Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 14th, 2022

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

I'm a bit confused by that answer. Of course, all of the countries involved in AUKUS are part of the Five Eyes. They already co-operate on the areas you mentioned, but they are committing to, presumably, further and deeper co-operation by signing on to AUKUS.

Should I infer from your response that there is nothing new in these areas with respect to AUKUS, or that there are things that are new being advanced in terms of co-operation? If there are things that are new and that are being committed to, and Canada is not a part of them, then that's potentially a problem, is it not?

[Kevin Hamilton]

It's my understanding that there is no exclusivity with respect to those other areas of the AUKUS agreement that would exclude Canada or New Zealand or the other partners of Five Eyes. AUKUS creates essentially a commercial deal around the nuclear submarine procurement and then re-emphasizes the other aspects of co-operation in those areas that I mentioned earlier.

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

Your understanding of those other aspects of AUKUS, then, is that they are simply re-emphasizing or repeating things that are already committed to in the context of Five Eyes co-operation.

[Kevin Hamilton]

That is my understanding. Yes.

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

On another matter, have any ministers from the current government since 2015 met with representatives of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office here in Ottawa?

[Weldon Epp]

To my knowledge, they have not.

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

Is there a reason that would be the case?

[Weldon Epp]

There is no specificity in our one China policy that would preclude it.

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

What's the most senior level of official or member of the government that has met with representatives of that office?

[Weldon Epp]

To my knowledge, apart from ongoing engagement, including by me and other members of senior management within our department, most recently through the annual Canada-Taiwan economic co-operation platform—our annual joint planning council—it would be at the assistant deputy minister level.

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

Why did Canadian government officials not want to see Tsai Ing-wen receive the John McCain prize from the Halifax security forum?

[Weldon Epp]

With respect, I'm not sure I would entirely agree with the premise of the question. What's on the record is that Minister Sajjan, then minister of defence, made it clear to Parliament that the Government of Canada supports the Halifax international symposium and will continue to do so, and that the decisions taken by that independent Canadian conference or institution will remain independent, including who they invite to meetings and who they choose to provide awards or recognition to.

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

Were any representatives [Inaudible—Editor]

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Mr. Genuis, I apologize. that's your time. We'll have an opportunity to follow up, I'm sure.

Thank you very much, Mr. Epp.

We'll now go to Dr. Fry for five minutes, please.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you, everyone, for coming and giving us such great answers.

I wanted to focus on a big picture issue here. I've heard my colleagues Michael Chong and Heather McPherson ask about the broader implications.

We are seeing a global movement to get rid of democracy. We know that Taiwan and Ukraine are democratic. We see Russia doing what it's doing in Ukraine and we see China taking steps against Hong Kong and Taiwan. They're invading air space, moving very close to naval lines, etc.

Is your sense that this is part of a joint action to get rid of democracy in the two major regions, i.e. Europe and the Asia-Pacific?

We're members of the G7. The Japanese prime minister talked a lot about that free and open concept in the Indo-Pacific region. Is this something you're concerned about?

Is Canada planning a longer-term strategy to ensure that democracy remains clear, with the rule of law, free and fair elections, freedom of the press, and adherence to human rights? All of these are being denied right now by both of those countries: China and Russia are absolutely ignoring them.

Are we concerned about that big picture and that long-range plan to rid the world of democratic institutions and democratic nations?

[Weldon Epp]

That's a big question, but I'd like to thank the member for it. I would like to speak to that in a couple of ways.

I'll also take the opportunity to return to the question of the Canadian mandates in letters to ministers and the statement in the Speech from the Throne of the desire to comport with an Indo-Pacific strategy, as the member raised. That will be the context going forward—as we understand it—for the government to reinvest in and communicate even more clearly its commitment to the values of rule of law and principles that we've invested in and fought for in the Asia- and Indo-Pacific region. It is particularly the case on the Korean peninsula, where we continue to work with partners to uphold the rule of law and all of these, not least sanctions, to prevent nuclear proliferation.

Canada, as you know, has been very active in participating in augmenting a rules-based approach to the region in international trade. My colleague Ms. Speirs can speak directly to that in the context of the CPTPP and bilateral FTAs.

To the question of democracy, across that landscape which, at points, can be bleak, we have numerous partners within the Indo-Pacific region, including Taiwan, with whom we share a commitment to democratic governance, human rights and the rule of law.

