Evidence of meeting #7 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 lot.
A video is available from Parliament.
8:20 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Miller, you talked about the fact that technology is the gas that runs the Chinese economy, and obviously we're all very aware of that. Could you talk a little bit about the value of Canada's divesting or diversifying, I guess—the two Ds, divesting and diversifying—from technology with China but also increasing our own production of some of those vital technology pieces?
8:20 p.m.
Director and Senior Fellow, Indo-Pacific Program, Macdonald-Laurier Institute
Thank you for the excellent question.
I think there are two pieces to this. There are the critical components of technology—semiconductors, etc., and quantum technology—but there are also the components that drive that as well, which are the critical and raw materials. There are two sides to this sort of coin.
Canada has an abundance of those critical and raw materials, but we haven't done the same sort of job at extracting those materials and refining those materials. I think where we are right now versus where we could be in the future is very different. I think we could be a superpower on these issues, if we choose to be.
The second part of that—and Neo Lithium is just one clear example—is that we need to have a broader view of national security when it comes to our investments in critical and raw materials. We need to focus not just on Canadian soil but also on Canadian intellectual property and companies, even if they're abroad.
8:20 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you.
I'll ask Mr. Massie if he'd like to contribute to that as well.
8:20 p.m.
Full Professor, Université du Québec à Montréal, and Co-Director, Network for Strategic Analysis, As an Individual
Yes, absolutely. In order to limit the vulnerability of Canadian businesses, we have to strengthen their resilience. We should invest in infrastructure as a way of doing so. One of the reasons that explains why the Canadian mining sector is underdeveloped is that we lack the necessary infrastructure to get to the mining regions, which are, of course, very often far from our urban areas. One of the Chinese strategies is to invest in marine infrastructure, as well as in the mining sectors of foreign countries when the host countries don't invest enough.
If Canada had a much stronger and much more generous investment strategy, that would limit the risk of being forced to look to foreign investment such as that being offered by the Chinese. This would allow us to develop a Canadian industrial policy that is not simply limited to exporting natural resources, but which would also include some processing in Canada in order to create high-paying jobs.
8:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken Hardie
We have ten minutes before the vote. We would have time for one more question from each side, if anybody has an additional question they'd like to ask.
Go ahead, Mr. Chong.
8:20 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question for Mr. Berkshire Miller.
Many people believe that Beijing will invade Taiwan over the next three to four years. If that happens, what do you think the U.S. response will be to that invasion? Will it be primarily a military response? Will it be a response similar to that on Russia's invasion of Ukraine—in other words, an economic-based response? What will that response be, and what impact will that have on Canada?
8:20 p.m.
Director and Senior Fellow, Indo-Pacific Program, Macdonald-Laurier Institute
I think that's a crucial question. I'll try to answer as briefly as possible.
At the end of the day, it depends on what sort of contingency it is. I think China has learned a lot of lessons from Russia's war in Ukraine. If we expect an armada of Chinese ships to show up and do a full-scale invasion of the main island of Taiwan, I don't think that's how the contingency is going to play out. I think they are going to work in a "grey zone" and take a couple of islands around Taiwan first. I mention that because that's premised on the idea that they want to make it more difficult politically for the United States to make the decision to intervene.
I think a lot of it depends on the Chinese. If the Chinese engage in a full-scale assault on the main island of Taiwan, I think that the United States—I don't want to say they have no choice—is very likely to engage. If they pick off small islands like Kinmen Islands or Penghu Islands, it makes it a little more challenging for the United States to make that determination.
8:25 p.m.
Liberal
8:25 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I only want to say that I'm the deputy whip, and it's five minutes to the vote, so I have to go.
8:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken Hardie
Then we'll say thanks to our translators, clerk, analyst, technical staff, support staff and our witnesses for their time this evening.
We will conclude the meeting and we will see you in one week.
This meeting is adjourned.