Science and Research Committee on Nov. 20th, 2023

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

You didn't answer a straightforward question.

Frankly, if this is such a priority for you and your government, why is it that weeks ago, we learned there had been new patent applications published, listing Huawei as an owner with Canadian university researchers as inventors? In other words, Canadian universities are still very actively in collaboration with the likes of Huawei, despite the fact that 5G is identified as one of the five areas of sensitive research.

Minister, obviously your guidelines that you cite are not working.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Well, I would say, with respect, sir, that I'm the one who issued the directive to the market to not have Huawei and ZTE be in telecommunications in Canada. You're talking to the guy who made it happen. You're not talking to some random person. You're talking to the person who made it happen in Canada.

What I can tell you is that since June 2021, there have been no federal grants to Huawei. What we did, Mr. Cooper, which I think Canadians need to understand, is that we set the tone, because since then you will have seen—because I know you're a well-informed member of Parliament—that a number of universities.... Just for the record, as they're watching today, the University of Toronto, the University of Waterloo, McMaster University, Queen's University, the University of British Columbia and Western University have all adhered to our principles and stopped any collaboration with Huawei. That's part of the public record.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Minister, you have the power as minister to issue a ministerial directive banning federal granting councils from funding research partnerships with Beijing in the five sensitive research areas identified by CSIS. Why have you failed to do that?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

What I would say, sir, is that we've done more than that. We have issued guidelines to make sure that our programs, sir—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Minister—

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

If you want an answer, sir, I'd appreciate—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Guidelines that [Inaudible—Editor] with collaboration with Huawei. Guidelines—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Mr. Cooper—

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

[Inaudible—Editor] my answer because you asked me a question. If you want me to answer, sir, I'm more than happy to. That's why I'm appearing here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Mr. Cooper and Minister, if we could direct the questions and answers through the chair, as we said at the beginning, so we don't get back into this back-and-forth and talking over each other, that would be appreciated.

Thank you.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Minister, guidelines that have resulted in ongoing collaboration between universities and Huawei, despite the fact that 5G is identified as one of the sensitive research areas, guidelines that have resulted in ongoing collaboration with Beijing's National University of Defense Technology, which has been blacklisted in the U.S. since 2015 because it was deemed by the U.S. to be a national security risk, and you're saying here, before this committee, that your guidelines are working. Minister, are you serious?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I'm more than serious, sir. I made sure they would work. Like I said for the record, sir, you should look at the facts. Since June 2021, there have been no federal grants, but one thing you need to know....

We're not in question period here. Take a moment to listen to my answer.

What I'm saying to you, sir, with respect, is that not only did we do that, but you have to appreciate that we set the tone. Now we're seeing universities and provinces acting, again because my role as the federal minister is to set the principle. I would challenge you. In the Five Eyes, sir, we are among the best when it comes to that, because we actually work with our Five Eyes partners to put these—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Minister, I would submit that your guidelines are working very well for Beijing. They are not working well when it comes to protecting Canada's national security interests.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Sir, I would say with respect that I think a number of experts in the field would disagree with your assessment, but I respect your view, sir, and I can tell you my mission and my commitment to Canadians. I have been on the record, sir, to be the minister who has denied a number of acquisitions that the government or entities related to the Chinese government were to make in Canada. I'm the one who defended our national security by making sure there would be no Huawei and ZTE equipment in Canada's telecom infrastructure in 5G.

Sir, you're looking at the person in front of you who has made sure that we protect national security at every step of the way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you very much for the questions and answers.

We'll turn it over to Valerie Bradford for six minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Thank you to the other witnesses for joining us today. We really look forward to your testimony.

Minister, can you tell us about the importance of the independence of research?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

One of the things is that, and I think even our colleagues from the Conservative bench would agree, academic and institutional freedom is essential in Canada. I think the guideline we need to have is that our research must be as open as possible and as secure as necessary. That is really the framework in which we need to operate. Not only do we look at what we do in Canada, but, with respect to my colleagues, we are looking at what the Five Eyes are doing to make sure that at the same time we protect our research, which is key—we want to protect data, IP and knowledge—we also want to have, I would say, a research environment in Canada that is conducive to the work that researchers do, which is learning, knowledge sharing and making sure they can work collaboratively with different partners around the world to advance science, which is in the mutual interest of the researchers.

Our job is to identify and mitigate the risk. At the same time, I think that Canadians would be happy to see that we respect academic freedom and the autonomy of institutions. As I said to colleagues before, the federal government has a role to play. I am very happy to play it with you on behalf of this committee, but as we know, the research ecosystem is much broader than just the federal government, which has influence over the granting agencies. Provinces have a role to play. Academic institutions and researchers have a role to play. It's a whole ecosystem. We're trying to be open and to make sure that we lead in science, as we have always done in key areas. Mr. Cooper was mentioning AI, quantum, space, and I could go on. We're leading but at the same time we need to engage with eyes wide open.

I can tell you that this is really the framework, to have a balance that puts the national and economic security of Canada first. That is what I've been trying to do.

