Canada-China Relations Committee on Nov. 9th, 2020

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

We should look into that question, of course.

Is there anything that Canadians might miss in dealing with the Canadian-Chinese relationship that's important to point out?

[Bill Chu]

There is more than one, but one is that in our pluralistic society it is kind of logical to assume that the Chinese Communist Party is just another legitimate political choice, particularly when we see all its economic improvements. However, such an assumption should be thrown out the window when we know that CCP is really a one-party system, as dictated in its own constitution. It does not tolerate political pluralism.

This is why it has been causing so much confusion for so many people, or for the Canadian public anyway. They are confused about this.

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

Thank you. It's important to understand that this is a one-party state.

I would like to go back to Mr. Ho for a second.

As a newspaper man, Mr. Ho, you're very familiar with propaganda and all of that. In eastern Europe, particularly in the Baltic States, there's a lot of concern about Russian influence or Russia attempting to continue to have influence in the Baltic States. These countries go so far as to call it “information warfare”.

Is that too strong a term to use when you're dealing with the Chinese efforts amongst the Chinese community within Canada? Am I overstating that? If it is egregious and, as you say effective, is there something that should be done about it from a legal point of view?

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

In 15 seconds, please. I'm sorry.

[Victor Ho]

Yes. You are totally right. This is a kind misinformation war that's happening and has happened for a few years in Canada, like WeChat and like the Chinese newspapers and the Chinese media here. They are propagating a lot of Chinese messages, but Canada's government does nothing to stop it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much.

Now we will go to Mr. Chong in the second round, for five minutes.

Mr. Chong.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chu and Mr. Ho, thank you for your testimony.

I would like to focus on what has made Hong Kong different from mainland China. One of those things is freedom of the press. It was guaranteed in the international treaty, the 1984 joint declaration, and it's guaranteed in article 27 of the Basic Law and article 16 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights.

My question is for Mr. Ho. As a retired editor-in-chief of the B.C. edition of Sing Tao Daily, do you think freedom of the press in Hong Kong has changed? If so, how?

[Victor Ho]

The answer is that it absolutely has changed. It changed to the opposite side of what was promised by the Sino-British joint declaration.

Hong Kong is now essentially one country and one system, but the government, the Beijing regime, still calls it one country and two systems, making a false statement to make their political agenda still work, because they try to trick the international society.

Hong Kong was the same as 1997, but totally changed after last July. The national security law is overriding all common laws in Hong Kong—overriding—with no more validity for Hong Kong law to execute if the officials use the national security law. It is supranational.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

How is freedom of the press being limited in Hong Kong? Is it self-censorship, such as avoiding the coverage of topics like the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre? Is it moving coverage critical of Beijing to the back pages, away from the front pages? Can you tell us a little bit about how this freedom of the press is being limited?

[Victor Ho]

The limitation is so obvious. You cannot publish work or news reports contrary to the new SL. Take journalists like Ms. Choy at Radio Television Hong Kong. She was just arrested a few days ago because she made a documentary on the police where, again, the police were against us in a collaboration to beat ordinary citizens in Hong Kong last year.

The RTHK journalist's arrest gives a chilling effect to all the other journalists: Don't do such things to disclose negatives about the government or the officials.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Has the change in ownership in newspapers in Hong Kong affected freedom of the press? In particular, I'm thinking about the South China Morning Post. It was purchased by Alibaba, a mainland company, in April 2016. Has that change in ownership changed the editorial independence of the South China Morning Post?

[Victor Ho]

The answer is yes. This was a long-time change since 1997. My ex-boss is Sing Tao Daily's president. The Hong Kong Sing Tao Daily chairman is a very important political consultative member in China.

They changed the boss. They changed the news manager of the editorial department. Then the whole thing changed. The pro-Beijing message became the mainstream message of the newspaper. This is a very effective and very normal mode of business in Hong Kong. Change your boss, change the investor, and then the editorial line changes accordingly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Ho and Mr. Chong.

We will now continue with Mr. Dubourg for five minutes.

[Emmanuel Dubourg, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm very pleased to have the floor.

