Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on June 8th, 2026

[Chemi Lhamo]

You can go ahead. I'll translate, if that's okay.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Could we pause the time for a moment while they're translating?

[Gyal Lo]

In terms of the argument between the individual and the collective, China is intentionally making no future for a collective of Tibet, but at the same time, they selectively provide good conditions for those who can follow them. This is not in the national interest of Tibet. It's about trying to fully part from Tibet. Several individuals are following them. Of course, I'm not denying this.

Concerning the collective future of Tibet, the majority of people are hoping and striving for the future of Tibet, not for the few individuals' future. For example, in the monastery, the Chinese government is offering a certificate for a lama. It's from a sociological term. It's called monastic agent. Any lama who accepts the Chinese government's certificate of the lama loses people's support on the ground. A lama who rejected the Chinese government's certificate of the lama gained support from the ground.

That struggle is already dividing the monastery. I call this the multi-functional institution in Tibetan society. They divide those. It's a live example. I can see it. Our people on the ground still wanted to maintain the Tibetan future, not the assimilated future.

[Chemi Lhamo]

I would add that it's who the collective is that we're referring to. Who does the collective include? It's only one Chinese supremacy identity above anyone and everyone. That's the collective that they supposedly represent. Then also, the impact and the influence would be all of Asia if we talk about it from a global perspective.

[Lhadon Tethong]

The Chinese people themselves.... We've seen it time and time again, most recently in the white paper revolution after the COVID lockdown—the zero-COVID measures—if you follow at all what is happening and what people are saying. It's this idea that the Chinese government has the collective best interests of the wider society at heart. I think what you see now, although it's difficult to get the information out of China in any way because they shut it down right away, is that more and more we hear that people can see very much that the government is so focused on all the outward-facing things that it's not taking care of the people themselves, and there's unrest.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Certainly. I would argue that the responsibility of every government is to ensure the well-being of one's people. That includes Tibetan people and every other minority that you mentioned. If there are psychological and also physical impacts leading potentially to suicide due to these forced residential schools, that is not taking care of the well-being of one's citizens and one's countrymen. It's counterproductive.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Mr. Zuberi.

I would like to invite Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe to take the floor for seven minutes, please.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for joining us today for this important study.

Mr. Lo, what do you think are the main new findings in the 2025 report compared to what came out of the 2021 research? What major differences do you see between the two reports?

[Gyal Lo]

The major difference between the first report and the second report is that in the first report we were able to expose the boarding school as a colonial school, which we defined as having a great impact on the Tibetan civilization. In the second report, we were able to take it inside the boarding school to see what's happening, as my colleague Lhadon had mentioned. The curriculum excludes Tibetan culture and language in an extreme way. At the same time, it cuts off the two levels of the Tibetan knowledge system from the student. In the curriculum, in the textbook, it mentions history as a subject, but there's no part that's consistent with the Tibetan philosophy of education. As Tibetans, we emphasize the combination of wisdom and compassion. That's the fundamental approach of Tibetan education. What's happening in the school is they're educating and nurturing our children to have hatred.

For example, in the preschool reading material, we can see clearly there's a Chinese soldier fighting a Japanese soldier. It's nurturing in them hatred, not compassion. There's no concept of compassion in the classroom. There is no wisdom in the classroom. It's all about patriarchal ways of the CCP and Chinese culture. It's also anti-religious.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

There's something we haven't talked about enough yet today, which is how language is the basis for forming thought. This means that when a child loses their language, they automatically lose their identity. Tibetan thought comes first and foremost from the Tibetan language. We've seen it even here in Canada, where Ontario and Manitoba have banned French language teaching from schools. It led to a rapid assimilation of francophone populations in those provinces.

Isn't that exactly what you just told us? How can Canada not see that?

[Gyal Lo]

The language itself is a way to inform the way of thinking. If you lose language, then you're going to lose the way of thinking. The way of thinking that produces the culture and the knowledge system is where we can clearly see China completely shifting the deviating civilization or part of it. We can see it.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Ms. Lhamo, for some time now, you've been talking about the Carney government's new vision for Canada's relationship with China.

