Thank you. I'll again offer a few opening comments.
On one level, what we're seeing with the Nuctech affair is the kind of disconnect that plagues bureaucracies. I was aware of the risk of disconnect when I served as ambassador to China. We had a dozen different organizations at the embassy, each working directly for managers in Canada. I used to say that my role as ambassador required me to be connector-in-chief. This was essential because failure to connect and to see the bigger picture almost always meant failure at the level of larger Canadian interests.
Some very significant Canadian interests were at risk in the Nuctech affair, and you've heard about some of them already. Briefly, it's not in Canada's interest to advance the global dominance of a Chinese state-owned technology powerhouse, or to create long-term access and partnerships in our system that could make us vulnerable in the future.
Although bureaucratic disconnects happen in normal times, these are not normal times. I was secretary to the independent panel on Canada's future role in Afghanistan, also known as the Manley panel. Canada's mission in Kandahar was failing because the Canadian Forces, Foreign Affairs and CIDA each saw the mission differently.
The very wise people on the panel said that Afghanistan was a once in a decade challenge, one that required new structures and new approaches. We needed a single vision, one that was owned and led by the Prime Minister. We needed to identify achievable objectives, to assign responsibilities clearly, to resource the challenge appropriately and, above all, to see the mission as a Canadian priority, one that transcended specific military, diplomatic or aid objectives.
The panel's focus on process was unorthodox. Ottawa is a town that is in love with policy ideas and bored to tears by policy implementation, by the details of how things actually get done. As the panel pointed out, however, attempting something of national importance without mobilizing and organizing for success is irresponsible, and a dereliction of duty to Canada and Canadians.
Managing the Canadian implications of the rise of China isn't a once in a decade challenge. It's closer to a once in a century challenge, requiring a complete rethinking of foreign and domestic policies.
The Nuctech case is more than a bureaucratic disconnect, more than a performance failure by a government that is more challenged than most when it comes to actually getting things done. The experience offers us a brief worrying glimpse of the state of China competence in a government that has had vivid daily warnings of the extent to which China poses what the Deputy Minister of Global Affairs has referred to as “a strategic challenge to Canada”. However, we've seen no signs of heightened awareness, no sign of increased urgency to identify and better manage anything and everything having to do with China, and no evidence of any effort to galvanize the entire government, all departments and agencies, in an effort of pressing national importance.
This isn't actually a policy problem. It's a problem arising from the absence of policy. The officials you've already heard from were well-intentioned, but they didn't display any real sense of urgency or even much awareness of our China challenge. This isn't their fault. It points to a failure of leadership, a lack of that sense of priority and high-level accountability required to face up to and intelligently manage what may well be a once in a century challenge.