Information & Ethics Committee on May 2nd, 2023

[Morris Rosenberg]

Would you like me to answer?

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Yes.

[Morris Rosenberg]

Okay. First of all, the first I ever heard of that was in an article that was published in The Globe and Mail on February 28, 2023.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

No one believes you. Canadians don't believe you, sir.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

We are again at a point of order.

We have three seconds left here, Mr. Fergus.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I think it's important to raise this, regardless of the time that's left, if it was at the beginning or the end. I'm referring to Standing Order 117, which is decorum.

Mr. Chair, I think it is incumbent upon us to conduct ourselves with decorum and to not only allow only the witness to answer the question, but to refrain from impugning the character of the witness when they're in the middle of answering a question.

I could add—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

I've read the standing order, Mr. Fergus. My expectation from all members is that they treat our witnesses with courtesy and respect. That's my expectation. If I see any evidence otherwise, I'll certainly intervene. I have intervened on at least one occasion today.

I thank you for that intervention on the standing order.

Mr. Brock, according to my clock, you had three seconds left. I'm not sure we can gain anything—

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

My point has been made.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

The next speaker is Mr. Fergus.

You have five minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, again, Mr. Rosenberg. Once again, I feel obliged to offer some apology to you.

Let us go a little bit deeper in terms of where we were in 2014. At that time, you had indicated that all governments were seeking to.... China was not considered in a poor light. The regime was not consider in the poor light that it is today.

[Morris Rosenberg]

That's correct.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Would we be signing a foreign investment protection agreement at this point, in 2023? Would it be reasonable to say that we signed one in the 2010s, because it was seen to be in the interests of Canada to do so?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I assume that when the Government of Canada acts, it's in the interests of the Government of Canada.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

That's fair enough.

In regard to that, at the time that this donation was being offered to the foundation, as you indicated in answer to a question from Mr. Green, in fact you thought it was an opportunity for Canada to be able to use its soft power.

In what ways did you think that Canada could have used its soft power? Was it on academic freedom? Was it on research?

[Morris Rosenberg]

The negotiations evolved. Mr. Lefebvre, in one of the articles where he talked about this, actually said that he thought at the time that engaging with the Chinese would give him and the Université de Montréal an opportunity to make them familiar with our governance methods, with rule-of-law issues and with human rights issues. Was that naive? At the time, in hindsight, it probably it was naive.

I remember going to China under the Harper government and having a dialogue with my colleague. Part of my instruction—and I followed it—was to raise human rights issues with the Chinese. They don't like it, but we did it because at that time, we honestly believed—this is going back to Bill Clinton and bringing them into the WTO—that if we only brought them into the international economic system, they would become more democratic over time. We were wrong, but we believed that. That belief still existed in the 2010s. That's why we operated that way.

I'm sorry that Mr. Green doesn't buy that, but I think we felt we could do more good. We weren't being told what to do. Having conferences on climate change, on trade and even on human rights issues and other global issues would be a good thing. Some of the Chinese students who were at the Université de Montréal and who would attend those would be influenced by them.

The Université de Montréal believed that the Chinese students—they did have a Chinese students program—being exposed to our way of life and to our rule of law, would, I guess by osmosis in a way, impact China. I don't think any of us saw the current regime coming. It took a number of years for us to change our minds.

In 2017, you had an article in University Affairs by the rector at the University of Ottawa saying they should do more research with China. This was in 2017.

It took a while. It took the wolf warrior diplomacy, the change of attitude in Hong Kong and the kidnapping of the two Michaels for us to realize that this was not the China we were dealing with a few years ago. Until then, I think a lot of us were in a more naive place. Hindsight is 20/20.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

It truly is.

In regard, again, to the donation itself, I just want to get back to this. Once again, in terms of sending out the receipt for that donation, you quite cogently pointed out that it was similar to working in a different place.

That receipt really had no value whatsoever, except if it were used for the purpose of filing one's taxes by a business or an individual.

[Morris Rosenberg]

As I understand it, yes. I am not a tax accountant, but it seems pretty obvious.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Fair enough.

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Fergus.

As it stands right now, we started at around 5:52, so we have two and half minutes for Mr. Villemure and Mr. Green. I think we're going to split two and half minutes each between the Conservatives and the Liberals to conclude this round of questioning.

Mr. Villemure, you have two and half minutes.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Rosenberg, if it were a case of interference, the company would not be concerned about getting a tax receipt, right?

You said earlier that there is a world of perceptions. The prevailing perception is that independence is not possible, even though you are trying to demonstrate it here.

What are your connections with Justin Trudeau?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I don't have any. I met Justin Trudeau for about 15 seconds at a cabinet retreat. I was one of the deputy ministers who gave a briefing to members of the new cabinet on relations with—

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I have to interrupt you, Mr. Rosenberg, because my speaking time is limited to two and a half minutes.

What are your connections with Alexandre Trudeau?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I know him much better, because he was a member of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation board of directors when I was working there.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Even though you met Justin Trudeau for only 15 seconds, do you agree with me that he can still exercise influence, even if he says nothing? His name is well known and he is the Prime Minister; that does carry some weight.

Do you think his name and the fact that he is Prime Minister might constitute influence?