International Trade Committee on May 11th, 2022

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

As you said, the government could help you if it made up for that difference.

Thank you, Mr. Mazerolle.

My next question is for the FCCQ representatives.

In the context of a possible free trade agreement with ASEAN, what business opportunities would there be for Quebec and what sectors should Canada focus on?

[Philippe Noël]

Thank you for the question.

I'll start, and I'll turn it over to my colleague Mr. Lavigne.

Many sectors are of interest to our exporting businesses. Leaving aside the countries that are signatories to the CPTPP, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines, and Thailand remain in ASEAN. These countries want to acquire expertise in electronics and semiconductors, as the witness just explained in his answers to the previous questions.

Furthermore, ASEAN countries offer a great deal of opportunity in Quebec in information and communication technologies, agri‑food, green economy, particularly in the electrification of transportation, aerospace, mining and forestry sectors, and in the infrastructure sector, including through the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

If we can increase our presence in public markets, there will be a lot of development opportunities for our companies, especially if the current agreement with ASEAN is concluded.

I don't know if my colleague has anything to add.

[Mathieu Lavigne, Director, Public and Economic Affairs, Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec]

As far as the agri‑food sector is concerned, I would like to point out that some Quebec agri‑food products are already well known and popular in this region. I'm thinking in particular of pork, which is exported a lot to Asian countries, as well as Quebec soybeans, which are in the process of carving out a place for themselves in these markets.

So there are opportunities for our companies if tariff barriers are reduced.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, sir.

Mr. Miao, you have six minutes, please.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for joining us today on this study. It's always great to see someone in B.C.

Through the chair, I would like to ask a question of Mr. Nankivell from the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.

In your opinion, how has Canada's relationship evolved within the Indo-Pacific region and how has this increased the potential for trade within the Indo-Pacific region?

[Jeff Nankivell]

I appreciate very much the question. I would say a couple of things.

I would say there has been a push in the last couple of years to expand relationships with the middle powers and emerging economies of Southeast Asia, and that's a very positive thing.

Professor Ong made reference to the importance geopolitically for Canada to be developing these relationships with partners in Southeast Asia, like Singapore and Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia, as part of establishing Canada as more of a player on the geopolitical scene in Asia. I think that also has implications for our relationship with the People's Republic of China. It puts us in a better position there.

When it comes to expanding trade opportunities, it's pretty clear—and we heard also from the Quebec Chamber of Commerce—that Southeast Asia is an area that has not been as well explored by Canadian enterprises over the decade, so you have a combination there of room for improvement by Canadians in getting out and exploring these markets and you have the economic trends that others and I have talked about, where you have large populations in these countries. Vietnam and the Philippines post at around 100 million each, and Indonesia is at almost 300 million. These growth rates are developing very quickly a much larger middle class.

The steps the Government of Canada has taken in the last couple of years to launch the free trade negotiations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, at the same time in parallel with Indonesia, at the same time as we have ratified our participation in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, are all things that will help to open doors and give momentum for Canadian businesses to expand their opportunities in Southeast Asia, in particular.

Just as a final point on this, the trick in all of this is that our potential partners in Southeast Asia have grown skeptical of Canada's staying power on these things, and this time we really need to make long-term investments. We need political leaders—ministers, provincial premiers, mayors and so on—to be going out and putting in the time to develop relationships through visits in the region on a sustained basis, not just once every decade or when we're running for a seat on the Security Council. Especially in Southeast Asia, decision-makers need to see that Canada is committed on a month-to-month basis, not just once in a while.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you very much for sharing that, which leads me to the next question, which is to ask you about the recent Asia-Pacific women-led trade mission, specifically to India.

Can you elaborate on some of the results of this trip, and what lessons may have been learned that could be beneficial going forward?

[Jeff Nankivell]

The Asia Pacific Foundation, in this case, was in partnership with the Canada-India Business Council for the mission to India, but we've had other missions.

The Asia Pacific Foundation, with financial support from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada for support for women's entrepreneurship in Asia, has been running these businesswomen's missions to different parts of Asia, including Japan in recent years, South Korea, and last year a virtual mission to Australia and New Zealand, and in March a virtual mission to India.

This involved a range of women-led businesses from Canada having virtual sessions with potential partners in India. I think it's a little too soon to report on the concrete business deals coming out of this, but we have had coming out of this mission dozens of business-to-business meetings that were arranged.

