Canada-China Relations Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Time flies when you're in good company.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Now we go to Mr. Harris for six minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, you alluded to the human rights situations involving other countries. We do know that China is very active at the United Nations in undermining—with countries that are members of the United Nations—our notion and our understanding of the rule of law and our understanding of human rights in that context, making it very difficult for us to work at gaining other partners.

I want to know what steps or measures Canada is taking to do something about that. Is there a coordinated response being planned or under active consideration at the United Nations to deal with that issue, country by country if necessary, and to change that view? We know that they have a lot of influence there in the United Nations. Washington, of late, has been very reluctant to even support such an institution.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I think we should all be proud, as parliamentarians, that Ambassador Rae has been doing that. I think some of you would have seen his comments defending our values and our governance model, because we've seen during the pandemic in many instances, not just with respect to that country, some other authoritarian regimes that have tried to undermine the democratic system.

Therefore, when I said that we will compete, I think this is a place where.... And I want to salute and to thank Ambassador Rae for the work he is doing on behalf of all Canadians. We have seen him standing up, explaining that the governance model that we defend and the values [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

We heard him say “the governance model that we defend and the values”. That's where it stopped.

When we get the minister back here, when he is unfrozen, we'll tell him that.

Minister, we heard you say “the governance model that we defend and the values” and then you froze. Could you go on from there, if you don't mind?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Okay. I'll try to be as eloquent as I was trying to be in the first place.

I was just saying that we have seen Ambassador Rae defending, at the United Nations in New York, the governance and the values and principles that are dear to Canadians and to Canada, and human rights, which are a core principle.

When I say that we will be competing, I think that's a good example, and I think we should all be thankful to Ambassador Rae, who is someone who is standing up and speaking up in defence of our governance model at the United Nations.

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

Minister, recently the Chinese foreign ministry spokesman stressed that the Sino-British declaration was really a dead letter, that it ceased after the handover and that they have no role to play in the future of Hong Kong. That seems to be their view, and we are at an impasse with respect to that and with the national security law and the standoff that's occurring there.

Is it the case that the “one country, two systems” is also a dead letter, and is there any hope for that to be maintained or changed? What measures must be taken by countries such as Canada and our friends to ensure that this could happen?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

First, with respect to the Sino-British declaration, I think this is part of an international agreement that has been registered with the United Nations. When we're calling—and you've seen the G7 in our statement—we refer to the Sino-British declaration in saying that's part of the international legal obligations that China needs to abide by.

I think you've seen me, Mr. Harris, on a number of occasions expressing concerns when it comes to Hong Kong. First of all, we have a vested interest. We have 300,000 Canadians who are still living in Hong Kong.

Also, what I was saying and what we have been saying with the Five Eyes, with the United Kingdom, is that we are concerned that the imposition of a national security law is undermining one of the pillars that have made Hong Kong what it is today, a vibrant city, a global hub for finance and trade. Once you start eroding freedom and liberties, you're eroding one of the key pillars.

Yes, I am concerned about the future of the concept of “one country, two systems” because we've seen a number of erosions of that principle. That's what the international community has been saying to our Chinese counterpart.

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

How much time do I have, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

You have one minute and 30 seconds.

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

Thank you.

The issue, then, becomes, what do we do next? You say you're building relationships with other countries and that they are interested in this. We have talk of Magnitsky sanctions; we have recommendations from our subcommittee on human rights, and our committee is going to make some recommendations, which we don't know yet.

The next step has to be some sort of action that is meaningful to China. I am wondering when your work with other countries is going to come to that, or are we just going to be expressing concern and doing things like that? Will that have any impact on China if we're not going to take action?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I think we have taken action, Mr. Harris. The first is that we suspended the extradition treaty. We suspended the export of sensitive equipment. We updated our travel advisory. We issued a number of immigration measures, just like the United Kingdom and Australia, and the United States has been taking other measures.

I think you've seen, as the international community and as the Five Eyes in particular, that we have taken a number of actions. We will continue to consult, because—again, to your question, Mr. Chong—China is evolving, so our foreign policy needs to evolve in light of the circumstances that we are presented with.

