Foreign Affairs Committee on Sept. 21st, 2022

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Chair, what would you like me to do? We could do this—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I leave that to you.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

These are some suggestions I have, and perhaps Mr. Genuis would like to bring forward a revised version of his motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

You would like him to take the suggestions you made? You made many suggestions—

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

I thought you requested that the analysts propose some language.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Is that possible?

To clarify, Ms. McPherson, you're coming up with a friendly amendment and you would like the drafting to be done by the analysts?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I can also suggest some modifications on my own if that would be helpful.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

We leave it to you as to what you would prefer to do.

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

On a point of order, I wouldn't actually agree with this amendment, but in the interest of facilitating conversation, it sounds as though maybe an amendment is being proposed to strike the words “which includes a recommendation to immediately revoke the permit” and replace them with the words “regarding the situation in Ukraine” so (d) would now read—

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

I don't think that's a point of order, but I also think she proposed one meeting.

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

Yes, fair enough.

It would be “regarding the situation in Ukraine including the turbine decision”, and change “two” to “one” in point (a).

Is that a summary of your amendment?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Genuis, can we wait for the analysts to attempt to capture everything that she mentioned?

We'll just suspend for a couple of minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

If we can now resume, Ms. McPherson, I understand you will read the amendment into the record. You're still working on it?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I will soon. I'm just waiting to get the final copy of it. I don't want to give the wrong wording.

Perhaps while I am waiting for the final wording to come through, I can just say that if we are going forward, as I think we all know we need to, with regard to the Ukraine study, I was quite happy with the way we did it in the last session, when we knew we had a certain number of days allocated for it but there was some flexibility within the committee as to when we did those studies. I think we as a foreign affairs committee do not need to say our study is complete at a certain point. I think it's very important that this committee make sure that Ukraine is constantly on our radar and that we are constantly aware of what is happening there. That is one of the key roles of this committee. I think in the last committee, that was something we did well on towards the beginning and in the middle, but not so much at the end. It's something I would like to see us be able to continue going forward with.

But I digress. Let me read the motion with my amendment, please.

That, in relation to the study of the export of Russian Gazprom turbines, the committee (a) hold one additional meeting to invite witnesses from the existing lists; (b) at a separate hearing, bring representatives of Siemens and of Canadian Gas Association to testify for two hours; (c) at a separate hearing, invite the Minister of Foreign Affairs to appear for two hours to provide an update on the turbine issue and other Ukraine-related developments; (d) instruct staff to prepare a draft report on the committee's study on Ukraine, including the sanctions waiver; and, (e) conduct a study of the Canadian sanctions regime in general, with details to be defined later.

The change—just to make it very clear for all—would be to have one additional meeting. That meeting would have representatives from Siemens and the Canadian Gas Association, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs would appear for two hours before committee to provide an update on not just the turbine issue but also other Ukraine-related developments.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

May I request a clarification from the mover of the amendment?

There would effectively be one meeting with witnesses on the turbine issue, a second meeting with just the minister on Ukraine generally, and I'm not sure I understand part (e). Is that a meeting or is that a future study?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

My intention would be that—

I'm sorry, Michael. Would you like to go, Mr. Chong?

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

The amendment as moved by Madame McPherson is clear. There would be three additional meetings, the first of which would be with witnesses from the existing list, the second of which would be to hear from Siemens and the Canadian Gas Association, and the third of which would be to hear from the Minister of Foreign Affairs. That is the amendment that Madame McPherson has just read.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

I think Ms. McPherson can speak for herself.

A separate hearing bringing representatives of Siemens and Canada Gas Association—would that be one meeting or two?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I think what we could do is.... This is actually saying that we will have the three meetings, and I think that's fine. If there's an amendment and someone wants to make that be for the first hour and for the second hour, I think we can be smart and strategic about it and think about it, but what we have here is what we've come up with.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We now go to Mr. Bergeron.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Chair, I must admit that I'm not sure where I stand anymore. It almost feels like we're ending up with one extra meeting than originally proposed, when the goal was to get back to the overall situation in Ukraine as quickly as possible. I would remind members that Russia has called up reserve troops and placed its nuclear forces on alert. While I agree that the turbine issue is important, I feel we're overlooking the key issues right now.