In these virtual missions, we do a few plenary sessions where we have speakers and panels on topics of mutual interest to women entrepreneurs and the organizations that support them in Canada and in the partner country, in this case, India. These are followed by business-to-business meetings that are arranged by our team, largely out of the Asia Pacific Foundation's Toronto office. In this case we're working with the Canada-India Business Council, and with the trade commissioner service of the Government of Canada in its posts in India to arrange these dozens of business-to-business meetings to work on new partnerships.

I'd be happy to follow up with the committee with some information about where we are on that now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, sir.

Monsieur Savard-Tremblay, you have six minutes.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome to all the witnesses. I would like to thank them for their time and for being with us today.

I think we all agree that we have great business opportunities in that part of the world, but there are also caveats, because there are some grey areas. That's why I particularly like presentations like those by Mr. Beaudoin and Rev Lisson.

I would like to ask you a question, Mr. Beaudoin. You talked about red tagging. Can you tell us briefly what that is?

[Guy-Lin Beaudoin]

It involves making false accusations against people, saying that they are linked to the New People's Army, which is the armed wing of the Communist Party of the Philippines and has been in an insurgency for some 40 years. These accusations are made against clergy, lawyers, activists, human rights defenders. In fact, many women human rights defenders are accused in this way. I am thinking, for example, of Maria Ressa, with whom we work and who has just been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and Cristina Palabay, who received the 2021 Franco‑German Prize for Human Rights and the Rule of Law. Without these two prizes, these two women would have been murdered, like most of the people we interviewed.

That's why the people we work with, although they are pro‑trade, would like Canada to prohibit Canadian mining companies from moving into areas where there is opposition from indigenous communities, intimidation, harassment or red tagging, as well as in areas targeted by military personnel to combat terrorism. In the Philippines, human rights violations are unbelievable. When mining companies want to set up in a place where there are aboriginal communities, whether in the north or the south, there will often be a cleanup. You can understand that it then becomes easier to do mining exploration. So the people we work with want to establish very specific areas.

It's important to remember that, because of the application of anti‑terrorism legislation, some 347,000 people in the south of the country have been displaced because the government bombed villages.

In the southern part of the country, we work with the Lumads. We help them establish schools where indigenous people can teach their language and culture, and promote their way of life. For example, the land represents gold for the mining companies, but for indigenous people, it represents access to water, food, and a certain standard of living. According to an article in The Guardian, President Duterte himself accuses these schools of teaching indigenous children to rebel against his government. He even threatened to order air raids on those schools, and—

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I understand what you're saying, but let's go back to the behaviour of the mining companies.

For example, you recommended due diligence measures or legislation. That can also be discussed in due course. More immediately, I'm thinking of the responsibility of these companies. In other words, if one of them is behaving improperly, they have to pay the price. Right now, companies sometimes don't pay the price, as one of my colleagues would say.

We can also consider the role of the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise, or CORE. Is CORE doing enough right now?

[Guy-Lin Beaudoin]

In principle, in a country that respects the rule of law, an ombud office is an independent body. The Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise reports to the Prime Minister's Office.

Furthermore, the ombud doesn't have any real powers, since the ombud cannot conduct investigations on their own initiative or summon witnesses. In fact, the CORE website states, “We are allowed to collect your personal information by the Order in Council 2019‑1323. For most complaints, we will give your personal information to the Canadian company you have filed your complaint against.” That is one of the reasons why the people we work with don't file complaints at all. You will understand that no one dares file a complaint if opposing mining exploration in the Philippines puts people at risk of being red‑flagged, if they haven't already been.

The Canadian Ombudsman for Responsible Enterprise should therefore have the power to investigate, as a first step. More importantly, it should have the power to specify, after investigating events in a given case, what actions have been required of the company concerned.

That is why we are calling on the Canadian government and Export Development Canada to exercise due diligence and impose specific requirements when it comes to investing taxpayer dollars in companies.

Perhaps Rev Lisson would have something specific to add about the regulations that would be important to improve.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I would just like to ask her how we can tighten the rules so that Canadian companies operating abroad are more respectful of human rights. We have an opportunity to do this when we are talking about a potential agreement. Perhaps it's time to put some provisions in there.

Rev Lisson, I'd like to hear your views on this.