Canada had the residential schools system and, as I said, French language teaching in school was banned in some provinces. However, Canada has officially recognized Tibetan self-determination through a motion that I had the honour of sponsoring.

Despite all that, despite the reports we received from your teams, among others, we see Canada making diplomatic and trade rapprochements with China. How can this paradox be explained, given Canada's history? How can we explain that, knowing Canada's history in defending international human rights?

[Chemi Lhamo]

I want to re-emphasize that we live in a very complex world.

As Tibetan Buddhists, we were often told about interdependency and how everything comes from millions of causes and conditions. Even this moment that we get to share with you comes together because we were able to make our flight, because you all went to a vote and so forth.

Similarly, I think that, right now, the condition that we see and the steps we see the Canadian government taking.... We're really trying to give you a warning. We know China really well. Time and time again, it has failed to deliver on any of the promises when it comes to human rights and improving their situation. We saw that in 2008, when it wanted the Beijing Olympics. The world turned a blind eye when it wanted to join the World Trade Organization.

I want to emphasize that we are very appreciative of Canada's leadership when it comes to this specific committee. Three years ago when we came, you delivered a report. We saw your recommendations, which echoed the United Nations' recommendations. That, again, encouraged us to continue to fight and continue to find the truth about the abuse and the neglect inside of these schools. That led to us finding out about the four- and five-year-olds. When we first came here in 2023, it was six- to 18-year-olds. Time and time again, I think that you folks have both the responsibility and an opportunity to act. It is disappointing to see the direction in which the Canadian government is heading.

It is not too late. There is so much time for recourse and to take the right direction that is balanced with our priorities, our national security and a rights value alignment with the Canadian government.

Thank you.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

I'll continue on this subject in the next round, because I won't have enough of the 15 seconds I have left.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Okay.

Ms. Vandenbeld, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I know that you have testified here before. Three years ago, I was here. It is heartbreaking that three years later, you are reporting not only that this is still continuing, but that it is getting worse. I certainly hope that, by having this hearing, we might be able to make some difference.

My first question is for Tenzin Choekyi.

You mentioned very briefly in your opening remarks that there was an additional change since the last time; they're using the legal system. Could you elaborate on the kinds of laws that have been passed since you were last here?

[Tenzin Choekyi]

Yes. The key legal change is what was announced in March of this year, which my co-panellist emphasized. It's the ethnic unity law. This will take effect in July of this year. The ethnic unity law encapsulates everything—all of the assimilationist policies—that has been under way for many decades, especially in the last two decades.

On this ethnic unity law, the members of the European Parliament already passed a resolution in April of this year. They've called on the Chinese government to repeal the law. They have also warned of the severe consequences on EU-China relations if this law comes into effect. They have also called on the member states of the European Union to suspend their extradition treaties with China and called on the European Council to impose sanctions on the Chinese officials responsible for this ethnic unity law.

In Tibet, even before this law was codified, the Chinese government used a Tibetan staple food, tsampa—barley flour—which Tibetans identify with as being distinctive of Tibet. It's barley flour that grows at high altitude in Tibet. The Chinese government used tsampa as an example to say that, like all ethnic minorities integrating and becoming united, Tibetans too should be rounded up like barley flour and moulded together. This is the level of horrific disrespect that the Chinese government has displayed with signboards in the capital city of Lhasa in Tibet, using this staple food we've identified ourselves with since our ancestors to say that we are all one nationality. Now this has been codified into the ethnic unity law.

There has been one major change, especially in kindergarten, that is a pilot program. In Nagqu, in Tibet's so-called autonomous region, the Chinese government has put into place a pilot program of deploying 13 veterans in schools, and it includes kindergartens as well. These veterans are reported in Chinese state media for teaching discipline, motivation and air drills if there is an earthquake or a natural disaster, but what this pilot program is hiding underneath is showing young children that veterans are their examples.

Even beyond this new pilot program, to children from preschool and everywhere in the society, and ever since the Chinese Communist Party celebrated its 100th anniversary, they are propagandizing red education. They are propagandizing national defence awareness and drills, and all of that in the Chinese language.

