Canada-China Relations Committee on Oct. 4th, 2022

[Dr. Lynette Ong]

I think very stringent COVID restrictions have had various impacts on the Chinese economy. I think, number one, it sends bad signals to foreign investors, such as the president of the European Chamber of Commerce who has been making almost weekly press statements, saying how it has actually impacted European businesses and their business confidence in China.

Over the last decade, due to rising labour costs and various costs such as economic de-coupling, companies have been moving their factories abroad and away from China, and that has happened constantly. I think with zero COVID restrictions and how enduring that has been, the trend has definitely been accelerated.

On a much broader scale, I think foreign businesses read that as emblematic of economic policies that are coming out from Xi Jingping's regime—economic policies that are no longer pro business, which are becoming more and more nonsensical just for the sake of maintaining social control. That is coming as a trade-off to business friendliness.

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

You do not see these COVID restrictions lifting any time soon, whether it's for social control or for health?

[Dr. Lynette Ong]

No. I think a year ago, if you had taken a straw poll of China observers, people would have said that those restrictions might be lifted after the Party Congress, but I think the consensus now is that, more or less, the restrictions wouldn't be lifted any time soon.

I think these COVID restrictions are just a sign of the nature of policies that have been formulated and implemented by Xi's regime lately.

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

In your opening statement you mentioned that President Xi was reducing the role of entrepreneurs. Why is that?

[Dr. Lynette Ong]

In very simple terms, also for the reasons of increasing state control.

China has always been described as one of state advancement, and the private sector's role being reduced. This is for increasing political control, maintaining social control, and then the party being suspicious of the outside role of entrepreneurs, particularly tech entrepreneurs.

We have seen Jack Ma and various IPOs of big tech firms from China, and how they have been de-listed over the past year.

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

Thank you.

Ms. Calverley, would you like to finish the rest of your opening statement?

[Aileen Calverley]

This is what we saw in the recent federal election, where the United Front used WeChat to spread misinformation regarding parliamentarians critical of the CCP in a number of ridings to influence the outcome of the election.

Canada must stand firm in our resolve in providing Hong Kongers with a safe route out of the city and to safeguard their rights, freedoms and security once they are on Canadian soil.

Thank you.

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

What steps do you feel that the Canadian government can take to encourage ethical investing?

[Aileen Calverley]

There are two sides we need to consider: the first is legislation, the second is country risk analysis. For example, let me talk about country risk analysis first. I think, a year ago—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken Hardie]

Excuse me again, Ms. Calverley, but we are out of time for Ms. Yip's round. Hold that thought, I'm sure you'll have an opportunity to finish that one too. Thank you very much.

[Gordon Houlden]

I'd like to go to Monsieur Bergeron for six minutes or less.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would first like to express my enormous thanks to our witnesses for being here this evening. I want to thank them for participating in the exercise, even at this late hour, and informing our discussions of Canada-China relations.

When the former ambassador of Canada to China, Dominic Barton, appeared before the committee on February 5, 2020, he said that relations between the two countries had fundamentally changed in December 2018 and the chill was real.

My question for the three witnesses is very simple: is it your feeling that since the end of the Meng Wanzhou case and the release of the two Michaels, the relationship between the two countries has improved, or are we still in that sort of crisis situation that does not seem to want to right itself?

[Gordon Houlden]

Perhaps I will speak first.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Yes, do go ahead Mr. Houlden.

[Gordon Houlden]

Thank you.

My impression is that the situation has changed, but very little. There is still little contact with high-level visitors, scientists and businesspeople. There is no longer a crisis as there was before; rather, there is a situation in which progress is stagnant and there is a lack of trust on both sides. Above all, there is distrust of China on the part of the Canadian public and there are markedly negative attitudes between the two countries.

[Dr. Lynette Ong]

Thank you for the question.

Has it changed? Largely no. If you look at the latest Pew Research poll that polls societal views of China, I don't think it has actually recovered, and that is very much in line with the popular opinion poll results of many western societies. People have a lack of trust of China. I don't think things have gone back to normal.