[Rev Patricia Lisson]

I believe, yes, we need solid legislation to hold these companies accountable. Asking companies to self-regulate is not strong enough, and we know, particularly in the mining industry and other industries, particularly the arms industry, that it does not happen. They are not self-regulating in the way that we need to have happen to protect the environment and the human rights situation in countries like the Philippines.

It's not just the Philippines. There are other countries involved in this as well, so it's critical that all trade agreements need to be based on human rights. That's the basis of formulation of any trade agreement that we have.

The other thing that would need to be put in place is to exclude an ISDS out of the trade agreement. A trade agreement that holds that caveat allows the companies then to sue the country, so we have terrible situations where a mining company sues the government because the community has blocked their trade in the country.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Ms. Lisson.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

We will now move to Ms. Gazan for six minutes.

[Leah Gazan, Winnipeg Centre, NDP]

Thank you so much, and it's nice to be a visitor on this committee today. I have big shoes to fill.

Madam Lisson, you spoke about the participation of Canadian companies in violation of the rights of indigenous peoples in the area in the Philippines. You indicated that the Philippines is an “El Dorado of human rights abuses”, including the failure to obtain proper free, prior and informed consent, a direct violation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

I find that troubling because the UN committee came out this week condemning Canada over failing to uphold human rights, particularly in relation to the construction of the Trans Mountain and Coastal GasLink pipelines.

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination said that it “profoundly regrets and is concerned” that Canada is continuing to forcibly remove Indigenous land defenders from their unceded territory. They went on to say that, in British Columbia specifically, they “have escalated their use of force, surveillance, and criminalization of land offenders and peaceful protesters to intimidate, remove and forcibly evict Secwepemc and Wet'suwet'en Nations from their traditional lands, in particular by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Community-Industry Response Group, and private security firms.”

There seems to be a pattern of behaviour, whether it's in Canada or with the participation of Canadian mining companies with terrible reputations, as we know, internationally.

We adopted a bill in the last Parliament, Bill C-15, to see the full adoption and implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

How is Canada violating Canadian law by not ensuring that mining activities uphold these basic human rights?

[Rev Patricia Lisson]

I can only give you kind of a thumbnail sketch here, because I don't have all the specific details, which we can provide later.

Canadian mining companies violate this treaty with the UN by forcible removal of indigenous peoples from their land. The Lumad peoples in Mindanao, who we stayed with for three weeks, had been moved off their land. Five hundred of them were gathered on a church site. They had been living there for five years because of removal by a mining company, a major Canadian mining company, I might add, that I won't name. That's one thing.

Also, they go in and have the paramilitary police and military embed themselves in communities. By that I mean they move right into a community. The way rural Philippine houses are built, there's often space between the floor and the ground where they nurture animals during the rainy season. The military camp right under the houses of the indigenous people to intimidate them to ensure that some of them will sign off on the free, prior consent issue.

[Leah Gazan]

I have one more question.

That's certainly not free of coercion, which is one of the foundations of FPIC.

Monsieur Beaudoin, you spoke about violence against indigenous women and girls by mining companies in the Philippines. We're currently doing a study at the status of women committee on the relationship between resource development and increased rates of violence against indigenous women and girls in Canada.

Would you say that Canadian mining companies are failing to ensure, and actively participating in not ensuring, that there are proper protections put in place for women and girls?

I say that because we know around resource extraction development that women often go missing or are murdered. Is this also something that is associated with Canadian companies and is very common in the Philippines right now?

The question is for Monsieur Beaudoin—

[Rev Patricia Lisson]

Do you want me to answer that, Guy-Lin?

[Leah Gazan]

—or Madam Lisson. Either one of you can answer.

[Rev Patricia Lisson]

If I may take this question, it appears in the Philippines currently that it's not the same as we experience here in Canada with the missing indigenous girls and women, but women are affected dramatically through their health issues and poverty issues. Women human rights defenders are arrested and jailed, and most of that comes through the mining issues.

We know of a case earlier where a woman was arrested, put in prison, had a baby in prison, and the baby died from lack of attention. Normally in engagement in human rights law, she should have been able to care for and nurture her newborn baby, but that right was taken away from her when she was imprisoned for being a human rights defender.

We have these issues. There are parallel issues, particularly around women's health issues, poverty and housing issues, and abuse issues from that perspective.

It's a little different from the Canadian—

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Ms. Lisson.

Mr. Martel, you have five minutes.