, always has a minority on that committee. Thus, the Liberal government will have only five out of 11 possible members on the committee. This is something we fought for when the Harper government refused any parliamentary oversight on any security issues.

That's just Rob needing to get in there with that lived experience.

Minister, you have said that the China of today is different from five years ago. It is. One thing that has been required of you is to work multilaterally and to work with like-minded and sometimes even unlike-minded countries to find a way to deal with China. When it came to Hong Kong, our government issued many statements with the EU, the U.S., the U.K. and others. Recently you were at the G7 meeting of finance and foreign ministers, and a statement on the Uighurs and the horrendous situation in Xinjiang came out. You are also working on arbitrary detention. I'm kind of giving you a bit of a smorgasbord. Those are just examples of the leadership roles and the collegial roles you are taking on with respect to arbitrary detention.

I would like your thoughts on this way of working.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you very much for the question and for the precision on the NSICOP composition as well.

We believe that if we are to transmit a message to China, that message, broadly speaking, is that we all operate on this planet according to international rules-based law and that it is not acceptable to practice coercive diplomacy between countries. Fortunately, our like-minded partners, such as members of the G7 and in particular our closest ally, the United States, feel the same way.

It is certainly not acceptable to arbitrarily detain innocent civilians from another country because you have a difference of opinion on a particular issue with that country. Sure, we can have differences of opinion with China, but you don't resolve those by imprisoning citizens from the other country. China is not the only country that is guilty of that, but it is an example.

We believe that if we act together multilaterally, we send a stronger message. That's essentially it. There was a very big section in the communiqué from the foreign ministers of the G7 when we met in London. You will probably see a similar important section when the leaders meet in Cornwall next week.

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

Do you know how many countries have signed on to this declaration that Canada has led the way on?