Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Dec. 8th, 2025

[François Audet]

The problem you are describing has been well documented in the media. It highlights the following fact: When a state, however sovereign it may be within its own territory, fails to address an issue or lacks control over its territory, organized crime will step in to fill the gap.

What you are describing is an example of what is happening on a small scale in Canada but on a very large scale everywhere else. When local governments, countries or regions do not have the ability to control their territory, that territory will be left, either in whole or in part, in the hands of malicious organized crime actors who will take advantage of, abuse and extort migrant populations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe.

I invite Mr. Zuberi to take the floor for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.

I'm going to start off with the safe third country agreement, which has been mentioned a few times by different panellists. It came into effect in 2004 when things were very different, and it's been maintained since then with a number of different governments.

Today we find ourselves in a different reality south of the border. We see a lot of ICE activity and a lot of deep vulnerability for migrants and undocumented people and questionable practices in dealing with these people, including deportation to Venezuela and other countries.

This question is for UNHCR, but others can also contribute.

There are aspects of the safe third country agreement that allow for suspension in exceptional times. Do you want to share a bit about whether we find ourselves in that moment right now? If so, what does the agreement say about suspending certain elements of the safe third country agreement?

[Tracey Maulfair]

To start with, as you know, the safe third country agreement is a bilateral agreement. UNHCR is not a party to the agreement, but there is a suspension—either party can suspend the agreement—and one of the reasons they would think about doing that is if some of the terms were not as they saw it. It's not really for us to judge that. It's actually for Canada to judge if it is still safe to return people to the U.S. at this point in time.

Do you want to comment on that?

[Gauri Sreenivasan]

You've said it very well. These are extraordinary times and they are different times, and that really requires of Canada an analysis of the purpose of this agreement: Who is the partner we have the agreement with, and what is the best way for us to pursue Canada's obligations to human rights and our own concerns for the border?

The options available to Canada include, as we've just explained, suspension of the full agreement, and, from the CCR's perspective, it's very hard for the government to not reach that conclusion if it looks at the evidence, because the agreement is predicated on a functioning asylum system. We literally have a head of state in the U.S. who has indicated we have put this entire system on hold. There is no partner right now in a safe third country agreement, so we could suspend the agreement for a period of time.

Also, under article 6, there is the possibility of immediately looking at, for matters of public policy, exceptions for why certain people could be admitted essentially for public interest reasons. While the CCR's position is that it makes the most sense to suspend the agreement and allow people to present themselves at points of entry in order to rely on our very robust system to assess cases on their merits, there is also the option to look at very vulnerable populations who may immediately need access.

For example, earlier this year, President Trump indicated there would only be two genders henceforth and that people who identify as trans—trans people—don't exist anymore. There was the immediate option for the Canadian government to say that article could be used to clarify that people making gender-based violence claims or claims on the basis of discrimination and persecution as trans people should be allowed to make their claims heard in Canada, because they won't be able to be seen at all in the U.S.

We have quite a few options available, including a series of short-term exemptions for vulnerable populations, while we consider what to do, though we're very conscious that for the government it feels like a very big decision and something they don't want to face. I believe the latest quote from the minister was that we have a plan so we're sticking to it, but we know that the U.S. is not sticking to that plan.

It's really a moment for us to ask ourselves where we are at this moment in history. In big moments of crisis in history in other places, such as when countries found themselves beside Nazi Germany or found themselves dealing with complete dictatorships in other countries, they have had to make decisions about what kind of neighbour they would be and what kind of border they would have. Most people in Canada, as the polling shows us, feel that people deserve a fair process at the border to be able to make a claim heard.

We feel very strongly that it would need a different orientation of resources, but with a reorientation of resources away from a prevention mode to a system support mode, you could have a very orderly process for having claims heard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you.

Mr. Majumdar, you have the floor for five minutes, please.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

I thought we had a witness about to arrive in a second.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

We'll suspend for a couple of minutes. We're waiting for a witness to arrive.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Clark‑Kazak, I would like to ask you a question.

Earlier, I noticed that you looked taken aback when I mentioned that the Carney government's new policy on international development involves creating a fairly direct link between international trade and international aid.

I think you looked taken aback as well, Ms. Sreenivasan.

I would like to hear your comments on that.

[Christina Clark-Kazak]

The goal of development aid should be development. Obviously, it is possible to link trade and development in some cases, but, as I said, trade can sometimes cause population displacement if companies invest in mines that have negative environmental impacts. We also talked about internal displacement due to natural disasters.

We are seeing that there is sometimes a direct correlation between trade and negative environmental impacts.

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

Speaking of mines, let's talk about Canadian mines or Canadian mining companies. At present, the ombud may not have the power needed to change things.

Is that true?

[Christina Clark-Kazak]

Exactly. We need to be clear about the goal. If the goal is truly to promote development, then there can be no question of putting money into the pockets of Canadian companies.

[Gauri Sreenivasan]

I have something I'd like to add.

We have seen this happen before. In the 1980s and 1990s, part of our international development aid was explicitly linked to promoting the role of companies in developing countries. If we look at the results of these programs and projects, it is clear that they did nothing in terms of humanitarian aid and long-term development. Instead, the aid was used by companies to integrate themselves into the community. There were also many problems related to human rights violations. Canadian mining companies had many negative impacts in several different countries.

