House of Commons Hansard #70 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was languages.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, my colleague knows that our NATO allies have re-evaluated their positions on how they deal with China. How would this committee assist Canada, as a whole-of-government approach, against the Chinese communists, with respect to their asymmetric belligerence toward our country?

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC

Madam Speaker, it really comes down to focus, I would suggest to the House. It is a big issue and it is a complex issue, and it should be dealt with using the proper focus and taken seriously by Parliament.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Kingston and the Islands Ontario

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)

Madam Speaker, I hope that I can get a question from the member for Hamilton Centre, given his passion in this particular debate.

I am pleased to rise today in the House to address the motion brought forward by the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills. My remarks today will focus on the bilateral relations between China and Canada, as well as on China in the context of the development of our government's Indo-Pacific strategy.

The relationship between Canada and China dates back to the early days of the history of our country. As the motion highlights, Canadians of Chinese descent have made immeasurable contributions to Canada and are interwoven into the fabric of our society. Today, nearly two million residents of Canada are of Chinese origin and form one of the largest groups among Canada's immigrant population. In many ways, these people-to-people ties represent the closest link between our two countries.

International trade is another important aspect of our relationship with China. China is Canada's third-largest merchandise export market. With the world's largest population and a growing middle class, China offers Canadian exporters important opportunities, as well as ongoing challenges in certain sectors.

There can be no doubt that China has changed significantly in recent decades. It has benefited selectively from a rules-based international order in pursuing its economic rise. China seems determined to reshape the international order to meet its own needs, and its aggressive actions in the South China Sea and East China Sea threaten regional and global stability.

The mounting evidence of China's disrespect for basic human rights, freedom of expression and freedom of religion, including the treatment of Tibetans, Uighurs and other Muslim minorities in China, who continue to face repression, forced labour and discrimination, and national security law imposed on the people of Hong Kong in 2020, are all deeply troubling and at odds with Canadian values and interests. In response to these actions, Canada and other countries must continue to speak up and challenge China. We cannot allow any country, regardless of its size, to disregard human rights. At the same time, if we hope to make progress on global issues such as climate change, the environment and public health, we must find ways to engage and collaborate with China.

Our government is prioritizing a comprehensive approach to the Indo-Pacific region that will guide our foreign policy for the next decade. This is not just a strategy for one region of the world, but a strategy for Canada that will impact our peace and prosperity for decades to come. No region will be more important to Canada's interests than the Indo-Pacific.

As the prosperity, security and well-being of Canadians become increasingly linked to the Indo-Pacific region, Canada is deepening our partnerships and expanding our engagement in the region. Canada must engage in the Indo-Pacific with a comprehensive, responsive and integrated approach. It must be one that continues to advance trade and economic objectives while protecting Canada's national security and other security interests, defending a rules-based international order, advancing sustainable development goals and, of course, fighting climate change.

Canada's evolving policy for advancing our interests in China is inseparable from, and a critical piece within, our approach in the broader region. We must continue diversifying into the broader Indo-Pacific, and our relations with China are but one part of the Indo-Pacific strategy under development by the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

As we all know, our bilateral relations have suffered from China's use of coercive diplomacy. This has led Canada to reflect on and assess China's sincerity in constructively resolving issues. We are taking a step-by-step approach to assessing Chinese intentions and managing our interests in China.

While our government acknowledges the complexity of Canada-China relations, we will continue to co-operate, when it makes sense to do so, on global issues and shared interests. We will challenge the Chinese government's violation of international rules and norms, compete with authoritarian approaches by advancing those that support democracy, transparency and accountability, and coexist with the most populous nation on earth.

As part of this approach, on April 5, the Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke with the People's Republic of China's state councillor and foreign affairs minister, Wang Yi. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has been clear that Canada will continue to stand for and raise human rights concerns, and she reiterated Canada's expectations towards China in resolving outstanding bilateral issues. The minister also emphasized the need for China to play a constructive role to stop the war in Ukraine, as the nations of the world were watching Chinese actions on this file very closely. The minister has also highlighted the many areas on which both countries can work together, such as climate change, the environment and global health.

