Foreign Affairs Committee on March 12th, 2020

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Well, I think you answered my question, and the answer is no, you're not prepared to recommit to the 0.7% ODA goals and you're not prepared to tell the rest of the world that we're prepared to reach a timetable to get there. I'm very sorry to hear that.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Madam Chair, do I have time to...?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Leona Alleslev]

Thank you very much, Minister.

Next we have MP Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, I want to start by sharing with you that a few weeks ago I reached out to your office involving a challenging situation of a family abroad. I worked with Nour Kechacha in your office. She was excellent, she was responsive, and she was very helpful. The family is back in Canada today. We ask tough questions to advance the public interest, but we also, I think, should give credit. I want to thank you and your team on that specific case.

Now for the tougher stuff.

Minister, I appreciated your comments about helping Michael Kovrig, Michael Spavor and Gary Schellenberg. This is a formula we've heard from officials before. It's very important to identify those three individuals.

I want to share with you some testimony we heard at the Canada-China committee about our engagement with complex consular cases in China. This is a quote from Charles Burton, a senior fellow with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute:

...the evidence given by our public servants in the previous meetings of this committee repeated over and over the formula that Canada’s priority in China relations is “the immediate release of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, as well as clemency for Robert Schellenberg”.

I'm sorry; I got his name wrong. It's Robert Schellenberg.

However, in response to questioning, one of the officials indicated there are two Canadians, Mr. Schellenberg and Mr. Fan Wei, whose charges on the death penalty are public and available. Why is this focus on Kovrig, Spavor and Schellenberg, three Canadians of non-Chinese origin, to the exclusion of Canadians Huseyin Celil and Fan Wei, who are not?

I judge that this would be deeply troubling to all Canadians formerly resident in the PRC prior to becoming Canadian citizens and joining our national family.

Do we also thereby tacitly accept the Chinese government's claim that persons of Chinese origin in Canada have an obligation of residual loyalty to the Chinese state regardless of their Canadian citizenship? Is this why the serious problem of Chinese state harassment of persons of PRC origin in Canada, in gross violation of the protections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is essentially unaddressed by our government?

Essentially, the issue he's raising is that there doesn't seem to be an equivalent emphasis on Canadians arbitrarily detained in China who are maybe originally of PRC origin. Do you want to comment and respond to his comments?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I would say it's not the case at all. We have raised these cases. The case of Mr. Fan I'm very familiar with, and Mr. Celil as well. We defend everyone. If you're a Canadian, you're a Canadian. We're going to provide consular services. We're going to fight for your rights. Any insinuation to the contrary is misguided. I can assure you that when I speak to Ambassador Barton, when I speak to our officials, a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. We treat everyone equally. We have talked about some of the cases, but I can assure you that each....

Sometimes, with respect, we have to respect the wishes of the families. For many people detained in China and many people who have consular services, we are requested not to talk publicly about them. My lens is always to make sure that we have a no-harm policy in terms of the detention condition or the potential release of these people. That's the only lens we apply—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Minister, but I have to jump in there, because after we had the testimony from Ambassador Barton specifically on the Celil case, Mr. Celil's wife spoke publicly in the press and expressed concern about the case not seeming to have received equivalent attention.

I appreciate your comment that a Canadian is a Canadian, but you repeated a formula that identifies three individuals and not other individuals.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Listen, I have a full list of Canadians abroad to whom we provide consular services on a daily basis. I could go through the full list of people. We pay particular attention to everyone who is detained arbitrarily, particularly those who are in China, to provide them with all the consular services.

There are even other names that you have probably never heard in the public domain, and this is to respect the wishes of the family, but I can assure you that our officials treat every Canadian in the same way, and when we advocate for one, we advocate for all of them.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Minister, I have a different topic in the time I have left, but again, the formula is out there, and I think people have heard it.

I asked you a question in the House about legal responses to the human rights abuses of Uighurs, and you responded in the House by saying that we're very concerned about the abuse of Uighurs. However, my question was not general; it was specific to legal responses, recognition of crimes against humanity and the use of sanctioning tools against officials involved in the horrific mass detention of Uighurs.

Could you speak specifically, please, to legal responses to this gross violation of human rights?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

We are very concerned. We are deeply concerned about the treatment of the Uighurs in China, and all minorities. I take every opportunity I have to raise human rights with my Chinese counterparts, and we will continue to do so, because the protection and upholding of international law and human rights is a core principle of foreign policy, and I can assure you that every time—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Leona Alleslev]

For the next round, for five minutes, we have Mr. Spengemann.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Minister, my thanks to you and your team for what you do. I also thank you for your commitment and your leadership on the international stage.

My first question is about human rights.

Minister, you had the chance to speak in the House on the recent tensions in Delhi, India. I'd like you to take the opportunity to frame for the committee your thoughts on the importance of human rights generally, and the perception that perhaps human rights are a trade-off against diplomacy. Much like the fact that we treat the economy and the environment as going together, we also need to treat human rights advocacy and diplomacy as a pair, as going together.

I'd like to commend our government for keeping the door open in difficult circumstances with countries like Iran, Russia and China. Could you comment a bit on the importance of human rights advocacy and how you see it in the overall fabric of your mandate?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you very much.

