Evidence of meeting #15 for Canada-China Relations in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was interference.
A video is available from Parliament.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, As an Individual
We can have investigations for years it seems in this country and they never seem to lead to any successful conclusion.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
No, but you just implied that we do not have investigations here in Canada.
Do you know that to be true?
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, As an Individual
Investigations are only useful if you can actually prosecute in the end.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
No, no. You suggested that there are no investigations going on here.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, As an Individual
That is not what I suggested because the RCMP has publicly stated that there are.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
It is what you implied; it is absolutely. You said in America they were investigating, which implies that we're not investigating these cases here.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, As an Individual
We have evidence of indictments in the United States. I would like to see evidence of indictments in Canada and successful prosecution. That's the litmus test.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
That's very different. No, no, now you're going from investigations to indictments.
Again, I really have to say this is very frustrating. This is a very serious issue. We want to deal with this in a very serious manner. Insinuations don't really help the members of this committee.
Is it your assertion, sir, that the U.S. entered into the agreement with Australians and the Brits on the submarines because they had lost faith in Canada?
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, As an Individual
The object of criminal intelligence is to lead to successful prosecution. We would like to see more—
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Mr. Genuis asked if you thought the Americans were concerned and whether that is part of the reason we're not part of the AUKUS agreement. In response to his question, you referred to some report you had seen that suggested there may have been some concerns.
But that had nothing to do with AUKUS, did it?
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, As an Individual
It appears that the government does not seem too concerned about being left out of AUKUS.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Thank you. You essentially answered that question as well by saying “it appears”. Thank you for that.
If I could to Ms. Harth, thank you very much for your testimony.
We were talking about the reaction of various countries to these police service stations. I think two countries stood out. I think it was Ireland and another country.
In your opinion, what is the right way to react to these secret police stations?
Campaign Director, Fundacion Safeguard Defenders
The first one is obviously what a lot of countries have done, which is calling out publicly and immediately the fact that these are illegal. That is something Canada has done.
The second is to launch investigations, which may take some time. This is again what is happening in Canada and a growing number of democratic nations around the world. As was pointed out earlier, some of them have ordered the closure of these stations. Again, while we think that in terms of public messaging that is very valuable, it does not solve the actual issue.
In terms of policy recommendations beyond the ongoing investigations, one is to look beyond the addresses. This is not just about a single address. This is about the networks of individuals and organizations running these and similar organizations running similar operations even if there is not officially a police station. It is crucial that all investigations really go into the wider United Front activities, both to counter transnational repression and also those other influence operations.
We really call on allied democracies to face this common threat together. This is pretty new for most countries. We need a coordinated framework, for example, to start from the G7 to define transnational repression, share intelligence and best counter-practices. It could even include the potential adoption...because the issue of indictments and prosecution was pointed out. That is an issue that, for example, the U.S. authorities are also dealing with. Just this week a bipartisan proposal for a legislative framework on transnational repression was put forward exactly to adopt the kind of criminal clauses and legal framework that may be necessary to counter that repression.
These are some of the steps to be taken.
My apologies.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken Hardie
Thank you, Ms. Harth.
I know it's difficult to hold answers to the time, because there's so much information brimming up inside.
We have a little bit of extra time in the second panel, so we will conclude this round first with Mr. Trudel for two and a half minutes and then with Ms. McPherson for two and a half minutes.
Mr. Trudel, the floor is yours.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Thank you.
I would again like to thank all the witnesses for their testimony. The discussion is extremely interesting.
I am going to put the same question to Mr. Leuprecht and Mr. Chantal.
For the last two or three weeks, we have been witnessing a sad spectacle. The government is playing for time while everyone in Canada—parliamentarians, many journalists and opinion makers—are calling on the government to institute an independent investigation to get to the bottom of things, in view of everything we have learned.
Do you think the government is playing for time by appointing a special rapporteur who is close to the government and close to China?
Don't you think it would be preferable to institute an independent inquiry immediately?
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, As an Individual
It seems to me that before announcing that a rapporteur had been appointed, the government could have made sure that all parties in Parliament agreed on the choice of the rapporteur and all agreed on the rapporteur's impartiality.
Unfortunately, the government chose to do things differently, as was the case for the study done by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, or NSICOP.
The government could make an exception and say that NSICOP could present its study not to the executive but to Parliament, and Parliament could decide the content of the study and the scope of the report to be presented to Parliament.
I believe the government has means available to it to ensure impartiality, apart from a public inquiry.
Bloc
Associate Professor of Political Science, Université de Moncton, As an Individual
It may be that the government is trying to gain a bit of time. However, there is also no assurance that if a public inquiry were instituted, it would produce the right result. I think that on this question, we also have to allow the authorities here in Canada time to do their work. When the time comes, we will be able to determine what kind of additional decision to make.
As well, Canada is being pressured by the United States, which is in direct competition with China. There is a danger here, however. We have seen it in the past, for example in the case of Iraq in 2003. Colin Powell, as the representative of the United States, went to the United Nations, the UN, to say there were weapons of mass destruction. We later realized that there were none. So there is a tendency to exaggerate the Chinese threat and not give the authorities in place time to act. The threat exists, but we have to be careful to make the right decisions.
Nor is hysteria about China what is going to enable us to address the Chinese threat properly.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken Hardie
Thank you very much, Mr. Trudel.
Now we go to Ms. McPherson for two and a half minutes.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Harth, I want to dig in a little bit more into what our next steps should be and give you a little bit more time there. Before I do that, I want to point out, which I think is important to get on the record, that when we hear the phrase “police stations” or “overseas Chinese police stations”, perhaps that's a misnomer. I think you brought that up. It's not an address. It's not a location. It is a bigger thing. They've been described to me as “clandestine hubs” for foreign influence activities, as these locations should not be understood within conventional understanding of policing activities.
You spoke about the registry's not being, perhaps, a useful mechanism. You've spoken about the need for community outreach and the adoption of a framework. Are there any other things this committee needs to hear from you about what we should be doing next?
Campaign Director, Fundacion Safeguard Defenders
I actually have one last initial recommendation listed—
Campaign Director, Fundacion Safeguard Defenders
—so I thank you for giving me the opportunity to point it out.
Let me just point out that I don't want to say the registry might not be useful. I just think that, as a stand-alone solution, it's not a solution, right? It must be part of a wider framework of options.
My last recommendation would actually be, aside from those already said, that together with allies.... This also goes back a bit to the questions asked by Mr. Chong on international institutions. Canada has the Magnitsky human rights act. Together with allies, you should consider sanctions on the PRC institutions and officials responsible for these transnational repression efforts, starting with that Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and the Ministry for Public Security, recalling that these two institutions are responsible not only for these transnational repressions and illegal policing activities on foreign soil, but also for crimes against humanity and even genocide inside China. It's high time that we started holding these individuals and institutions to account, and definitely interrupt all co-operation, be it with international institutions or at a bilateral level.
NDP