In conclusion, bilateral relations can be complex and dynamic, but our national interests and long-standing Canadian values are a constant. Canada and China will continue to have deep people-to-people ties and share many economic, social and cultural interests, which will continue to enrich the fabric of both our societies. Our government continues to advance Canada's interests by managing relations with China through a principled approach, and we will be steadfast and firm in upholding Canadian values and interests.

I want to end by addressing the proposal to create a new special committee. There are already several existing parliamentary committees where bilateral relations issues can be and have been raised. At the top of this list is the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, which has, already this year, undertaken a thorough and constructive study of China-related matters. The foreign affairs committee remains best placed to study these matters, and I am concerned that my colleague is simply creating a vehicle to duplicate its work with this proposal.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:50 a.m.

Conservative

Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON

Madam Speaker, one of the dimensions of the multi-dimensional relationship between Canada and China is justice. One of the things that this special committee could study, if it were to be established, is the issue of justice between Canada and China. Just yesterday, Canadian Denise Ho was arrested in Hong Kong.

On the court of appeal of the high court of Hong Kong sit a number of Canadian, Australian and British judges. Some of those judges have resigned. The former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada sits on the court of appeal.

I am wondering whether the member thinks it continues to be appropriate for a Commonwealth judge to continue to sit on the court of appeal of Hong Kong, in light of the degradation of the rule of law and the independence of the judicial system in Hong Kong since the rollout of the draconian and illegal national security law.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:50 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I do not disagree with the member for Wellington—Halton Hills on the importance of the various issues this potential committee could discuss. Indeed, I am sure, if it were to be created, it would discuss some of those things. My concern is more about the vehicle or the mechanism by which it is being proposed to study it. We have established committees, standing committees of Parliament, that can look at these issues. The issue that he raised specifically with respect to justice, could be studied through the foreign affairs committee, for example, to see what China is doing and if Canada needs to take a certain position on it or make a recommendation, at least, to Parliament to do that.

My concern is not about the issues. I think that the member raises important issues, as did the member who spoke after him. I am sure we will hear more of them today. My concern is more with the vehicle and the mechanism by which we are being asked to study these.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:50 a.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, it is always such a pleasure to hear the member for Kingston and the Islands speak, and today's speech was one of his most dynamic yet.

He laid out many potentially problematic issues that Parliament would have to examine closely. He spent 10 minutes listing all those problems, but then rejected the idea of creating a parliamentary committee to study them. Does he see the contradiction there?

Would the member reconsider his position if, say, an amendment were moved to set an end date for the committee?

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:50 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I think all my speeches are quite dynamic. I would not limit that to just this one, but I appreciate the member's comment.

What I attempted to do in my speech was highlight the various issues in the relationship between Canada and China, which have been going on since pretty much the creation of this country, and the fact that we have to make sure that we continue to assess and address them, not just while this committee would be formed, but, indeed, into the future. We need permanent mechanisms and vehicles to study and contribute to that relationship from a parliamentary perspective.

I am submitting that we have those vehicles and established ways of doing that through the existing committees. I am saying that we could do this work using the committees that are already in place. I find it surprising that the Bloc, given the concerns that we continually hear them raise about the resources in the House, the interpretation services and whatnot, is so willing to just stack another committee onto all of the other committees and the strained resources we have to deliver on those.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:50 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Madam Speaker, certainly the issues with Canada and China are important. What concerns me is that we are in the middle of a horrific war with Russia, and in recent weeks, I have noticed the Conservatives have sort of gone radio silent on the Russian war.

Given the fact that the Conservative backbench is running issues of vaccine disinformation, voodoo Bitcoin economics and planning to fire the president of the Bank of Canada, we know that Putin's disinformation team is very much tied in with the disinformation that is being promoted by the extreme right. Is it possible that the Conservatives on the backbench are getting more and more uncomfortable by Parliament standing up to Putin, so they want to change the channel at this historic moment?

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I am really trying not to go after Conservative rhetoric with my speech, but the member for Timmins—James Bay has just lobbed that ball to me in such a manner that it is very difficult not to.

