Foreign Affairs Committee on April 18th, 2023

[Marie-Josée Langlois]

In terms of the implementation, yes, it's incumbent on all the member states to decide how they coordinate. If there are two levels of coordination, they will do it among themselves.

You also touched on coordination among countries across discussions internationally. That coordination happens as well, which can take a lot of time in terms of.... As you know, sanctions are most effective when we move together, so we try to have discussions to ensure that when we have common interests, we can work together to align them.

In this case, you would have, potentially, international discussions among Canada, the United States, EU members, etc., and then the EU members would themselves regroup and decide on what their best approach is, just like we would do in Canada with other departments in terms of deciding what the best Canadian approach would be.

Those different types of levels of discussions take time, yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

We'll now go to Mr. Sarai before going to Mr. Bergeron.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Maybe you can tell us.... We're thinking of, or have on our list of things to do, a sanctions report.

Would this type of topic be better discussed and fleshed out in a study on the sanctions regime itself and how these sanctions could be enabled, how effective they are, what their process is, what process can we streamline better, etc.?

Can you elaborate?

[Marie-Josée Langlois]

Yes, we certainly welcome engagement with committees and the discussions. A sanctions report would have to be.... If I understand what you're describing, it would be fairly broad, so we would need some time to evaluate and assess it. We'd be happy to continue the discussion.

We note that right now, the Senate is working on its own report and some of its views and recommendations. We'd be happy to engage in that context here with the committee, if there is an interest in discussing sanctions further.

If it's the broad scope of sanctions—from how we make them, all the way to implementation—of course, that would be more in depth and it would take a bit more time from our side, but we'd be happy to do that.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

What is the Senate studying right now? What do they have before them?

[Marie-Josée Langlois]

The Senate has been working on a review of the sanctions legislation and will be putting forth a report and recommendations later on. The timing is to be determined, but that should be coming.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Are you suggesting that it would be smart of us to wait for that report to be done? I know it's not in your purview necessarily, but could you opine on that?

[Marie-Josée Langlois]

I'm sorry. There's a lot of noise. Could you repeat the question?

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Are you suggesting that we wait for that study to be completed, so that we can opine on it afterwards? Is that what your suggestion is, not as an official but as an individual? Could you shed some light on that?

[Marie-Josée Langlois]

I wouldn't opine on that. The report will be forthcoming. I'm not sure what the timing would be. It would certainly be an interesting perspective for us to review.

Whether the committee would like to review the report or engage in that discussion, we'll defer to the committee, of course, but our understanding is that the Senate report will be forthcoming.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Bergeron.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Chair, I'm listening very carefully to the debate on this amendment, and I can't help but notice something. All the amendment would do is remove 15 lines from the original bill to make us adhere to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons and the rules of the Senate, which we are already required to do.

I can't help but say that the motion the government has put forward—and I'm surprised it was even deemed admissible—would simply invalidate provisions in the original bill that don't sit well with the government. The House has already adopted those provisions, however.

I want to let you know that I will be voting against the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

It now being one o'clock, I think it's almost time to adjourn. Prior to doing that, I understand that Mr. Chong would like to raise an issue.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

There have been discussions among members of the committee, and I believe if you seek it, you will find consent of the committee to first adopt the report that our analysts have written on the committee's travel to eastern Europe and to Belgium, and that the chair report the same to the House and that the committee requests a government response to the report.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Chong.

I think that's a great idea, should everyone agree. However, as you know, there are number of different steps we have to take for adoption of that motion.

Is there unanimous consent to adopt the travel report?

(Motion agreed to)

Excellent.

Are we fine with “Wake-up Call: The World after February 24, 2022” as the title?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Excellent.

Next we have to determine that the chair, clerk and analysts be authorized to make such grammatical and editorial changes as may be necessary without changing the substance of the report.

Is that okay with everyone?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Excellent.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the chair present the report to the House and that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Awesome.

Okay, that sounds great.

I just wanted to highlight—

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

Mr. Chair, can we add “with thanks to our analysts” to that motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Absolutely. Thank you very, very much to the analysts.

Go ahead, Mr. McKay.

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

I am not a member of this committee, but I take note that Vladimir Kara-Murza was sentenced to 25 years. May I plant a thought with the committee that this committee opine and make a statement about what is an utterly outrageous sentence? It is relevant to the entire conversation this committee has had for the last two hours.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Absolutely. Is there unanimous consent to that?