Mr. Bill Chu and Mr. Victor Ho, thank you for being here and participating in our committee meeting.

I'd like to direct my first question to Mr. Chu, since he is the founder of Canadians for Reconciliation. I am currently in Montreal, in the province of Quebec. Here as well, there is a large population of Chinese-Canadians.

Does your organization have contacts with these persons in Quebec? Do they inform you of security problems? Are there any members from Quebec in your organization?

[Bill Chu]

Thank you for asking. We are a very small group, and have been active in B.C. only. Our focus, as I mentioned, is more than just the Chinese. We actually devote a lot of our time to the indigenous community. That is fairly well known by the media as well as, I guess, observers out there.

In terms of our concern in all this, really, China's bottom line is not just about Canada; it's about imposing a new world order around the world. I think we need to bear that in perspective. Although we are probably from different provinces, we need to take a bigger picture and understand why China behaved the way it did. Some of the things we are seeing have been progressing quite severely, in our observation. This is why hopefully we can together make some changes.

[Emmanuel Dubourg, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Thank you very much.

I know you were with Mr. Ho in July 2020, when you made this statement and presented its recommendations. In fact, you sent us a part of your statement and its 15 recommendations. You mentioned Huawei and the two Michaels, among other things. You listed a number of measures.

First, what impact might these 15 recommendations have on the current situation in Hong Kong?

Second, you leave me with the impression that Canada is not doing enough to take leadership in this crisis. Am I right?

[Victor Ho]

What I recommend is mainly with regard to the Chinese media and the political interference by foreign governments. My main concern is with our Canadian values and whether these Chinese media uphold our universal values. My concern is with media professionals in Canada in terms of our national interests.

We speak out regarding a government other than Canada's. This is my main point. So what is our audience? Our audience should be in Canada, in our society. We have to think of their right to information and then exclude any government directives or interference, because we are serving Canadians. That is my concern. The government should try to make it very clear that whether you are ethnic Chinese or ethnic Syrian or ethnic French, it doesn't matter, but if you live here, please do things that Canada appreciates.

I tried to alert Ottawa to do something, to prevent our national interests being captured by other governments.

[Emmanuel Dubourg, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I will now give the floor to Mr. Bergeron for two and a half minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I want to begin by thanking the people here today for their insightful comments and for their courage in testifying before our committee. I am very grateful to them.

I want to come back to the matter of the Internet. We spoke about Huawei and the 5G network with Mr. Chu a few moments ago. We also talked about WeChat, which is apparently controlled by China.

I'd like to talk about HK Leaks, which reveals information about opponents of the Beijing regime and is apparently hosted on a Russian server. Perhaps you don't have this information, but the question is, first of all, whether Canadian citizens living in Hong Kong have been the subject of such denunciations on this site and whether Canadians, on Canadian territory, have also been denounced on this site.

What do you think of such a tool? Do you think there will be more of them? What can be done to limit the scope of such a denunciatory tool from the Chinese regime?

[Bill Chu]

I'm just trying to see whether the question is about the security of some of the platforms used by some of the Hong Kong protesters. Is that the question?

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

No. On the contrary, my question was about the platforms used by the governments of Hong Kong and the People's Republic of China to denounce the protesters.

[Bill Chu]

I'm not familiar with the one you mention, but obviously on the Internet we see all kinds of information, misinformation or disinformation, irrespective of whatever platform it is. This is the period, I feel, where the government can do more education for Canadians. Hopefully, the information you gather will be shared, not just among those in Parliament, but also with the general public, because the risk is certainly widespread.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chu.

Thank you very much, Mr. Bergeron.

Now we have Mr. Harris for two minutes and 30 seconds.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to return to Mr. Ho for a moment.

You talked about the direct voice of the ambassador and other spokespersons on behalf of Beijing. Another vehicle used, apparently, to influence actions within Canada by China, according to some of the witnesses, is the United Front Work Department. Is this something that you can tell us much about in terms of its operations, based on your experience as a newspaper editor for many years? Is that something you've investigated or written about or that your papers have written about, and what can you tell us about it?