As I mentioned earlier, perhaps there's no need to add witnesses if, by some chance, we're able to agree to recommend that the government suspend or revoke the permit. If we can agree on that, there's really no use continuing and enhancing testimony on the turbine issue.

Mr. Chair, I will go back to what I was saying at the beginning. I asked an informal question to our friends on the government side, so maybe we'll get an answer from them by the end of the meeting. I don't want this to drive a wedge between us. However, I will say it's very clear to me that even if we were called to repair all five turbines over the next two years, Russia wouldn't start supplying Germany again. So, in a way, the joke is on us if we maintain this permit. It should just be revoked.

I reiterate that we were very careful not to blame the government, as we were well aware that this was an extremely difficult and uncomfortable decision for them. That being said, even the German ambassador said that we no longer really needed this permit now that Vladimir Putin has been caught bluffing and the world has seen that he's acting in bad faith, especially with this morning's announcement.

If our Liberal colleagues are open to it, let's recommend that the government revoke the permit, and then they can do as they see fit with the recommendation. Personally, I see no point in unduly prolonging the turbine study. We should quickly move on to much more pressing issues. For example, Ms. Bendayan alluded to the fact that Ukraine has been and is currently engaged in a counteroffensive that's getting results and it's waiting for us to step up. Countries like Germany and the United States are buying weapons to ship to Ukraine, and meanwhile we're taking far too long to answer the call from Ukrainian authorities. A very compelling CBC News article entitled “Ukraine presses Canada to send more weapons as its forces push east” notes that Canada has been slow to respond to the Ukrainians' requests. It seems to me that that's a priority. I also see the question of sanctions as a priority.

If we agree to ask the government to suspend the turbine permits, then by gosh, can we stop wasting our precious time discussing that issue and focus on the truly critical and strategic issues? As we speak, Ukraine is fighting a merciless battle to regain its territory and it needs our support. Let's not waste our time splitting hairs when barbarians are at the gate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bergeron. I certainly appreciate your frustration.

We now go to Mr. Aboultaif.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to make a point here on Mr. Bergeron's point. Definitely, I know that he's talking about the ongoing process of studies that we're doing on Ukraine. We know that this is going to be going forward for a long time and that it's very important for us to keep taking on studies on this topic.

What the intention of Mr. Genuis's motion is, I think, is to be able to finish what we've invested our time and studies on in the turbines issue, and that meeting will be very crucial for us to be able to wrap up this whole study in a proper way and to at least present a meaningful report out of it. That's why this is very important. We are investing the time. The time that we have in hand is still there, and we can put more upcoming meetings on a Ukrainian issue that has continued to develop in different ways.

We know that we have a duty on this topic to be able to continue to monitor, being an ally and supportive of the Ukrainian government and people, but I believe—and I hope we can all agree—that this motion will definitely serve the purpose of making the report a meaningful one, since we've already invested time in it. I hope everyone can understand that and that we can just all agree on it and move forward.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Aboultaif.

We now go to Mr. Sidhu.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm a little confused here.

Mr. Bergeron, you're absolutely right in terms of focusing on recent developments, As you know, the nuclear threat, sanctions and so many other things are going on in Ukraine that are more pressing at this time. I agree with you that we need to focus on Ukraine and not just beat around the bush to try to score political points with each other. Ms. McPherson said “one meeting”, from what my understanding was, but that one meeting went to three meetings, so now I'm a bit confused again.

Going back to what Mr. Bergeron said, Haiti is pressing, as are things that are going on in Pakistan, in Tigray and in Armenia. There are so many pressing issues around the world that we need to get to. Yes, we can focus on scoring political points, but we should also be focused on the human lives that matter right now in Ukraine. I don't agree with the three meetings on the turbine issue. As Mr. Bergeron said, I believe that we need to stay focused on the broader Ukraine context and focus on the nuclear threat and sanctions.

Thank you.