Foreign Affairs Committee on Aug. 4th, 2022

[Alexandra Chyczij]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Marty Morantz]

Thank you, Mr. Sorbara.

Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I'd like to assure the representatives of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress of our full support.

The vote that took place a few moments ago in no way reflects that we do not wish to hear from you further, quite the contrary. I told the clerk and the chair that I felt that half an hour wasn't enough time to have an opportunity to speak with you.

Having said that, I don't think it's appropriate to bring a motion at the last minute to impose witnesses on committee members. I would be very much in favour, when we discuss the next witnesses, of calling you back to allow you to continue the discussion with us, especially since things may have changed in the meantime.

You know that the European Union, in all of its sanctions, has taken care to avoid having them in any way target energy supplies from Russia. It's a precaution—let's call it that—that Canada did not take when it decided to put its sanctions regime in place, so it ended up in the situation we're in.

Considering the fact that the European Union has taken care to avoid including in its sanctions any aspects that might affect the supply of energy from Russia, do you think that this precaution has the effect of invalidating any criticisms that the Canadian government's decision results in allowing oil and gas from Russia to be supplied to Europe, thereby feeding the Russian war machine?

[Alexandra Chyczij]

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron, for the clarification with respect to the motion. I am always ready to testify before this committee and any other.

With regard to the EU sanctions, I believe the EU will reconsider its position, given that we have now seen Russia cut off Poland, Bulgaria and Finland because they did stick to the sanctions. When they were called upon to pay for Russian gas in rubles, they took a principled position, refused to do so, and Russia cut them off. I understand that Russia is now cutting off other countries and strategically cutting off other businesses and industries.

It is clear that Russia is now engaging in the continuation of the gas wars they have played for the last 30 years. Every time there was a political problem with Ukraine, they would cut the gas off to Europe so that the Europeans would pressure the Ukrainians. When speaking of unity of the allies, one of the principles of that is “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine”. The point was made earlier with Madam Joly that Ukrainians are allies as well, and there is no unity on that question with the Ukrainians. They object to the waiver of those sanctions.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

If we accept the Canadian claim that this permit has provided an opportunity to expose, I would say, Moscow's true motivations...

You heard from Minister Wilkinson about the possibility of moving gas through the Ukrainian pipeline, and you made it clear that this was the only infrastructure in Ukraine that had not yet been bombed.

Why do you think this infrastructure is, contrary to what the minister said, an interesting, plausible and valid option?

[Alexandra Chyczij]

For the simple fact that it exists; there are pipelines through Ukraine and through Poland that are alternatives to Nord Stream 1.

If this is about the turbine, you avoid the question of the turbine by using one of the other pipelines. If the question is about sanctions, though, then you don't avoid the question. I think it has always been about sanctions and not about the pipeline or the turbine. Canada has allowed itself to be party to blackmail that resulted in a waiver of those sanctions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Marty Morantz]

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

Now we have Ms. McPherson for six minutes, and that will bring us to the end of our meeting with the UCC.

Ms. McPherson.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much.

I would like to thank our guest from the UCC, and just give my heartfelt thanks for the work that you and the entire organization has been doing over the last terrible, terrible months, as we see what's happened in Ukraine. I know that not only are you expected to be the voice of Ukrainian Canadians but you are also dealing with the horrific burden of what we are watching happen in Ukraine. Your bravery is admirable, so thank you for being here, and for your voice. Thank you for the work that you've done to this point.

I'm also very keen on having you come back and speak to the committee. I look forward to that opportunity.

What I'd like to ask are questions just about the sanctions regime itself. Yes, I think we can look at what happened with regard to the waiver and say that, basically, we've now set up a system where Germans aren't any better off for the weakening of our sanctions. Putin has very clearly used this as a tool to blackmail our allies and us. Now it has proven to have worked. Why would he not use the same system with regard to food, with regard to energy in other countries? He has, as we know, weaponized food to the point where millions of people's lives are at risk. Will he use this to chip away at our sanctions?

It's a big worry that I have. I just wonder, from your perspective, if that's something that you see, if you do have some worry about setting a precedent where we allow a man like Vladimir Putin to blackmail Canada and to undermine our sanctions regime.

[Alexandra Chyczij]

Absolutely. That has been the position of the UCC since before the war began. We warned in the months leading up to the full-scale invasion that strong deterrence was the only way to stop an invasion. We called for arming Ukraine, for sanctions, before. Unfortunately, that only started to happen in the days leading up to the war. Canada only made the decision to send lethal weapons some 10 days prior to the actual invasion.