What concerns me more, given the member's comments, is the narrative out there that somehow we do not live in a free country. This has been purported by the individual who is presumed to be the next leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Carleton. His entire platform is based on this notion that we do not live in free country, which I think is alarming. It goes right into the narrative the member for Timmins—James Bay spoke about concerning Russian misinformation and disinformation.

Members of Parliament need to come to terms with the fact that it is not appropriate to be peddling that misinformation for the purpose of political gain. It might help the member for Carleton get elected as leader of the Conservative Party in September, but it certainly will not help this country in the short, medium or long term.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Mount Royal Québec

Liberal

Anthony Housefather LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement

Madam Speaker, I agree that the member's comments were dynamic, as he always is, but I was also going to add they were measured and non-partisan, which shows me he can do this really well.

Is the member aware if anybody has ever gone before the foreign affairs committee or the trade committee to bring forward a proposal for a study on China and some of these issues that was rejected by the other members of that committee?

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I am not personally aware of any of the studies that may have been brought forward. I am not going to say that they have not because I just do not know, but I would like to know if that is the case.

This idea would be so much more justified, and we could justify the argument for creating this special committee, if we could back that up by saying that we had tried to go to these different standing committees, raised these issues to start studies on them, and they refused to do them. Then, at least for me, it would definitely have more legs to stand on in terms of the argument to propose this committee.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Madam Speaker, in the speech by the member for Kingston and the Islands there may be some disinformation when it comes to being measured, but the misinformation from the member for Timmins—James Bay is completely false.

The situation that we are faced with today in defence around the world is probably one of the major reasons, as pointed out by my colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills, that committees are already busy. This is an emergency. When there are references to interference in elections and a committee is not taking the time to look at that, does the member not think that would warrant having a committee to look into this special situation with China?

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, if I understood correctly, the member said that he is on the defence committee. No, he did not say that? Okay, I am sorry. He was talking about the defence committee.

I would think that, if we had issues related to defence and with China specifically, the best place to discuss those would be at the national defence committee, not to establish a new committee. I do not really understand the logic of the member's argument of committees being cancelled as a result of the election, whether it is the China-Canada committee, the defence committee or the foreign affairs committee. Any committee would essentially be eliminated as a result of an election.

Specifically concerning where to study this, I still have not heard the argument come forward as to why, given all the issues the member talked about that are going on in the world right now, namely the war in Ukraine, for example, we need a special committee to study this and why it could not be studied at the existing committees.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC

Madam Speaker, this feels a bit like Back to the Future or Groundhog Day, as we keep reliving the same thing over and over again. Of course we have always been in favour of creating a committee to examine the relationship between the People's Republic of China and Canada. It is no different today; we have not changed our minds. We believe it is still relevant to have a committee to take a closer look specifically at this matter.

There is no denying that the People's Republic of China is a military, political, and economic superpower. It was a real Eldorado for the Liberal government of the 1990s. Everyone said we should relocate all our businesses to China and take advantage of China's cheap labour. By doing business with China, we would eventually help raise the standard of living there, which would inevitably advance democracy and help it blossom like a flower in the spring.

A few decades on, we have become a little disillusioned with the logic and narrative that the Liberal government of the day was trying to impose. Nevertheless, the fact remains that China is an undisputed economic power.

We need to recognize that relations between the People's Republic of China and Canada were excellent for decades. We can think of the time when Canada provided wheat to contribute to famine relief in the People's Republic of China or the influence Dr. Bethune had during the Chinese revolution. There is also the fact that former prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau was among the first western heads of state to establish relations with the People's Republic of China.

Relations between our countries were always extremely positive until they faltered significantly with the request to extradite Meng Wanzhou, followed by the illegal detention of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig. I thought it was important at that point to take a look at what could have happened and how we might try to restore relations.

Then something happened that had me completely shocked. I was floored. We came to realize that the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations was not the least bit interested in finding solutions to improve relations with the People's Republic of China. It had become a partisan political tool to try to put the government in a tough spot. I will not get into details because we will probably have an opportunity to come back to it. The whole thing was abruptly interrupted when an entirely unnecessary election was called unexpectedly last fall.