Speaking in a personal capacity, I used to teach a course in China on a Chinese campus. We have no plans of returning to China anytime soon, because things.... You know, there has been a scar, and we know the root cause of the scar. I don't think the root cause has actually gone away, even though the two Michaels have been released.

[Aileen Calverley]

Releasing the two Michaels has not changed anything. Actually, many Canadians want to know what happened to the two Michaels, but since they've returned, it's been quiet. In our hearts, the scars are there. They were never repaired. For Canadian and Chinese relations to mend, or continue, Beijing needs to do a lot of work. For now, with the situation in Russia and Ukraine, we start to worry about Taiwan.

This is not a period of time when we feel safe to visit, for example, Hong Kong, to visit Taiwan or to visit China. I think there's still a lot of work to be done to mend the relationship.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you very much.

On March 21, 2022, the American State Department announced new visa restrictions on representatives of the government of the People's Republic of China. The statement by the State Department called on the PRC government, and I quote, to end its genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, repressive policies in Tibet, crackdown on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong, and human rights violations and abuses, including violations of religious freedoms, elsewhere in the country.

My question is very simple: when our closest ally and trading partner is speaking openly of genocide in Xinjiang, how do you explain the Government of Canada's timidity about applying that term to the situation in Xinjiang?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken Hardie]

We have time for one answer, Mr. Bergeron. To whom do you wish to direct your question?

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I would ask Mr. Houlden the question.

[Gordon Houlden]

The word “genocide” is the strongest one of all. Even the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights spoke of “crimes against humanity” in the report he produced after his visit.

If we are talking about genocide in the sense of the repression of a minority, I agree. If we are talking about genocide in the sense of the physical elimination of a group, we have to distinguish the genocide in Xinjiang from the genocide of the Jews in Europe. That may be a technical point.

Even though the United States has limited visits by Chinese officials, the President of the United States is going to have a meeting with the President of China. We can strongly criticize the people who are directly associated with the repressive actions and human rights violations and deny them visas, but I think we have to maintain contacts and private conversations with high- or mid-level PRC officials.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken Hardie]

Thank you, Professor Houlden.

[Gordon Houlden]

We now have Ms. McPherson for six minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here. Again, it is very late, and I'm very grateful that you've agreed to be with us. It's perhaps a little less late for Dr. Houlden at the University of Alberta, which is, of course, the university that I went to.

Mr. Houlden, I was going to start with you, if I could. You talked a little bit about the diplomatic failures. It was nine or 10 months that we didn't have an ambassador. But I think it's a larger discussion around Canada and Canada's diplomatic commitments, I guess, to diplomacy. In my opinion, we have privileged trade over development, over diplomacy for far too long.

Can you talk a little bit about what that stagnation looks like, what that lack of investment in our relationship has been and the impacts that have resulted because we have not had an ambassador?

[Gordon Houlden]

First of all, I'd say that Jim Nickel, our chargé d’affaires, whom I know very well and who is now going off to Taipei, has done a stellar job in the absence of an ambassador.

Having an ambassador is symbolically important, but it is substantively important as well. It allows better access to Beijing now—not great access but better access. An ambassador is not just there to eat canapés and go for cocktails. An ambassador is there to go in and deliver tough messages, and also, through his or her contacts—her contacts in the case of Jennifer May—to provide Ottawa with great advice.

One request I would have, though, is to keep the expectations on Madam May reasonable. We're sending a talented official. I know her well. She worked for me when I was in Beijing when she was a junior officer. Let's keep our expectations modest. Do not expect her to make a substantive difference in the conditions in Xinjiang. Do not expect her to solve our consular hangover in Hong Kong. If we keep our expectations modest but know that she will be there to provide a strong voice for Canada when we are unhappy....

It may be a private voice. I don't actually believe in loudspeaker diplomacy when it comes to an ambassador in place like Beijing, but, heavens, we have an ambassador in Moscow of all places where there's a war going on.

Let's get an ambassador there. I'm sure she'll be there very soon. Keep expectations modest, but a Canadian voice is necessary, as is a uniquely Canadian evaluation of the situation so that we're not just depending on our allies. I think that's important.