These are major changes.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you. It sounds like there's a codification, almost. Where it may have been subtle and hidden, it's now quite overt that the end goal really is to eliminate the different cultures.

I see you nodding, and I wonder if that is because I see that the Uyghurs, Tibetans and other minorities are all being treated the same way in this sense.

We spoke last time about the fact that you're learning.... Like what happens with the Tibetan children, they learn from that and then use that with other groups. I wonder if you could talk to me a bit about how that is happening.

I'll go to Ms. Tethong first.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

You have just a few seconds to answer, please, because we have already gone over time.

[Lhadon Tethong]

I'm sorry; what was the question?

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

It's for the next round.

Excuse me, Anita. You'll probably give her a chance later.

Now I would like to invite Mr. Davies to take the floor for five minutes.

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much to all the witnesses who gave presentations today.

I've said this before in this committee: This was not my natural interest when I became an elected member of Parliament. My background was in finance. My party put me on this committee, and I'm really grateful to have had the opportunity to learn from my colleagues and everyone who has presented. I've learned so much from everybody around this table, and I really hope that Canadians get a chance to listen to and watch the presentations here today.

One of the things that bothers me, as I have learned through this process over the last year—particularly when it comes to China—is that it seems we've hit a tipping point. In my view, it seems to me now that we are willing to sacrifice human rights and the challenges that you face—the challenges faced by Tibetans, Mongolians, Uyghurs—for economic prosperity.

Our traditional adherence to human rights and the values that we Canadians have espoused for years at the United Nations and around the world mean that nations play well in the sandbox. I'm not sure which one of you said earlier that we play by the rules, but we're not playing by the rules. We are now going to be allowing goods from China that have been made by slave labour and are highly subsidized by China. Where do we draw the line? At what point do you stand up and say, “We're sorry, Canada. You're not actually doing what you promised to do”?

I'm going to ask Ms. Gyatso for a response on that, because I continually see that we're always trying, but we're willing to sacrifice for economic gain, and that bothers me.

[Tencho Gyatso]

I think that is one area where the small Tibetan exile community has been working across countries and nations. There are 7.5 million Tibetans inside Tibet, but outside of Tibet, we are 150,000 spread across 27 countries. People are surprised to hear that, because they think it's such a small community, plus one Dalai Lama.

What we're trying to do is build coalitions. When western countries speak of their values in a coordinated fashion, it puts China on the defensive. Otherwise, China gets very emboldened, especially in its UN status and other fields. When China is up for review on children's rights, that is a time when, with the leadership of the Canadians, we can bring together many host countries to speak in one voice.

Again, the new ethnic unity and progress law that some of my colleagues have spoken about is a space where it will be good to show a united front. I know the Germans are putting out a report, and the European Parliament is, and many others, so I think those—

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I have limited time. I'm really interested to know what your recommendation is. Perhaps, Ms. Tethong, you can give me your view on what the trade-off is.

To me, it's like we're trying to push rope uphill. It's an impossible task. We want to defend human rights. We want to be your advocate. We have talked a lot about transnational repression, and Ms. Lhamo, you've been subjected to it here in Canada. As one of my colleagues would say, is the juice worth the squeeze? Are we not doing the right thing by allowing our trade to continue to expand while turning a blind eye to human rights violations?

[Lhadon Tethong]

Having done this work now for 30 years, I think what we are clear about from the Tibetan side is that it's not either-or. This idea that you could pursue only the trade and not talk human rights or that you don't pursue the trade and then you can.... The key is that it's both. Especially in this moment when the world is realigning and is in this difficult position and all the countries together are in difficult positions when it comes to trade and tariffs and whatnot, this is the time to, I believe, push for both, because China needs the world too. China is the target of all these economic challenges that the world is facing. China's facing them too. There's an opportunity for like-minded nations to work together and not give up all this ground.

One of the things the Chinese government makes people, nations and governments believe is that either you say nothing or you say everything, and then we're not going to be friends. It's just not true. We must push for human rights. We must push for real action. We have to hold fast to these values while engaging with China, perhaps more now than ever before, because we can see how intent this regime is, especially under Xi Jinping's rule, to change the world order.