I urge you all to become historians, students of history, and understand who we are dealing with. Ukrainians, unfortunately, have lived with various versions of Vladimir Putin for over 300 years. We know exactly how the psyche works. Appeasement does not work with him. Only a strong hand will show Putin that the west means what it says. By caving on sanctions we are showing him our weakness.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Absolutely.

I'm sure you were watching while the ministers were here providing testimony for us. I did flag with Minister Joly that I'm very concerned about how our sanctions are being enforced, and the lack of transparency about them, so that parliamentarians and Canadians can see what is being seized, what those assets are. I've brought it up in the House a number of times. I've asked it in Order Paper questions. A perfect example is that we learned yesterday that the CBSA was able to stop a shipment of dual-use weapons to Russia, but that's the only one that they can tell us any information about. They can't release details about any other shipments.

We also know, from John Ivison's story on July 21, that Italian officials had seized Russian-bound drones sent via Canada and that the CBSA missed that shipment.

When we hear the government talk about the 1,600 sanctions it has in place, do you worry that it is performative, that this sanction regime is, in fact, a performative thing where it is saying the right things, telling us the sanctions are in place, but there is no way for us to check, no way for Canadians to know if they're working, no way for us to measure the efficacy of that sanctions regime?

[Alexandra Chyczij]

The UCC would certainly welcome greater transparency of sanctions regimes. Since 2014 the UCC called for the imposition of strong sanctions following the invasion of Crimea and the Donbass. We did not see anything particularly muscular coming from Canada. We urged, at a minimum, a mirroring of what the Americans were doing and what the EU was doing. We certainly would welcome greater transparency.

Also, we would like to see a beneficial ownership registry in Canada so that we could see who owns what. The purpose of sanctions is to freeze those assets, but I think the next step—and we have the legislation in place now—is to seize them and sell them. That can only happen if we know what we're looking for. I think $120 million of seized assets is probably just the tip of the iceberg of what is being controlled in Canada by Russians and their proxies.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Absolutely. I have heard from people who have said that it is very difficult for us to understand the shipping between Russia and Canada and that, in fact, the transparency of the Russian Federation is higher than the transparency of the Canadian government on that. I think there's a lot of work that the Canadian government could do to make sure that's in place, and I agree with you that we 100% need to understand who is benefiting from it.

I know these corporate relationships are very complex, and it will take some specialists to do that. I look forward to working with the minister and working with all my colleagues to make sure that happens.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Marty Morantz]

Thank you, Ms. McPherson.

That brings us to the end of our meeting with the UCC.

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

I have a point of order.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Marty Morantz]

Mr. Genuis, you have the floor on a point of order.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wonder if you can clarify something. The committee passed a motion specifically wanting to hear from the UCC. We are hearing from them, but for an unprecedentedly short period of time. You've heard from Conservatives, NDP and Bloc that we think the time is too short. The UCC is an extremely important organization representing Ukrainians across the country in a very challenging context with the war going on.

Could you clarify for the committee, given the motion that was passed, who made the decision that we should hear from them for only half an hour today? Was there any rationale given as to why it's such a short amount of time for the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, given their importance and given the explicit wish of the committee?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Marty Morantz]

Thank you, Mr. Genuis. I'm not sure it's a point of order. It's more a matter of discussion and the negotiations that should be taking place with the committee.

Having said that, as you're aware, I am the vice-chair, and I subbed in at the last minute. I was not privy to discussions that went on with respect to the timing of the visit by the UCC. I share some concerns that the time is simply not enough, and it would be nice if the committee could agree before the end of this meeting....

It was clear to me in the motion that we were supposed to have more than one meeting. I think it's right in the motion to hear from witnesses. I think we should all be able to agree on that, so we can move forward.

I leave that for the discussion of committee members. That would be my recommendation.

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

Mr. Chair, to clarify, you as vice-chair were not consulted by the chair—

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

You have clearly stated that what Mr. Genuis is doing right now does not fall into the point of order category. I would invite you as chair to please continue on with the meeting.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Marty Morantz]

On the meeting, I don't think it's a point of order, although I think it would be reasonable to have more meetings. That is what was discussed in the motion.

We are at the end of our first meeting. We are going to adjourn. I understand that new login details will be issued by the clerk. We will reconvene at 3:30 eastern time.

Thank you.

[The Clerk]

The new link was sent at 1:18 to all members.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Marty Morantz]

Thank you very much, Mr. Clerk.

The meeting is adjourned.