In the meantime, thanks to the election of a new government in Washington, a solution was found that, although somewhat questionable, made it possible to resolve the problem of the U.S. request to extradite Meng Wanzhou, which then led to the almost immediate release of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig.

After the election results were announced, we came back to the House and, lo and behold, the Conservatives decided that they needed a new toy, a new tool with which to play partisan politics. All of a sudden, now that the two Michaels had been released, they felt there was no longer a need for the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. Now, the Conservatives wanted a special committee to examine the disastrous Afghanistan evacuation. Our Conservative friends were convinced that this would win them political points. They no longer needed the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations at that time.

We criticized the fact that the Conservatives were abandoning the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. Obviously, we were not against creating the Special Committee on Afghanistan because, admittedly, some missteps and bad decisions were made, and we needed to try to identify any problems in advance just in case we should ever find ourselves in another such situation.

Incidentally, the late premier Jacques Parizeau often said that we must never underestimate the federal government's ability to disappoint us. In this case, it seems as though the federal government never learns from past lessons. Although we have to hope that the federal government will learn from what happened in Afghanistan, I must admit that it may disappoint us again this time.

In any event, we put pressure on the government to bring back the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. However, for their own reasons, the Conservatives were not ready for the committee to be reinstated at that time. I will let my colleagues speak to the reasons why they may not have wanted that committee to be re-established.

Let us see where we are this morning. The Special Committee on Afghanistan is wrapping up its work. The Conservatives' new political toy or tool will soon be a thing of the past. What issue has become their new political football? They have suddenly proposed a special committee on the relationship between Canada and the People's Republic of China. That is rather extraordinary.

Our Conservative friends did not think it would be useful to bring back the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations even though the world has changed profoundly in the months since the election, due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Now their priority is suddenly to reinstate the committee, so what made them change their minds?

I want to make it clear to my colleagues that we agree. We have always believed that this committee served a purpose. However, I sincerely wonder about why our Conservative friends are bringing this proposal forward now. It was relevant after the election, but they were not at all interested. Suddenly, now that Russia has invaded Ukraine, they find it relevant again, with the Special Committee on Afghanistan a few weeks away from wrapping up.

I cannot speak for my colleagues, but I think that if someone suspected partisan motives were behind this proposal, they might be right. In any case, we must acknowledge that it certainly seems that way. However, as I have said from the beginning, even though I have serious doubts that our Conservative friends' motives are honourable, we will vote in favour of this motion because we believe and always have believed that this committee served a purpose.

I would now like to take some time to talk about the wording of the motion moved by my colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills, whom I salute. It is always a pleasure to work with him.

I want to draw my colleagues' attention to one of the points early in the motion: “(iii) the distinction between the people of China and the Chinese state, as embodied by the Communist Party of China and the government of the People's Republic of China”. I think we can essentially all agree on that one.

I think the next line is worthy of a little commentary. It states, “(iv) that authoritarian states, including the People's Republic of China, increasingly pose a threat to the rules-based international order”. The Conservatives seem to have discovered that there are authoritarian states in the world. It may come as a shock to some, but less than half of our fellow humans on this planet live in democracies.

Given Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the People's Republic of China's threats against Taiwan, I understand this sudden desire to highlight the fact that “authoritarian states, including the People's Republic of China, increasingly pose a threat to the rules-based international order”, but I simply want to point out that this is not new.

Authoritarian states are not new. Because of some kind of agreement or tacit alliance between the two countries, the authoritarian states of Russia and the People's Republic of China may constitute a threat to the international order established after the Second World War.

I remind members that when the United Nations was created, we appointed the five largest powers at the time to maintain balance within the international system. The invasion of Ukraine, however, has highlighted the limits of this system, as one of the five powers meant to help maintain international order has gone out of control.

We find ourselves in a situation where neither the People's Republic of China nor Russia are what one might call democratic states. It appears that they have decided to collaborate, and we fully understand the threat that poses to the world order as we knew it, until recently at least.