We've done three things that I think are quite consequential. I think it was rich for my colleagues to criticize this government in any way, because in this country we really started to look at this issue in 2018. No government before that had really looked into it. We not only came up with the national guidelines, we also put money into the research security centre. Now we have an enhanced posture, which we announced at the beginning of this year, and we are going to come up soon with further guidelines and lists to make sure we provide tools, because institutions have been saying, “Minister, we hear you. We understand what you want to do. We know that this is what we need to do. Give us tools.”

We will come up with lists of institutions and research areas, and if our researchers engage in research with entities on these lists, then funding will be denied. That's the role we can play: providing leadership; making sure we use all the tools we have available federally and at the same time, as you said, embracing the whole community to make sure they go with us on this journey of securing research in our country.

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

What is the timeline, then, on these lists and enhanced guidelines? When do you anticipate having those?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

It should be very soon.

We've been working with our security partners. We decided to take a country- and company-agnostic approach when we initially set the guidelines. I would say to my colleagues that they've been focusing on one country, but, for the record, threats can come from anywhere at any time. Let's be honest. This is a world that, in terms of Joe Politics, has been changing quite rapidly. Risks come from all different sources now.

To your point, what we've been working on with our intelligence agencies is making sure we are as specific as one can be, because we want our researchers to do research. We don't want them to spend an unreasonable amount of time filling out forms to make sure they comply with rules. However, at the same time, I would say that these lists are forthcoming. They will come very soon. We've been working with Universities Canada, the U15, and the Government of Canada-universities working group.

None of that has been done, I would say, on a stand-alone basis. We work in partnership. To the earlier question of my colleague, Mr. Cooper, the rules we have put in place have been well thought through with experts, Universities Canada, U15 and our Five Eyes partners to make sure they work. People realize that if there are malicious actors, it's good that we are protecting Canada, but we also need to do that as the Five Eyes because the malicious actors will migrate to other jurisdictions, so we are very well aligned with our Five Eyes partners to make sure we are best in class.

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

Could you elaborate? You did talk about how threats can come from anywhere. How have the threats to international security through research partnerships evolved over the last 10 to 20 years? You said we started worrying about those only in 2018.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Well, in 2018, I would say our government started to take action. Like I said, this was really the moment when we saw the community coming together to make sure that we did better. That's why I thought it was a bit rich to criticize our government for that, because it was not done by the previous government.

That being said, I think the threat level has increased. We've seen regional conflicts operating. We've seen malicious actors trying to enter our networks. We've seen examples, well documented in the press, of the kinds of threat. Like I said, it's not only people trying to get our knowledge. What I'm very focused on is people trying to get our data and eventually our IP. We need to protect that and provide tools to the institutions. That's why, for me, the $160 million we put in the Canada research security centre was key, because that provided funding to about 50 institutions across Canada. They told me that they understood the guidelines and wanted to follow them, but they needed resources, because this is complex work.

I think we did everything we could, and we will continue to do that. Like I said, the list of entities and research areas will be forthcoming.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you for the questions.

Now we will go to Maxime Blanchette-Joncas for six minutes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I welcome the minister, who is joining us.

We are pleased to see you again, Minister.

We are holding this important meeting today on the national security of research. In February, you announced that you had guidelines and a plan. Normally, a plan includes timelines with dates. Today, however, you are telling us that there are no dates.

I have put questions to everyone who has appeared before the committee, including the presidents of the three granting organizations and the officials from public safety, but no one had a date. I would like to reassure those who are waiting for directives.

Allow me to quote other ministers from the provinces, including Quebec's Minister of Higher Education, Ms. Pascale Déry, who said that she was waiting for clear directives from the federal government.

She said: “I myself made submissions to Minister Champagne, but I did not receive a response. I am still waiting for one.” This statement dates back to May. She added: “We need directives to be able to take further action and to define a more precise policy so that we are able to intervene in the right way. We need clear guidelines...after all, this is a matter of national security.”

Minister, you said in February that you would produce guidelines. Those included a list of high-risk organizations. That was in February.

Now it is November—nine months later. When will this list be available to provide guidelines or, at least, clear instructions to the institutions and applicants who are waiting on a specific plan?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

That's a very good question.

As of November 20, 2023—today's date—I can tell you that it is going to happen soon. I work very well together with Minister Déry. Quebec is always a few steps ahead of the game, a leader in many areas.

I can explain why these guidelines have not yet been issued. I believe that, beyond the date, your question was really aimed at understanding why.

It's complex to present lists of specific entities. I have to give full credit not only to our teams, but also to the public servants and national security agencies. They worked with our colleagues from what we call the Five Eyes, expressly to come up with the most comprehensive list possible.

In fact, as soon as we have the list of entities, it has an impact. Canada will be one of the only countries in the world, I think, to have a specific list with the names of entities. It took a lot of work by our security agencies to come up with a list that will stand the test of time, so to speak. Obviously, we will adjust it over time. However, we can't forget that we are one of the first countries ever to draw up such a list.