As executive director Reeves mentioned earlier, rather than only working to include Taiwan more meaningfully where it should be and where our interests require it in international organizations, we also need to be creative in working with Taiwan and other partners through platforms like the GCTF to amplify its experiences, not least, for example, in the area of media freedoms. Taiwan has an incredibly robust and, frankly, very active domestic media context.

Those are the sorts of values and practices that Canada shares with Taiwan. We want to work through a number of platforms to do so. To your—

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Go ahead. I wanted to ask you another question, so if you could....

[Weldon Epp]

As the government develops a new Indo-Pacific strategy, I want to emphasize that it has not stopped decisions being taken to move forward and work more closely with our partners, not least Japan. You mentioned the free and open Indo-Pacific approach of the Japanese. You will have seen last year and summer that the Canadian government announced further, deeper co-operation with Japan within that framework.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

You don't like hypothetical questions. Nobody likes them. They make an idiot of all of us if we answer them.

What I wanted to say is Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Taiwan is not. Will it embolden China—not that China needs to be emboldened any further—to follow through on what Russia is doing in Ukraine? If so, who are we going to be allied with in that case, if we have to take a step?

[Weldon Epp]

I think Canadians will look forward to hearing from the government as it develops an Indo-Pacific strategy, which will address some of those issues as they come forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Dr. Fry.

Mr. Bergeron, you have two and a half minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will continue on the exact same subject.

I was a bit surprised by the response given by Mr. Epp. First, he said that he didn't want to respond to the hypothetical question about a possible invasion of Taiwan by the People's Republic of China. Then, in the same breath, he added that the PRC had never closed the door on reunifying China by force. Concerning a response to hypothetical questions, I believe that Canada has very clearly stated what it would do in the event of a hypothetical new invasion in Ukraine.

Why, then, is there this resistance to answering the question about a possible invasion of Taiwan, given that many Canadian citizens live on the island and are very certainly interested in knowing what the Canadian government would do if the island were invaded?

[Weldon Epp]

Mr. Chair, I want to be clear. Canada does have a policy, hypothetical or not, and we've been consistent.

As we have for 50 years under our one China policy, in calling on both sides to seek to resolve outstanding differences through dialogue and peaceful means with regard to potential future actions taken by one side or the other, we need to respond to events as they evolve and not preclude the possibility for positive outcomes.

What I said in my earlier comments was that we are deeply concerned with actions being taken by the Chinese side, which are adding both pressure and tension to the region and potentially being seen as a dress rehearsal for future actions.

The Chinese government, as I said, has never ruled out reunification by force, but it is also active in other means of putting pressure on Taiwan. We're alive to all of those, including economic coercion and reducing Taiwan's international space. That also includes the kind of activity we've seen recently with respect to Lithuania and the EU. That's why the government is seeking to join consultations on the EU's action against China and the WTO with respect to Lithuania. Canada will continue to stand up and oppose economic coercion as well as more overt military coercion and threats.

Last, I would say that as you've seen in the last year—and my colleague Mr. Hamilton can speak to this further—given the rising tensions not just in the Taiwan Strait but across the region, in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, you will see an uptick in the operational frequency of deploying Royal Canadian Navy assets in that region, working with our partners to undertake new, interoperable exercises. All of those are part of our preparations and contributions to stability today and in the future in that region.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

Colleagues, we've moved inside of the 10-minute time frame for the votes.

What I propose is that we give our colleague Ms. McPherson the floor for her two and a half minutes, which will take us very close to five minutes.

I'm also advised that we have the capacity, on the House of Commons side, to extend to 1:15. If colleagues want to check their schedules and obligations, I'd like to do that by consensus if the committee agrees to do it. Please turn your mind to that possibility.

In the meantime, Ms. McPherson, you have the floor now for two and a half minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to follow up on the Indo-Pacific strategy, when we can expect that and what it will look like.

You answered my colleague Mr. Chong that you didn't know when it was going to be done, when it would be released, and whether it would be public, but that the plan was for that strategy to be public. Obviously, it is very important for parliamentarians to have access to that strategy so we can see how it's being implemented.

One of my key concerns is the feminist foreign policy, which we have also not yet seen but which is meant to be released by the government.

How will we ensure that the Indo-Pacific strategy incorporates the FFP, and what will that look like? What are the processes that are in place right now to ensure that this happens?