Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 10th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

One second, Mr. Chong.

You have the floor, Mr. Bergeron.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I'm trying to understand what you're saying. You're telling us that the government and opposition will each have two rounds of five minutes, but that there won't be the two minutes—

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

I'm hoping to be able to finish with the first four presenters.

Then we will proceed with the second panel of witnesses.

Mr. Chong, go ahead, sir. The floor is yours for five minutes.

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

I'd like to focus on Russia's disinformation warfare. Currently RT, formerly known as Russia Today, the state-controlled broadcaster, is licensed by the CRTC to broadcast in Canada in both English and French.

Mr. Kolga, do you think they should have their licences revoked or amended by the CRTC?

[Marcus Kolga]

The Ukrainian Canadian community has collected significant evidence of hate-based messaging and disinformation that's been broadcast by RT. I think that information has been sent to the CRTC. I'm not sure whether the CRTC is actually considering revoking that licence. RT are in a particularly unique situation in that they are paying Canada's satellite and cable companies to carry their channel. They would like nothing more than for cable to freely broadcast their channel to all Canadians.

I would suggest that perhaps the best way of approaching it right now is to place sanctions on RT for broadcasting disinformation and attacking our democracy, because I think the process of having the CRTC remove the licence would be long and perhaps onerous. Sanctions would probably be the quickest—

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

The federal cabinet could issue a directive to the CRTC.

You know, there are parallels, in my view, between the two authoritarian governments, the two largest authoritarian governments in the world, Russia and China. There are parallels between their two state broadcasters, RT and CGTN. CGTN, the Chinese state broadcaster, has also been granted a licence to broadcast here in Canada by the CRTC. There's evidence that they are spreading Beijing's propaganda, and there's evidence that they are committing violations of international law by airing forced confessions, which is against international human rights law.

I'll also add this. In 2017, when a media inquiry went to the CRTC about RT, the CRTC indicated that it had not and was not reviewing RT's presence in Canada, despite the fact that at that time, U.S. intelligence agencies had identified RT as a propaganda tool of the Russian government, and despite the fact that the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, said that RT France was spreading disinformation.

Subsequent to this, the U.S. intelligence community concluded, in the spring of 2020, that Russia had interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election through various means, particularly through RT, and also concluded that Russia had interfered in Canadian democracy by targeting Canadian elected officials, in particular the current Deputy Prime Minister, Chrystia Freeland.

Inexplicably—to me—the cabinet allowed the CRTC, in August of 2020, to approve the broadcast of RT France over Canadian airwaves, in its decision 2020-281. Perhaps you could comment on this inexplicable action on the part of the government and the CRTC to allow RT France to be licensed in August of 2020.

[Marcus Kolga]

Thank you for enlightening me on that fact. I did not know that this had happened. Quite frankly, I'm shocked. We see that just over the past two weeks, Germany has banned RT DE from German airwaves. They've also removed RT, the German service, from YouTube and banned it from YouTube. The fact that RT France and the French service is now being broadcast in Canada is quite surprising. As I mentioned earlier, that whether it's the government that removes the licence for these broadcasters or whether sanctions are imposed to ensure that they're not able to profit from their broadcasting here in Canada, whether it's on the Internet or otherwise, we need to do something about this broadcaster and others like it—such as, as you mentioned, CGTN and GCTV—foreign state broadcasters that seek to promote disinformation and propaganda on Canadian airwaves. We need to put a stop to it.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Mr. Kolga, thanks very much and thank you, Mr. Chong.

We will now go to Mr. Oliphant for five minutes please.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I begin again by thanking our witnesses for your engagement with us today. All of you are helpful to us. I want to particularly thank the Ukrainian Canadian Congress. You've been persistent, consistent, thoughtful and engaged with the government from the beginning of this crisis. I recognize that this is an extremely difficult time for both your organization and your members, and I want to thank you for continuing to advise the government and being available when we've needed to talk to you.

I'm going to start with a couple of statements and then a couple of questions. Obviously no one in this room is untouched by this, because of the significant Ukrainian diaspora in Canada. We all have friends. This is personal for many of us, and that is a motivating factor. However, the reason this is on the top of the agenda for the Canadian government is not only that; it's also because a threat to Ukraine is a threat to the western world and a threat to Canada. We will continue to see this as a threat to the international rules-based order and a threat to sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Ukraine. No foreign policy or defence issue is more important to Canada at the present time.

It's been a difficult time. I talked to Borys Wrzesnewskyj as well after Future Bakery was vandalized. That was a personal moment for many of us as friends of Borys, but it was more than that. It was an expression of what I believe will probably be determined to be hate, and also probably an expression of disinformation or misinformation that needs to be adjusted.

We have that from members of Parliament as well, though. I will not dignify the remarks of NDP MP Leah Gazan by reiterating them in this room, but I think as Canadians and as parliamentarians, we were all deeply offended.

I want to go to Mr. Kolga about that, because one of my Ukrainian Canadian friends said that that statement was founded in Russian disinformation and could be promoted or propelled into disinformation about the way in which Canada has engaged in terms of that $120-million sovereign loan, as well as other engagements such as Unifier and the other many things we are doing to support the situation.

Could I ask Mr. Kolga to dig in a bit on the way Russia could have promoted such disinformation and could take use of it in the future.