This is not just about international aid. What legislative framework do we have to hold companies accountable for their actions? As you say, the Office of the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise does not currently have enough power.

Finally, international aid can support development objectives and peace-promoting community organizations. Development must therefore be linked to peace. Many women's groups, civil society groups and human rights groups are leaders in reaching peace agreements, as was the case in Guatemala in the 1990s.

Aid can accomplish many things, and it is important to ensure that our commercial objectives do not lead to any negative repercussions.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Audet, according to your research, emerging trends are likely to amplify population movement over the coming decade. I am talking about climate change, militarization and the collapse of certain governments.

Can you tell us more about that?

[François Audet]

Of all the risk factors, I believe that cuts to aid funding is the largest risk factor for global displacement. The closure of the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID, the decline in Canadian aid funding and the decline in European aid funding are creating even more instability. Reducing aid will not create conditions conducive to the development of social structures, emerging democracies or emerging regions.

These funding cuts are having a huge impact almost everywhere. I was in Europe a few weeks ago. There are fewer projects and fewer local investments in humanitarian and international aid organizations. That means that some populations who are dealing with states or governments that do not provide them with basic services will no longer be able to meet their basic needs and will thus become even more vulnerable to climate change, unfavourable market conditions and armed or criminal groups.

In addition to the changes in climate we are seeing, we are concerned that the United States' new stance, which is more predatory and less co-operative, and the significant cuts to international aid funding could lead to an increase in population movement. At present, we are talking only about American aid.

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

Japan has also reduced its aid.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you Mr. Audet and Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe.

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

Thank you, Mr. Audet.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Now I would like to welcome, from the CAUKUS Foundation, Madam Dimon Liu, director.

Thank you for being with us. We understand why you were late.

You now have the floor for five minutes.

[Dimon Liu, Director, CAUKUS Foundation]

Thank you. I apologize for being late.

Honourable chairman and honourable members of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights, it is an honour to speak before you at the Canadian Parliament.

My name is Dimon Liu. My testimony will attempt to explain why China's economic success is built on the backs of the largest number of displaced persons in human history. It is estimated that they range between 300 million to 400 million, equivalent to the total population of the United States being uprooted and forced to relocate.

In 1978, when economic reform began, China's GDP was $150 billion U.S. In 2000, when China joined the WTO, it was approximately $1.2 trillion. China's current GDP is approximately $18 trillion. In 2000, China's manufacturing output was smaller than Italy's. Today, it's larger than America's, Europe's, Japan's and South Korea's combined.

If you have ever wondered how China managed to grow so fast in such a short time, Charles Li, former chief executive of the Hong Kong stock market has the answers for you. He revealed that China owes its farmers a 40-year debt, and he listed four reasons that enabled China's rapid growth: one, the cheapest land; two, the cheapest labour; three, the cheapest capital; and four, a disregard for environmental costs.

Reason one is the cheapest land because the CCP government took the land from the farmers at little to no compensation. Reason two is the cheapest labour because these farmers, without land to farm, were forced to migrate to the city to find work at the lowest possible wages. The communist household registration system ties them perpetually to the rural areas. This means that they are not legal residents in the urban areas and that they cannot receive social benefits that legal urban residents are entitled to. They live in precarious circumstances because they could be evicted at any time. Videos of rural migrants being arrested and abused by urban police are regularly posted on social media.

One well-known incident of eviction occurred in November 2017. Cai Qi, now the second most powerful man in China after Xi Jinping, was a municipal official in Beijing. He evicted tens of thousands of rural migrants into Beijing's harsh winter with only days or just moments of notice. Cai Qi made famous a term that CPP officials often use, “low-end population” or diduan renkou, which exposes the officials' contempt towards rural migrants and how they treat them as second-class citizens.

These displaced migrant workers have one tradition that they hold dear, which is to reunite with their families during the Chinese Lunar New Year holidays, making this seasonal migration of about 100 million to 150 million people a spectacular event to behold. In China's economic winter of 2025, with waves of bankruptcies and factory closures, the tide of unemployed migrant workers returning home early to where there's also no work and no land to farm has become instead a worrisome event to the authorities. Historically, in the last 2,000 years, social instability has caused the collapse of many ruling regimes in China.

The cheapest capital is acquired through predatory banking practices. Another means is through the stock markets, first to rake in the savings of Chinese people, and later to rake in international investments by listing opaque and sometimes state-owned enterprises in leading stock markets around the world.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

I'd like you to wrap it up, please. Time is almost over.

[Dimon Liu]

Okay. I will go to my concluding statement.

Chinese Communist officials often laud their system of government as superior. The renowned essayist Qin Hui wrote that the Chinese Communist government enjoys a human rights abuse “advantage”. This is true. By abusing its own people so brutally, the Chinese Communist regime has created an image of success, which will prove to be a mirage.

For those who are still supportive of the CCP regime in China, I have a message: If you think the CCP will treat foreigners better than its own people when the CCP has power over you, please think again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Ms. Liu.

I will now invite Mr. Majumdar to take the floor for five minutes, please.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Thank you very much.

Dimon Liu, thank you for being here. I appreciate the weather and your airport troubles. I also appreciate your statement, which was a very strong one.

You started off by saying that 300 million to 400 million people are internally displaced inside China. That is a massive movement of humanity. Why is it that we in the outside world know so little about this massive internal displacement that's happening?