Foreign Affairs Committee on May 2nd, 2017

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Please.

[Stéphane Dion]

These are not my priorities but the Prime Minister's priorities, since I am his special envoy.

The first one is to make sure that our trade agreement will succeed for Canadians. The second one is what we just discussed, which is how Canada can support Europe in the values that we share. The third one is how we can strengthen our relationship with Europe when we work elsewhere in the world, including for the challenges you mentioned with our neighbour Russia, or development in Africa, or emerging economies in Asia.

We need to work with Europe on all of this, because we're in the same situation they're in, in so many ways.

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

[Stéphane Dion]

There's also our relationship with the United States.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you, Ambassador.

[Stéphane Dion]

It doesn't take very long, when you talk with them, before they raise this issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you, Mr. Levitt.

Mr. McKay, please.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Congratulations to my friend and colleague of many years. I don't share the skepticism of my opposition colleagues with respect to the wisdom of your appointment, particularly with respect to its strategic position. Frequently, ambassadors are focused on their own domains, and as I would understand your position, it is to take a bit of a 35,000-foot look, if you will.

The Prime Minister is fond of saying that our unity is in our diversity. In Europe, it seems to work in the reverse, or at least right now it seems to be working in the reverse, and you come in at a time when the European Union is undergoing significant stresses and strains.

One of the strains at a very high level is whether it continues to be an Atlantic relationship or whether it spins off, if you will, in some parts, to the south or to the east, particularly with Russian influence. The Atlantic relationship is a non-starter unless the Americans are vigorous in their pursuit of Europe. Under the current administration, the Americans seem somewhat less enthusiastic about Europe. In particular, their not pursuing the trade agreement would be an example. This has enormous implications, probably within your term.

My question is about whether you've had any conversations with your American counterparts about the role that America chooses or doesn't choose to play in this Atlantic relationship.

[Stéphane Dion]

Do you mean my European counterparts?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

No, the American counterparts.

[Stéphane Dion]

If I discuss with American counterparts what Canada is doing in Europe...?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

No, what America is prepared to do in Europe, and whether there is a changed relationship between America and Europe that, in effect, will affect the overall Atlantic relationship.

[Stéphane Dion]

Okay. I'm not sure on what you call my counterparts, because I changed jobs recently, so I don't have the same counterparts that I did some months ago. Also, the American administration has changed in the meantime.

I've had a lot of discussions with Americans about the relationship between the United States and Europe and in what way Canada may be helpful in this relationship, and a lot of discussions with the Europeans themselves. We are in the same situation. We want to keep an open relationship with the United States, especially for trade. We want to avoid any trade disputes, and this committee is working on that issue as well.

I might tell you that when you sit down with an European official, it's not very long before they raise this issue and ask how we as Canadians will cope with it, as the United States is 75% of our trade market. They ask what kind of approach we have to this problem, how we can solve it, and what we can learn from it. We'll try, we Canadians, to learn from what the Europeans do, especially Germany, which has been identified by the President of the United States as a key aspect of the relationship with the United States regarding trade.

To strengthen our relationships with Europe can only help in the challenges we have to face in keeping a very strong and positive relationship with the United States.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

We have frequently found ourselves as intermediaries between the U.S. and others. Based upon body language, if you will, between Chancellor Merkel and President Trump, that's a critical relationship that doesn't appear to be going as well as one would hope. Germany is going through an election, and I have no insight as to how that's going to turn out. Describe how your role as a strategic adviser would unfold in that kind of dynamic.

[Stéphane Dion]

I was with the Prime Minister in Germany some weeks ago, and I can tell you how much the Germans want to share with us any understanding we may have of the relationship with the United States. It's key for them. They have a lot of interest in that and in the capacity of Canada to be working with the United States while staying Canada. That will certainly be a large part of my ability to reach the officials in Germany and elsewhere in Europe and to have a very dynamic relationship with them.