[Marcus Kolga]

As a child of Estonian refugees who fled the Soviet occupation in September of 1944, I can tell you that my parents, who were infants at the time, would have been considered by the Soviet Union and by its propaganda machine as being—similar to the tweet you're referring to—fascists or neo-Nazis simply for escaping Russian occupation and repression.

That line of propaganda was used throughout the Cold War to smear anyone who was critical of the Soviet Union and the occupation and repression of the republics occupied by the Soviet Union. That narrative has been resuscitated, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, by the Putin regime to label anyone who is critical of his regime.

The problem with that narrative, as you might expect, is that it marginalizes those who are targeted by it. With regard to the Ukrainian community, the entire community is smeared with this paintbrush and it's intended to silence them and stigmatize them so that when the Ukrainian community speaks up, the hope is that these labels will stick to its people and that the Canadian government will not pay attention to this community and its voice. That is the core of the problem.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I'm sorry for interrupting, but is it possible, then, that Russia would use that to show division in the Canadian parliament?

I don't think there's anything we're more united on—perhaps some outliers—than our concern about this issue. Can Russia use that sort of statement to show some sort of lack of consistency?

[Marcus Kolga]

Clearly they have. I'm not sure about the intentions of the member of Parliament in repeating that Russian disinformation in her tweet, but the fact that a member of Parliament has tweeted that disinformation demonstrates that the Russian disinformation and propaganda is effective and is connecting with parliamentarians.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

That's a problem.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Mr. Kolga and Mr. Oliphant.

Two brief final interventions will take us to a full hour with this panel, and, as I said, we have a second panel waiting to give testimony.

Mr. Bergeron, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes. Ms. McPherson will then have the same amount of time.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I will be very quick, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Browder, according to an article in Le Monde, Russia's financial sector is healthy, robust and very profitable. The article also says that the upturn in oil prices has enabled Russia to build up massive foreign reserves of nearly $630 billion. This has led some to wonder whether it may be worthwhile to possibly remove Russia from the SWIFT system.

What do you think about the view that Russia has prepared itself for that?

[William Browder]

That's a good question.

There's probably no stronger moment for Vladimir Putin than right now, because of the figures you just cited but also because of the timing. We're in the middle of the winter, and Russia exports gas to Europe. In the case of Germany, 40% of the gas comes from Russia, and in the case of Italy and Austria, it's 100% of their gas. This is the moment when they have maximum possible leverage, and what that means is that the Germans, Italians, Austrians and others are going to do everything possible to break ranks with the Western alliance and not be too tough on Russia.

As far as the SWIFT sanctions go, you're correct that Russia has these enormous reserves, but that doesn't really matter so much if you're in a situation where you're basically cut off from the rest of the world financially. Your reserves will run down very quickly, and life will get bad in very short order.

Nobody should underestimate the pain of SWIFT sanctions, but nobody should underestimate all the collateral damage that it will do either.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Since we don't have much time left, Mr. Browder, I do not believe it's fair to ask you another question.

So, gentlemen, thank you very much for your insightful testimony.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bergeron.

We have Madam McPherson for two and a half minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Since the tweets by one of the NDP members have come up, I want to make it very clear that her tweet in no way reflected the position of the New Democratic Party. I've spoken to our leader, Jagmeet Singh, many times, and our support for the Ukrainian people and Ukrainian Canadians is unwavering. I believe that Ms. Gazan has retracted that statement. Certainly it is something that I deeply regret, and I can reiterate our support for the Ukrainian Canadian people.

I know I don't have very much time, but I have a last question, for Mr. Browder. Could you talk a bit about the other countries that have been using Magnitsky sanctions in a more appropriate way? They have been using them more frequently. What would you like to see Canada do, and what actions would you like to see this committee move forward on? I know that's a lot to ask in a short time, so good luck.

[William Browder]

As I mentioned, Canada used the Magnitsky act very briefly in 2017-2018. The United States has used the Magnitsky act more than 500 times, against all sorts of terrible villains all around the world. Britain has used the Magnitsky act more than the Canadians, even though it's been in effect only since 2020.

I'll make a pitch to this committee, which is that it raises a very important question. We have an excellent tool, and this Magnitsky act can be used not just in this situation with Russian and Ukraine, but with China. It can be used with Iran; it can be used with Myanmar and all sorts of different places, and there are so many victims screaming for justice that this can be used.

If the government hasn't been using it, it raises the very relevant question of why. What can we do to make sure this tool gets used in the future?

To the extent that people in this committee are interested, I think a hearing should be held on the Magnitsky act, to bring in witnesses to discuss the best practices in other countries, how victims have used the Magnitsky act in different countries, and what recommendations could be made to make it a tool that gets implemented and used more properly going forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Ms. McPherson—

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Chair, on a point of order, I do not want to mislead Canadians and I believe this is very important. I raised the issue of Ms. Leah Gazan's tweet in the House of Commons, and that question was responded to by the NDP leader, Jagmeet Singh.

That tweet is still very much live. It has not been retracted, nor has there been an apology.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, the only reason the tweet is still up is that the member added the retraction to the tweet. This is playing politics. Ms. Bendayan knows that very clearly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Colleagues, we're getting into debate here. As I said, we are waiting for another panel, but thank you both for those points.

On our collective behalf, I'd like to thank our three witnesses for their time this afternoon and for their insights. We will give them an opportunity to disconnect. Please keep safe and thank you again for joining us today.

Madam Clerk, we will briefly sound check the second panel and resume shortly.

We'll be suspending for about two to five minutes, maximum.