Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, if the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills had not moved this motion, I probable would have done so myself.
Obviously I have some reservations, but I want to take a few minutes today to share my thoughts and explain why I think this motion is a step in the right direction.
The constitutional role of the House and the government is to address international challenges and ensure the general security of the distinct states that make up Canada. I say this because it is clear to me that the motion before us today touches on the very concept of state sovereignty. It is a sensitive issue, but one that we need to discuss, and we must do so in an entirely non-partisan way.
Obviously it is my hope that Quebec will become a country that manages the international relations of the Quebec people according to its own values and interests. However, when it comes to the Huawei and 5G issue and, more broadly, Beijing's growing influence on Canadian soil, Ottawa must act, and act quickly.
In many ways, China's approach under the Chinese Communist Party has been to shine across the world. Clearly its appetite for power is now only limited by what others will tolerate. In that regard, the west has been particularly tolerant of an objectively brutal, controlling and increasingly expansionist regime.
In a world where economies are past the point of no return in terms of interdependence, international political action has become much more complex. However, the facts remain simple. The Minister of Foreign Affairs will not be my biggest fan today, but at the risk of adding a layer to the embarrassment that can sometimes be brought on by facts, I will make a connection with the parliamentary business that happened over the summer.
As hon. members of the House know, the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development conducted a study on the situation of the Uighur people in Xinjiang. It will come as no surprise that the findings of the subcommittee are rather clear about the existence of genocide in China. I know it because I am deputy chair of the subcommittee.
What may surprise some people is that the Chinese state is using technology to spy on and intimidate people, right here in Canada, in connection with this genocide. The Chinese Communist Party is literally tracking families and nationals who speak up for Uighurs abroad, and this is being done with absolute impunity.
As my colleague pointed out right before me, Chinese technologies are often suspected of being used for industrial and political espionage. Let's be clear: Technologies that are used to surveil Chinese citizens could very well be used to surveil our own citizens.
It has been documented that Chinese companies play a role in the police state, in China and elsewhere. These often proven suspicions should make us very cautious, with emphasis on “cautious”. This means being careful to avoid risks and act calmly, based on the facts. We must absolutely not cut corners here.
I have heard the arguments about the impending critical importance of 5G technology to communications infrastructure. It represents an immense technological leap that will potentially transform the economy. The implementation of 5G technology is the equivalent of switching from the telegram to the fax while still getting around in a horse-drawn carriage. It is very simple: 5G technology is a train that is already moving and we have to get on it safely.
That is why I support the motion, and I also want to continue our parliamentary work by studying the issue at committee. If I am so very pleased that we completed our study of the Uighurs, it is for two principles that apply to any issue.
First, even though it was apparent that atrocities were being committed, we went ahead and verified the facts. We did that because we have a duty of diligent care, which puts us firmly on the side of serious democracies and sets us apart from tyrannies and dictatorships, which have no such duty.
Second, our actions are legitimized by this process of seeking out the truth. Our truth and the truth are the same thing. That is not the case for tyrannies and dictatorships. That is why the Chinese government reacted to our conclusions by insinuating that we made a mistake. I was not at all embarrassed by our comments. We did our job, we assessed the facts and we can defend them. I will repeat that these principles also apply to 5G, Huawei and Chinese interference.
I would add that we have a certain duty of conscience in this matter. This may seem righteous, but given that we take our democracy seriously, it is imperative that we condemn acts committed by totalitarian regimes. In my view, condemning barbaric acts is just as important as condemning the tools with which they are committed.
We need to uphold the standards that give us the right to speak out and then act. It is true that many allied countries have taken action. The motion that we are currently debating mentions Australia, but there is also New Zealand, which has a very individualized approach, as does the United Kingdom and the United States.
It is critical that we adopt an approach that addresses our concerns and our own specific realities. The best way to do that is for us, as parliamentarians, to choose the path to follow. Requiring the government to comply with the motion in 30 days would mean skipping a number of steps and is unrealistic, in my humble opinion. To put this deadline into perspective a little, the government has more than 30 days to respond to the petitions that we table.
I will end my speech because I think I am running out of time and I would like to answer my colleagues' questions. I think that the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations needs to have the time to submit its report. We have time, but the most important thing is that we need to be able to justify our actions.