I will just take 10 seconds to thank the member who commended some of our members who have provided consular services. Some of them have worked through the night for days and days to provide services, so I just want to mention Nour and the team and the great work they did.

To your point, first of all I'd like to acknowledge your work. You have been a great advocate for your constituents by always raising human rights. As I said, you put it nicely that human rights is a core principle of Canada's foreign policy. We defend our interests and we defend our values and our principles, and one of our core principles is the protection and defence of human rights around the world.

We are proud to do that, and the voice of Canada is respected around the world because we stand up even when it's not easy, or perhaps as others might think, inconvenient. Canada has been there to stand up for minorities in China. We've been standing up to the situation you referred to in Delhi recently, where we were very saddened and concerned about the violence we saw. We have expressed that. I was one of the few foreign ministers of the G20 who called the foreign minister of India to express our concern and ask for a path toward a peaceful and productive dialogue.

We were also trying to engage with our Indian counterparts about the importance of upholding the rights of all religious minorities in India. We do that in a respectful way, but we do it on the basis of our principles, and we will continue there and elsewhere to always stand up for those who perhaps don't have a voice or who don't have a voice as loud as Canada's.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Minister, briefly, I'd like to ask a second question.

If I were to put to you the proposition that good human rights policy and practice, in the sense of the rule of law, is also good for the economy, how would you engage that proposition vis-à-vis your counterparts abroad?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

As I said, in the relationship we have with states, the way I frame it is always about Canada's interests, values and principles. Your interests might be that you engage in a commercial relationship, but you need to be true to your principles. In a world that is full of uncertainty, a world that is changing these days by the hour, we need to be guided by core principles because of the respect you get around these tables around the world. Whether it's the G7, G20, NATO, NORAD—you name it—la Francophonie or the Commonwealth, people know exactly where Canada stands.

Canada stands on the side of those who perhaps don't have a voice in the world, or who perhaps have been subjected to abuse. Perhaps some would be willing to compromise. We don't compromise. We are able to speak about both of these things at the same time in the same conversation with the same people.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

In the remaining minute that I have, I wonder if I could invite you to follow through on the exchange with Mr. Harris and maybe look at another example where, qualitatively, our development assistance is far above the standard.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you.

To my colleague Mr. Harris, we always want to do more. What I was trying to provide was a concrete example of some of the Canadians who are making a difference in the world in a very concrete way. What I was trying to reflect to my colleague Mr. Harris was about the impact. When I go from mission to mission, I always ask what Canada does best and what we can do better.

What I was telling you, for example, was that in MINUSMA, the commander was telling me that Canada brought community policing and is changing how the UN is policing. We have more women in the forces. We brought them there, and they tell us that we're changing the way they're policing, and not only in Mali. A Nigerian commander told me we're changing the UN. That small group of people we have there is changing all of our practices at the UN. They do better because we're there.

My point is that you can look at the numbers—and obviously one can always look at the numbers—but one also has to look at the impact. I saw our mission in Ukraine recently. I saw our mission in Latvia. I went to the MFO in Egypt. I—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Leona Alleslev]

Thank you, Minister.

Now we move on to a round of two and a half minutes—oh, my apologies. It's five minutes.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I could barely say my name in that time.

Minister, I asked you the question; I don't think you answered it. I want to give one more shot. I want to ask about specific legal responses—speaking, sending letters—on Uighur abuses.

There are specific legal steps that you can take, and I think you know what they are. One of them would be listing officials involved in Uighur detentions under the Magnitsky act. Another one would be to support an international investigation around crimes against humanity to officially support the declaration by the U.S. Holocaust museum.

Again, as one more shot here, are you taking, or contemplating taking, a legal response to respond to this gross violation of human rights against Uighurs in China?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I'll give you an example of a response we have given.

You want a legal response? We supported the Gambia in their case against Myanmar with respect to the Rohingya. That's a very specific—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I mean Uighurs, though. I'm asking specifically about a legal response to Uighurs.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I know, but I gave you an example of our making a legal response.

We are always looking at all the tools of diplomacy that we have. We have raised this issue. We are constantly raising the issues of minorities and religious minorities in China, and we'll continue to do so.

What I was—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you.

I guess the record shows that's a no, because you went from a question about a legal response in China to talking about something you did in Myanmar.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I think you were asking me for an example. I was giving you an example where we are...and we'll continue to do so. Canada is strong internationally, and we use all tools of diplomacy.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Minister.

I want to jump off on Mr. Spengemann's comments about India.

I think all of us share concerns about the situation involving human rights and pluralism in India. A couple of years ago, your government signed a comprehensive security and intelligence co-operation agreement with India that would have expanded intelligence sharing significantly.

I'd appreciate an update from you on how the government feels about the status of that agreement in light of some of the concerns that have been raised around human rights, including by members of your own caucus.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

As I said, I think I'm one of the very few G20 ministers who called the foreign minister of India to share our concern when we saw the events in Delhi. You can check the record. We did that respectfully, but we also stated Canada's position and asked about the path towards peaceful resolution of the situation we were witnessing. We called, and we were looking at how the rights of all religious minorities could be respected.

When you were asking for examples of things we're doing, I think the record probably shows that I'm the only G20 minister who picked up the phone to the foreign minister to—