Science and Research Committee on June 1st, 2023

[The Clerk]

I will now read the motion as amended:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i), the committee study the use of the federal government research and development grants, funds, and contributions by the Canadian universities and research institutions in partnerships with entities connected to the People's Republic of China in areas including, but not limited to: photonics, artificial intelligence, quantum theory, biopharmaceuticals and aerospace; and including but not limited to, intellectual property transfers and developments with Huawei Technologies and the National University of Defense Technology; that the committee hear from the director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, department officials, top research officials from Canadian universities, the federal granting agencies and any other witnesses deemed relevant to the study; the committee allocate a minimum of four full meetings to this study; that the committee begin the study on June 20; that the committee split the meetings for this study with the study of Long-term Impacts of Pay Gaps Experienced by Different Genders and Equity-seeking Groups Among Faculty at Canadian Universities, with this study being dedicated in the first hour; and that the committee report its findings to the House.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Now we have an amended motion.

Go ahead, Mr. Collins.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

One thing we haven't talked about as part of the motion is the scope that has been presented as part of the original motion that was presented to the committee.

As I am reading through this, I look at the photonics, the artificial intelligence and the quantum theory. Again, I'm going to go back to what I talked about earlier: Many of these issues are being studied at other committees. I am wondering whether there is an opportunity to take out or to add language to the study to get at that overlap that I've referenced several times here today.

I know this issue isn't new to the members opposite. I think some of them have even participated in other committees on the same issue.

I just wonder if there is an opportunity—and I'll start with maybe amending it by removing Huawei, if I could—to start to narrow it down and make it very generic instead of specific. I think that may help us in terms of choosing witnesses and then coming up with recommendations in the end that will serve to help us with either government legislation or investments.

At this point in time, I would, as a start, remove Huawei from the recommendation that's been put forward, unless there is unanimous consent and we can all agree upon that. It doesn't mean that someone can't ask a witness to come in and speak to those issues—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Now we have a new amendment to the main motion, which is to remove Huawei from the main motion.

Is there some discussion on the amendment?

Go ahead, Mr. Tochor.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Just quickly, why are we hiding the truth of what Huawei is doing to our universities? Removing one of the state sponsors of Beijing's influence in the tech frontier is a cover-up, not just in a democracy but in our institutions. I think it is insulting that we would not investigate what Huawei is doing in our universities.

The Conservatives will be voting against this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Go ahead, Mr. Collins.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Chair, I don't think it's hiding anything. I just think you're limiting the scope of the study by narrowing it down to one. There may be other companies that we may want to study as part of this, so to suggest that it is one, understanding that questions have already been presented to other witnesses in other studies on Huawei, which no one has disputed in terms of the recommendations or the advice that has come from the witnesses.... They have been included in the reports.

If you recall, I think even prior to your time, Mr. Chair, there have been reports that have included some of the questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Yes.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Specifically, the member opposite, Mr. Mazier, has always raised that company's university and college relationships in terms of government funding. I would say that we're limiting the study by narrowing it down to one company. I would say that we can expand that language if you have other suggestions to provide that build upon that theme of foreign interference, or whatever you want to call it. I think we need to be a little bit more inclusive rather than exclusive. That's why I made that recommendation today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Is there more discussion on this amendment? If not, we will call the vote on it.

We are getting close to 1:30. If we need more time, we're going to have to go to a deviation or we'll have to see whether the committee wants to adjourn at 1:30. I haven't made that request yet, but I'm also trying to manage a meeting that's bouncing in different areas right now.

Let's go to the vote on the amendment. In the meantime, I'll have a quick discussion with the clerk when I can.

[The Clerk]

This is on Mr. Collins' amendment to remove Huawei from the motion.

Shall the amendment to the motion of Mr. Mazier carry?

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Is there further discussion on the main motion?

Go ahead, Mr. Collins.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would suggest that the next amendment would be that we add, “and that, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request that a comprehensive response to the report”. I think that's standard language that we've seen in other motions that have been put to the committee and unanimously approved by the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Right, sure.

Mr. Tochor, you have the floor.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

It's apparent that the cover-up continues as amendment after amendment gets added that has no merit.

The Conservatives will vote against any amendment that slows the down the process to get to the answers on Beijing's influence at our post-secondary institutions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Go ahead, Mr. Collins.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

There seems to be a conspiracy theory here in terms of the.... That's all we've heard through almost every study from the other side of the table. I'm not discounting the fact that we need to study some of these things, and it's certainly their right to put it forward. The concern I have is that this theme of.... You just heard the comments here in terms of a cover-up, conspiracy theory. We can use different words for it.

I would say that this committee has worked very well from its inception in terms of looking at subject matters that help us move legislation forward and make strategic investments. The motion today, which was preceded by the filibuster, stands in the way of our moving forward on—I can count—three or four different studies that we have in the works, including the one by my colleague MP Bradford that was already approved.

When we talk about slowing the process, this meeting started with a filibuster. This meeting started with interrupting and advising the witnesses who came from.... We had one witness who came from halfway around the country to be here today to provide her testimony. She probably prepared for several hours in terms of coming up with recommendations in her opening statement, as almost all witnesses do at all committees, so to talk about slowing down the process is, I think, a bit rich to hear from the other side of the table.

To go back to the amendment that I just moved in terms of asking for a response, it is standard common language that we see in almost every study recommendation that's come to this committee and all others where I've appeared.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Go ahead, Ms. Bradford.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

I'm absolutely astounded that the opposition would not want a comprehensive response. Why would the opposition, if they really want to get to the bottom of something, not want to hear a government response?

It just makes sense. If you're doing an objective investigation of any topic, I think you need to hear from all sides, not just witnesses you line up who are going to perhaps support your already pre-concluded position. I think we would definitely need to hear a government response on this.

We've had government witnesses on many of our other topics, and I think it would be very appropriate that we get a government response on this one. Otherwise, it's clear that you're predetermining the outcome before we even start the study, which is not a good way to enter a study.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you.

I was hoping to get to a vote on this, but go ahead, Mr. Tochor.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Chair, it's become very apparent to this side of the table that there is something here. There is something they are hiding, as this meeting confirmed, when we put forward a motion.

The Liberals have filibustered this study. There are issues at our universities, where we need to look at the foreign influence, and in this whole meeting, we've suspended for over 50 minutes, which means that we should be sitting until 1:50, not 1:30. I suspect we are going to get shut down.

We are looking for answers. We will not stop asking these questions about the involvement of Beijing at our universities. This will continue past this meeting; it will continue to the next. We are not done trying to get to the bottom of how integrated Beijing is with our institutes across Canada.

I think it's a shame that we never got to a vote on the main motion because of amendment after amendment being added by the Liberals. If we would like to go down this road, then this is what is going to happen at this committee until we get the answers on this influence that is taking place in our country from a foreign state actor. This is wrong.

I hope we can extend this meeting to 1:50 to make up for the time that we were suspended, Chair.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Chair, just to set the record straight, if I could—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

No, I'm actually going to adjourn the meeting at this point.

I haven't asked for additional resources. I wanted to see whether we were going to get to the main motion and get to a vote. Evidently that isn't going to happen today.

We're at 1:30. I'll now adjourn the meeting. We'll resume next week.

The meeting is adjourned.