I think the answer, and the key takeaway for Canadians watching at home tonight, is that the smart way to deal with these issues is to work alongside the international community.

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you, Mr. Harris, and thank you, Minister.

Now we'll go on to the second round.

I have Mr. Williamson. Is that correct?

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

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, it's good to see you this evening. Thank you for joining us.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, sir.

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

Are you worried that China doesn't take your government seriously? It's been two years now that the two Michaels have been imprisoned. Last October, the Canada China Business Council celebrated the 50th anniversary of relations between our two countries by calling on the government not to release the Canadians who were detained, but to release Meng Wanzhou.

What keeps you up at night, or why are you convinced that your approach to China is correct?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

First of all, to speak your question, yes, I do think that the Chinese authorities take us seriously, Mr. Williamson. I have had a number of meetings with my Chinese counterpart. If you looked at the length of time I've been minister and the number of times I've had interactions with my Chinese counterpart, you would draw the conclusion that we are taken seriously. My last meeting with my Chinese counterpart was two hours, in Rome. By international standards, that's a long meeting.

I can assure you, we had a number of topics to discuss about human rights, but obviously my top priority is to bring Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor home, to seek clemency for Mr. Schellenberg, to stand up for Canadian interests and values, to [Technical difficulty—Editor].

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

Why are you reluctant, then...?

Oh, I think we're frozen here, Chairman. Can you just pause the clock until we get the minister back?

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Minister, we were frozen there for a moment.

Mr. Williamson was about to ask another question, so I'll let him continue.

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

Why are you reluctant even on half-measures? You dismissed outright or you fobbed off Mr. Chong's question about a foreign agent registry act. Why the reluctance to bring in an act of that type or, for example, a law disallowing Canadian companies' sourcing of products in Xinjiang? Even these measures, which I think would have broad support, you seem to resist.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I don't think Canadians watching, Mr. Williamson, would at all see me resisting much tonight. What I'm saying is that I'm willing to work with this committee. I've said that all along. I think you do important work. If Mr. Chong and the committee want to do a study on the registry, we will certainly be taking a look at that.

We have taken decisive measures. When I suspended the extradition treaty between Canada and Hong Kong—the first country in the world to do so—I think by international standards people would say that's pretty decisive.

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

It has not produced results, though. It's a lot of meetings, a lot of talk.

Let me ask you about your colleague John McKay, who in the House of Commons the other day pointed out that there are 163 accredited diplomats in Canada from the People's Republic of China. The United States, by contrast, has 146, and the United Kingdom has 22.

Given China's course of diplomacy—what even some Chinese embassy officials call “wolf warrior diplomacy”—does this high number of Chinese diplomatic officials in Canada and the work they are doing on behalf of their country concern you?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

What I'm concerned about—and I think I'm not alone, Mr. Williamson; I think you and members of this committee are too—is foreign interference by state and non-state actors. That's why I've said that we are taking a number of measures and are always looking at measures. We are consulting with the Five Eyes. We're well aware of this.

I trust our intelligence agencies in Canada to make sure they take all the necessary steps to protect the safety and security of Canadians. I've also invited Canadians to report to their local police authorities any acts of intimidation so they can be properly investigated and prosecuted.

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

Except that the problem we learned about from immigration officials last week is that, short of a criminal conviction, individuals who hold visas can't actually be removed.... I'll come back to that later.

As you know, Minister, Canadians expect their members of Parliament and ministers of the Crown to uphold the highest standards of ethics and accountability while in office. It is in that context that I ask these questions.

It has come to my attention that you own shares—pardon me, you owned shares—of Immervision, which were held in a blind trust. Immervision produces and licenses technology used in cameras produced by Hikvision, which reports have said is supplying surveillance equipment used by China's state authorities in monitoring Uighurs in detention camps in Xinjiang, and in other gross human rights violations.

It has also come to our attention that these shares were sold. Did you direct anyone or participate in any discussion concerning the sale of these shares?