About the United States, the more we show that we are improving our ability to be strong in Europe, the more it will help us to negotiate with the United States. If you look at it as having no other solution, it doesn't put you on a strong footing as a country, but Canada being stronger with Europe, stronger with Asia—Ambassador McCallum will be with you just after me—I think is key for the future of our country.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Finally, Russia seems to be stirring the pot. I don't know whether it's having some success, but it certainly is stirring the pot.

Germany is uniquely positioned as, if you will, the most European of nations up against the east European nations and then Russia. Describe what you have learned about Russia's role not only in Germany but in the European Union, which has surprised you or not, since you have taken on this position.

[Stéphane Dion]

What we look at in this situation is to be sure that our European allies will stay very strong. There are links with Russia for the economy, especially the ability to receive the natural....

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

The natural gas.

[Stéphane Dion]

Yes. It is very demanding for some of these countries, and we don't want them to mollify, in order to stay united and strong in the difficult relationship with Russia.

Also, some of these countries have a very important dialogue with Russia, and I think, as you know, we Canadians have an interest to be well aware of that, because the NATO official policy and actual policy is both deterrence and dialogue. Dialogue is something that is key for the future of this very complex relationship we have with our neighbour, Russia.

By the way, this leads me also to mention that Germany, as you say, is at the core of these discussions with Russia, and is key to keeping a strong deterrence. Germans will be in the Baltic countries with us. For me to be then the special envoy of the Prime Minister in addition to being an ambassador will be, I hope, an asset for our country from this perspective.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you very much, Mr. McKay.

We'll go to Mr. Kmiec, please.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Dion, several people have used different titles: special adviser, strategic adviser, ambassador, special envoy. I would like to continue in the same vein as Ms. Laverdière and my colleague Mr. Kent, regarding your role of special envoy to the European Union and Europe.

According to the Prime Minister's press release, there was an exchange of correspondence with the President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission on your role as special envoy. Are you aware of the content of those letters?

[Stéphane Dion]

I have them right here. I can give them to the clerk of the committee. In my presentation, I quoted the main excerpts that show that the European Union is pleased to work with this new diplomatic resource we now have, for which I will be responsible.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

We have established that the Prime Minister had the idea of this role of dual ambassador at the outset. This is what you said. Was the idea of appointing a special envoy also the Prime Minister's, or did it come from the European Union, from Mr. Juncker or Mr. Tusk?

[Stéphane Dion]

The Prime Minister's idea never changed; it is still the same responsibility he gave me at the outset. The designation changed because it better expresses what the Prime Minister had in mind in the beginning.

This is going to help me. When I arrive in a European country, I will be his special envoy in addition to being the ambassador to Germany. It is clearer than saying that I'm also Canada's ambassador to the European Union, because the European Union only refers to the European Union authority.

The challenges we have been discussing for close to an hour now incorporate much more than the European Union authority. Certain ambassadors may want me to go to their country, for instance Italy, Spain, Poland or Georgia. Some of these countries, however, are not members of the European Union. And so we also have to cover that very European aspect.

We just spoke of the tensions between Russia and Ukraine. These countries are not part of the European Union, but they represent an essential European dimension. Switzerland and Norway are not in the European Union, but Canada must nevertheless maintain a strong relationship with those countries. The whole issue of the Arctic goes far beyond the European Union, but it has an important European dimension for Canada.

I think the designation we now have reflects what the Prime Minister had in mind at the outset much more precisely.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

You said that the title of special envoy was clearer. In that case, why were you not given that title in the beginning? As you said, it would have been much clearer at the outset, and would not have created a diplomatic and political issue in Canada and in Europe, as Ms. Laverdière, Mr. Kent and others have said; that is also what the media reported. This created a diplomatic shock in some countries, and for certain people in Europe.

Why was it not established right from the beginning that you would be called a special adviser,with special responsibilities to the Prime Minister, rather than trying to create a new ambassadorial position to the European Union and Europe?