Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 7th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

[Dr. Charles Burton]

—Mr. Chiu would still be in Parliament today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Respectfully, we can make the beep-beep go longer, if that would help. I just don't think it helps. I will leave that with all of us, because we are able to do well.

Ms. O'Connell, you have five minutes.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Through you, I would like to ask this of Mr. Mulroney.

During your tenure as ambassador, did you ever make a recommendation for a registry for China to the government that you served?

[David Mulroney]

No, I did not.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

What was the reason for that, or when did you realize that perhaps that was a mistake and that something of this nature should be implemented in Canada?

[David Mulroney]

When I was ambassador to China, my focus was on China. When I retired and I wrote a book and travelled across the country and talked to people, I began to see that our China problem wasn't in China. It was now in Canada.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

But as ambassador, would you not—

[David Mulroney]

I talked constantly about the importance of security, threats to information and the need for ministers and members of Parliament to guard their documents safely. That was a real focus for me. I met with all of the senior security people in Ottawa when I came back. We talked about what was happening, so now that was a priority for me.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Okay. Good.

What was the government of the day's reaction? What concrete steps were then put in place to deal with the security threats and to inform MPs and things like that?

[David Mulroney]

Again, I wasn't back in Canada for how elections were run—

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Sorry. Not just elections—

[David Mulroney]

—but I think the government was appropriately security conscious when they were in China. That's the only thing I could see—that when they came to China, they were appropriately security conscious, as were other governments.

I travelled to China with Mr. Chrétien and with Mr. Martin as well.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Okay, but you didn't have specific recommendations to the government of the day, based on what you saw in your role.

[David Mulroney]

I had a lot of recommendations. I remember bringing together the economic deputy ministers and the defence and security deputy ministers to talk about the situation we were getting into back in 2010-11, when more than half of Canada saw China as this unlimited opportunity and the other half saw it as a threat. I said we need to integrate this now. I had some success in that, but not complete success.

I was very conscious of the security situation vis-à-vis China. I had also been assistant deputy minister for Asia in Ottawa when Mr. Chrétien was Prime Minister, and Mr. Martin, and I saw how the Chinese ambassador of the day worked then too. I was very vocal about that.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Right, but subsequent measures needed to be implemented so that they would remain in place for successive governments, and those legislative or regulatory changes didn't happen.

You mentioned the MP security or MP awareness. This was something I raised as a parliamentarian myself, that MPs get little to no briefings or training on how to even deal with that. Clearly, that issue persisted even past your time in flagging it.

[David Mulroney]

They always got a briefing from me.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Absolutely. Thank you.

Madam Chair, if I have time, I want to get to a question for Mr. Johnson.

You spoke about literacy. My colleague Ms. Blaney raised literacy and education, and if I have time, I'd like to quickly ask about legislation.

I as a Canadian found it very concerning and upsetting to know that, for example, hashtags could be hidden in codes and programming for videos, and that Canadians wouldn't even know, unless they knew what to look for, that they themselves were being targeted. Is there a role for legislation, or also for governments, to require platforms or some sort of awareness for Canadians that if there are hidden hashtags, Canadians know they are being targeted? You can't just hide coding for specific groups to then share.

[Matthew Johnson]

I can't take a position on the specific legislation, but what I can say is this: There certainly is a role for appropriate legislation and regulation in addressing disinformation.

It is also not possible, as the British scholar Sonia Livingstone has said, to be literate in something that is not legible. In order for Canadians to be able to critically engage with the media that we consume, it needs to be at a certain level of transparency, whether that transparency has to do with making things like hidden hashtags clear or whether it is about making clear how algorithmic decisions are made in delivering or recommending content.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you.

I have very little time, but in terms of the use of local media by foreign state actors to somewhat legitimize content, is that part of the literacy program you would also recommend?

[Matthew Johnson]

I would say that the literacy program that we recommend and the programs that we currently deliver would address that. It wouldn't be targeted. It's not targeted specifically at that, but certainly any digital media literacy program is going to address how to evaluate whether or not a source of news is reliable and how to read news critically.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to talk about the foreign agents registry toolbox.

My question is for both witnesses.

Yesterday, Minister Mendicino testified before the Special Committee on the Canada-People's Republic of China Relationship. He spoke of the toolbox, but he didn't really answer the question when asked when the tools would be made available. I would like to know what you think about an issue that was raised: the minister said that he was worried about perhaps offending people because of their nationality or the current situation. He also spoke of stereotypes.

At the end of the day, is the Canadian government is trying to keep some information on Chinese interference on the down-low so as not to offend the Chinese-Canadian community, either because it does not want to foster a feeling of stigmatization, or because of fear of retaliation?

Both of you may take all the time you need to answer this question.

[David Mulroney]

I saw those comments, and I must say that I was discouraged when I saw them.

There are a couple of things to consider. The most important is that a with lot of what China is doing in its interference, the first victims are in the diaspora community. The Chinese state will say to a Chinese student at a university, “We heard that you were speaking about independence in your class, and that could be bad for your family back home”, or they say to Uighurs, “You'll never see your mother again if you keep this up”, so in terms of not acting and finding reasons not to act, by all means be careful. Be sensitive and be respectful in terms of how you do it. The very fact that you announce that you're doing it already sends a message to the Chinese, a very important message, a message we are not sending.

I would announce the registry. Then do the consultations and hear from the Chinese community, but also hear from the Tibetan community, hear from the Uighur community, hear from Falun Gong activists, who are all being persecuted here in Canada by agents of the Chinese state who increasingly act like it's a little piece of China.