Let me digress for a moment to share another fascinating point. By invading Ukraine, Vladimir Putin thought he would discourage all states from wanting to eventually join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. However, the exact opposite has happened. Do not forget that under Donald Trump's administration, President Macron described NATO as being virtually brain dead.

There were questions about the usefulness and relevance of NATO, but Vladimir Putin has made the organization relevant again—so much so that states that have traditionally been neutral for decades, such as Finland and Sweden, are now considering joining NATO. Vladimir Putin has pushed countries into NATO's arms by trying to prevent Ukraine from joining the organization.

Moreover, after Brexit, some European countries, such as Poland and Hungary, started questioning the point of the European Union. After the invasion of Ukraine, people stopped questioning whether the European Union was relevant or useful. In response to the Russian threat, the European Union, like NATO, closed ranks like never before.

We may agree with our colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills that this kind of tacit alliance between Russia and the People's Republic of China represents a significant threat to the international order as we knew it until very recently.

Even so, that does not take away from the problems we are seeing inside and outside the People's Republic of China as acknowledged in point (iv) of the motion. One example is the new silk road, China's move to establish itself as a force to be reckoned with in Africa and ultimately render former colonial powers, such as France, and even countries without a colonial past, such as Canada, irrelevant. Canada had a notable and noted presence in Africa for decades, but it literally missed the boat.

While China was investing heavily in Africa, Canada withdrew from that continent, especially under the influence of Stephen Harper's Conservative government. This opened Africa's doors to the Chinese. We missed the boat, and the Chinese are emerging as the power to be reckoned with in Africa. Russia is doing the same thing in Mali now. As the French pull out, the Russians are moving in. As point (iv) indicates, this contributes to a possible destabilisation of the international order.

I was talking a moment ago about the incredible and surprising solidarity shown by NATO and EU states in the face of Russia's aggression against Ukraine. We all thought about our friends in Taiwan, because we know that China is keeping a close eye on what is happening right now. Xi Jinping has made no secret of the fact that he would like to bring Taiwan back into the fold of mainland China. There have been concerns about the repercussions this would have.

At a reception in Taiwan's honour last night, it was noted that Taiwan is Canada's 11th largest trading partner, the fifth largest in Asia. This is significant. Taiwan is inextricably intertwined with the global economic system. However, if the People's Republic of China were to invade Taiwan, given the influence of Chinese banks on assets in Europe, would Europe be able to show the same level of solidarity in imposing sanctions on China, which is even more inextricably intertwined in the international economic system than Russia is?

What is happening right now is extremely concerning. It is not a matter of if the People's Republic of China will invade Taiwan but when, and the question is how the international community will be able to respond to this new transgression of international rules.

It is important to create a new committee on Canada-China relations. We think it appropriate to support this motion even though, once again, I highly doubt the good intentions of our Conservative friends, who moved with this motion at such an odd time, after Russia invaded Ukraine and a few days after the Special Committee on Afghanistan wrapped up its work, which did not give the Conservatives the political dividends they were hoping for. Now they are turning their attention to something else, and it seems that the political panacea for the Conservatives today is to reactivate the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations.

We will step up. We will do what we can to ensure that this committee does not become another partisan circus, and that we can lay the foundation for a better understanding and, we hope, better relations with the People's Republic of China, given the country's significance in the international system.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. However, I want to clarify one thing: I always intended to move this motion.

I am moving it now because the House of Commons Administration did not have the resources to add another special committee until now. However, since the Special Committee on Afghanistan will be completing its work on June 8, there is now an opportunity to create a new committee on Canada-China relations.

It was difficult to make the decision to move a motion on Afghanistan last fall, but now we have an opportunity to have a committee on Canada-China relations. That is why I moved this motion today.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC

Madam Speaker, I do not doubt my colleague's intentions. However, I would like to point out that, without disclosing any caucus secrets, and setting aside this noble argument that another committee could not be created because the House of Commons just did not have enough resources, I know for a fact, from what some Conservative colleagues have confided to me, that there were internal disagreements about whether it was advisable to bring back the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. That is the truth.

