Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Feb. 20th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

We're out of time on this round, so please give a very brief answer.

[Sergio Marchi]

I agree, and I've said as much. The recent ministerial visits were positive and valuable, but a relationship with China also has to happen at the most senior of political levels. Therefore I hope the Prime Minister can and will complement with his counterparts the kind of relationship-building his ministers are doing. Then you will truly have the making of a relationship that will stand the test of time and allow us to tackle the toughest issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Mr. Silva.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witness for being here as well.

The committee has been struggling with the whole issue of a genuine engagement between Canada and China on the issue of human rights, and whether the bilateral human rights dialogue can play a bigger role in Canadian foreign policy in China. How you go about this dialogue is very important. Certainly there are those who argue that the dialogue is not working and we should just abandon it and go back to square one. If there is some measure of success, we'd certainly like to hear what it is, so we can assess whether this is working or not.

The whole issue to me is how do you render the universal principles of human rights effective at the local level--how do you go about doing that without also engaging local governments, authorities, and NGOs? The problem is that our dialogue with China or any other country is always government to government. We talk about bilateral relationships, and it's the federal government versus their government.

At times when we talk about human rights it seems to them that we're lecturing them. But we're lecturing a regime, not the whole population. Obviously there are many people in China who have genuine concerns about human rights and want to advance the cause of human rights. We're not taking issue with those people. But how do you go about engaging those individuals so we can bring about effective change? I'm not sure. It's a big question in my mind, but I really believe we cannot have a genuine dialogue without those local engagements. Otherwise this is all going to be useless, because at the government-to-government level it's not working.

Maybe Paul Evans can answer that.

[Paul Evans]

Thank you for the question.

Like you, I share the view that the human rights dialogue is not performing to maximum capacity. But I think we need to take a step back. That human rights dialogue is just one square in a much bigger set of initiatives that Canadian governments, universities, and the private sector have put in place over about the last eighteen years, for advancing human rights discussions in China.

The problems in the dialogue itself have been reviewed rather carefully by your committee and I won't comment on them, except to say that, by itself, the dialogue not very helpful. However, in the context of a concerted effort that has several other dimensions to government-led activities, where government-led activities connect to what NGO's, foundations, or universities are doing, that's interesting.

Madam St-Hilaire asked us what we can do that's new. One thing that has been very valuable out of this subcommittee's hearings is talking not just about that government-to-government dialogue in isolation, but how it is going to connect to what NGO's and a number of others are doing.

As we look to the future, we're going to have to find new mechanisms for engaging China at multiple levels. I think corporations, on corporate social responsibility, as we discussed, can open up a new front both in their talks with Chinese counterparts, but also through connections of associations. The Canada China Business Council would be a kind of instrument for engaging some of their Chinese partners.

We're on the edge of something. No Canadians feel we can go backwards in our promotion of human rights in China. Every signal that we are getting through our polling, through what we hear at this committee and elsewhere, is that Canadians want to move on it. Now we might have a little bit of new energy, and we're going to need some new mechanisms. But the old architecture is not wrong, it's just not enough and needs to be improved. At least that would be my view.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

You wouldn't agree, then, that the present bilateral human rights dialogue needs to be expanded. Would you abandon it or just expand on that relationship?

[Paul Evans]

I can't give a reasoned judgment, but having seen that dialogue unfold, having seen what other countries are saying about that dialogue, this is not a dead duck. It's a duck that is hobbling on one foot and needs to be improved. I think several good recommendations have already been made, but the most important one is that we don't assume and don't focus too much on this dialogue. On a scale of one to ten, I would say it's at a three or four in terms of usefulness, but put in the context of nine or ten other activities where it could be a focal point, then we might get a seven out of that organization.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Is that it, Mr. Silva?

We're actually out of time on that round, Mr. Marchi, but we'll allow you to respond to that.

[Sergio Marchi]

I was just going to say that there has also been considerable testimony in terms of CIDA's role, but in thinking of your question, I think it is also a role that CIDA has tried to fill in the past, not necessarily just government to government, but in working with provinces, regions, and communities.

I had the benefit of visiting a number of those CIDA projects in China, where there was terrific success with those projects and a real relationship that was built, not necessarily with the government or with the leaders of that area, but really with the community leaders of those areas. So however your committee wishes to look on the role of CIDA, I think that's one of the roles CIDA can play to build the capacity, if you will, for that civil society.

Someone mentioned that there are something like 30,000 NGOs. They may not fit the definition of NGOs as we know them, but hopefully, through evolution, they can and they will be. But I think you're right: you have to have a multi-dimensional approach. Government to government is one important facet, but it's not the only one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Since Madam St-Hilaire has waived her second round, perhaps I could just come back to one of the questions I was asking before about this warm politics or warm economics of the status quo ante that you characterized, Mr. Evans.

Is it not true that following the Tiananmen Square massacre, the Government of Canada imposed significant sanctions on the PRC and took other measures, such as granting refugee status to PRC students resident in Canada at the time?

[Paul Evans]

Yes, sir, you are correct on the latter part, but Canada–China trade actually did not decline after Tiananmen Square. It was back to a period that Mr. Khan would find interesting, which is when we had a trade surplus with China.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

So at a time when the Government of Canada was extremely vigorous in its condemnation of human rights violations, and particularly the Tiananmen Square massacre, at a time when some sanctions were imposed, that was followed by a period of positive growth in trade.

[Paul Evans]

I would say it was in the context of virtually every other western country. Also, “sanctions” is not quite the right word in regard to our trade. After Tiananmen, we limited the kinds of political exchanges we had with China for a period of time. We did not put in place financial sanctions, except around some specific hardware that could be seen as useful to the Chinese military.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

So there was a chilling in the political relationship, but a growth in the economic relationship following that.

[Paul Evans]

The economic relationship continued at about its same pace. It increased slightly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

In terms of your characterization of the status quo policy of cold politics, warm economics, have you seen, in the past year, any data to suggest that Canadian companies have lost contracts or that any Canadian commercial interests have been dilatorily affected as a consequence of what you characterize as cold politics?

[Paul Evans]

No, sir, we can't point to any specifics, but I would say that we are in a moment in which we don't know yet the full Chinese reaction to what long-term cool politics would mean.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Is it true that Canadian companies—Mr. Marchi, please feel free to comment on this—have expressed ongoing concerns about problems in regard to the violation of intellectual property rights and copyright law in the PRC? Is that accurate?

[Sergio Marchi]

Certainly on the intellectual property front, I think the Chinese have made huge progress in terms of legislation and regulation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

But is it accurate that there are problems?

[Sergio Marchi]

Let me get to your answer.

The biggest challenge or problem, as you put it, is in the implementation and in the enforcement. There is still a problem and a challenge on the enforcement side, and obviously that's not something akin just to our country, but certainly the United States and the European Union.

In their discussions and certainly at the WTO, the implementation and enforcement side is the area they need to do the most work with. In fact, our countries are also helping them in terms of setting up the systems and regulations for those enforcements.

There is a problem in enforcement. They have the laws and regulations in place. Now we have to give them time to certainly make sure the law is being respected.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Some Canadian companies active with respect to China have claimed—certainly I have correspondence from several—that they have been victims of industrial espionage. Has this been an issue or problem, or do you dismiss that out of hand?

[Sergio Marchi]

I haven't had any companies talk to me about it, so I can't comment on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Really?

Mr. Evans, do you think there's an issue in that respect?

[Paul Evans]

I think many Canadian companies that operate in Asia report examples of what you've characterized as industrial espionage. It is not unique to Canadian companies operating in China.