Now the Conservatives are dissatisfied, and I will admit that I am as well, with the negotiations between the New Democratic Party and the Liberal Party on the committee that will examine the situation that occurred at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.

The Conservatives very clumsily presented a motion at the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. Because it was not adopted and they were not pleased with the committee that was created, they are proposing to create a special committee on the Canada-People's Republic of China relationship in the hope of again strong-arming the government on the issue of—

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. I must interrupt the member because there are others who want to ask questions.

The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, as my colleague probably recalls, Canada signed the FIPA trade agreement under the Stephen Harper Conservatives, which locked Canadians into a trade agreement for over 31 years that cannot be cancelled. Under this agreement, Chinese companies can seek redress against any laws passed by any level of government that threaten their profits. There is a secret tribunal they can use if there is a lawsuit with respect to their rights around this.

We saw Chinese state-owned companies get access to energy, and I will quote from a story by a reporter who wrote, “If Stephen Harper ever gets tired of being Canada’s Prime Minister, he might like to consider a second career in China—he’d fit right in.”

I would ask my colleague this. Does he believe this committee should first look at what the agreement did with respect to opening up threats to our Canadian security? Has the former prime minister benefited at all from the trade agreement he signed?

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC

Madam Speaker, my simple answer to my colleague is yes.

If we need to reconsider Canada's existing relations with the People's Republic of China, everything must be on the table and we will have to consider the positives and negatives of each issue.

We have to acknowledge that Canada's economic relationship with the People's Republic of China is quite deep. This became clear during the pandemic when supply chains were completely disrupted. That led some companies to reconsider their decision to use Chinese suppliers, which is a far cry from the El Dorado the Liberals promised in the 1990s. Everything must be on the table, and that includes economic relations.

If our friends in the New Democratic Party think it is worthwhile reviewing the agreement signed by Stephen Harper's Conservative government, that is fine, we will review it.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Green

Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Montarville for his speech.

My understanding is that he intends to support the motion. I am just curious as to why he thinks it is important to establish a committee on our relationship with China instead of having it studied at the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC

Madam Speaker, the answer is simple. Realistically, there are only so many resources, technically speaking, that the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development can devote to addressing these topics and issues. Right now, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is getting a lot of attention. There are plenty of people and conflicts elsewhere in the world that have suddenly been forgotten because this conflict in Ukraine is getting all the attention and sucking up all the oxygen. There are only so many issues that can be addressed by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. The same is true of the Standing Committee on Health, where it was decided to create a special committee to conduct a special study on medical assistance in dying.

In relation to the People's Republic of China, given its importance, we think that there must be—

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I am going to allow more questions, because I know there are several other members who wish to speak.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Kingston and the Islands Ontario

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)

Madam Speaker, I found the answer to that last question very interesting. The member was asked why this could not go to the foreign affairs committee, and the response was that the foreign affairs committee seems to be seized with one issue right now, which is the war in Ukraine, and does not have time for these other issues. Then the member also said there are a lot of issues going on around the world and that is why we need to establish this committee.

Is the member then saying we should be establishing committees for every issue the foreign affairs committee cannot handle? That is what he basically just said in response to his last question. He said that we do not have enough resources so we need a special committee, but he also said there are a number of issues going on throughout the world. Do we establish a special committee for every issue?

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC

Madam Speaker, taking that logic to ridiculous extremes, I wonder if it is even worth trying to answer that.

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-People’s Republic of China RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Montarville on his speech. I have learned more about international politics and global issues from his speeches than I did during all my years at university.

I would remind my colleague that, in 2020, the House of Commons adopted a motion calling on the federal government to develop a strategy to combat Chinese aggression and make a decision on Huawei. Nothing has been done since.

As we all know, one of the Conservatives' new friends, Jean Charest, has returned to the fold and is trying to win the party leadership. He has a history of professional relations with Huawei and is a friend of the company. Should a special committee on the relationship between Canada and the People's Republic of China be formed, does my colleague think that the Conservatives' demands and intentions with respect to this committee could change, given their new relationship with Mr. Charest?