Debates of May 12th, 2022

Opposition Motion—A Special Committee on the Canada-People's Republic of China Relationship

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, I am glad to stand as I represent Nunavut. Since I was elected in September I have been surprised with how many foreign interference issues we have had to deal with.

I would like to ask the member if he would commit to having the government bring legislation forward to combat foreign interference from China and other state parties here in Canada.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Madam Speaker, that is an attractive idea. It has been pursued in other countries. In principle, I would support it. I do not know how it would play out in practice.

While I am on my feet, I would like to talk about the north and the critical importance that the rangers play in the assertion of our sovereignty in the north. It is not only a military establishing of presence, but also the building of the infrastructure in the north in order to facilitate the extension of our sovereignty. The biggest challenge to our sovereignty is the government of China.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. He is very articulate and knows a lot about this issue. I appreciate his support for this motion to have a China-Canada committee set up again. I think that is what he said in his closing remarks, and if not, he can correct me on that.

I am looking at all of the things the member said were important to be dealt with, and I know the other committees are so busy. I am on the natural resources committee myself. There are a lot of issues around natural resources today, as well. China has control of a greater chunk of those in the world than any other nation. We do as well, and it may impact us in regard to being able to get the critical minerals we need for some of the EV situations we are looking at.

What are the member's feelings in regard to having discussions there, because we are already tied up in natural resources committee on the transition issues?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Madam Speaker, I chair the national defence committee. We have just done a threat analysis study. I think it will be an excellent report. However, we were distracted. The distraction was, naturally, to Ukraine, Europe and NATO. The threat of the Indo-Pacific was not dealt with nearly as well as it should have been.

I am assuming that your committee is much like our committee, challenged for time and challenged for resources, and not able to deal coherently with some pretty important issues.

That is the reason that I think this is not a bad idea.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Again, I want to remind the member that he is to address all questions and comments through the Chair. I do not have a committee, so I know he was not addressing it directly to me.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Avalon.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Madam Speaker, I will focus my remarks on Canada's engagement with Taiwan.

The connections between Canada and Taiwan are very deep and strong. Our two societies share a commitment to democratic values and a respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. The approximately 60,000 Canadians who live in Taiwan today comprise the fourth-largest Canadian diaspora community in the world. Daily direct flights between Vancouver and Taipei have helped to deepen these people-to-people ties.

When the COVID-19 pandemic struck, Taiwan was among the first to donate masks to Canada. The economic relationship between Canada and Taiwan is also thriving. Canada's two-way merchandise trade with Taiwan totals $10.2 billion in 2021, up 38.1% from $7.4 billion in 2020. In 2021, Taiwan was Canada's 11th-largest merchandise trading partner and fifth-largest trading partner in Asia. Taiwan is a critical link in global supply chains, particularly for chip manufacturing and international shipping.

To strengthen trade, Canada and Taiwan co-operate through select multilateral organizations, including APEC and the WTO. To advance economic people-to-people and cultural co-operation, senior representatives from both sides participate in the Canada-Taiwan Economic Consultations, an annual meeting. During the most recent meeting, our representatives discussed a broad range of topics related to trade and investment, such as the green economy, supply chain security, intellectual property, access to agricultural markets and greater collaboration on science, technology and innovation.

Canada and Taiwan, along with Australia and New Zealand, recently negotiated the indigenous peoples economic and trade co-operation agreement. The arrangement establishes a framework to identify and remove the barriers that hinder the economic empowerment of indigenous peoples. Earlier this year, Canada and Taiwan announced their intention to hold exploratory discussions toward a possible foreign investment promotion and protection arrangement, also known as FIPA. Canada is keen to pursue trade, innovation and investment relations with Taiwan, consistent with our long-standing policy.

Over the past two decades, Taiwan was able to participate in select UN specialized agencies as an observer or as a special guest. More recently, however, Taiwan has been actively excluded from key international agencies and events. This exclusion has negative impacts not only on the 24 million people of Taiwan, but also on the global community. For instance, Taiwan continues to be excluded from the World Health Assembly, even though the island has much to contribute to global pandemic efforts. The international community faces an unprecedented number of complex issues, from climate change to public health to environmental degradation and more. Collaboration among all partners offers our best hope for resolving these issues. Where a technical imperative exists, we must enable meaningful contributions from all stakeholders. It is on this basis that Canada supports Taiwan's meaningful participation in relevant global discussions, including in the secure skies initiative led by Transport Canada.

Taiwan should participate meaningfully in international organizations whenever there is a practical imperative to do so, and whenever Taiwan's absence is detrimental to global interests. Consider, for instance, the question of Taiwan's ongoing exclusion from the World Health Assembly, the WHA. During the pandemic, it is clear that the exclusion of Taiwan from the WHA has been detrimental to global efforts to track and combat COVID-19. The pandemic provides a practical imperative for Taiwan's inclusion as an observer.

In recent months, we have observed tensions across the Taiwan Strait. Canada has communicated directly to the Chinese authorities its concerns about destabilizing military actions across the strait while reiterating Canada's strong support for constructive efforts that contribute to peace and stability in the region. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has discussed this situation with many of our allies and is working with our like-minded partners to support the security and stability of the Indo-Pacific as a whole. Additionally, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development is currently seized of this issue and is scheduled to meet today to hear testimony on the situation in the Taiwan Strait.

To be clear, we remain committed to advancing our interests with Taiwan within the framework of Canada's long-standing policy. Canadian engagement with Taiwan is multi-faceted and has, on its own merits, an important role to play in advancing Canadian interests. The value of this engagement between our two societies goes beyond the cross-strait security question.

During the last two decades, China has emerged as an economic powerhouse and a critical partner and stakeholder across a range of pressing issues of global concern. China's inclusion is necessary toward overcoming the daunting global challenges, including climate change, pandemic management and global economic recovery, as well as international security. It is in our interests to remain committed to a long-term, constructive and mature relationship with China. We will continue to seek frank but respectful dialogue and co-operation where it makes sense to do so, but also to defend and promote values we have always stood for.

Everyone benefits when we work together to identify mutual interests and negotiate creative arrangements that serve these interests. Canada engages both sides of the Taiwan Strait to advance complementary interests, respect for rights and freedoms, and the rule of law. This approach has informed the approach of successive governments for more than five decades and will continue to do so well into the future.

As a progressive democracy, Taiwan demonstrates that Confucian values can coexist effectively with the protection of individual rights and freedoms, including those of women, the LGBTQ+ community and indigenous peoples. At the same time, Taiwan's strengths in semiconductors, biotechnology and information technology have supported its dynamic, export-driven economy and contributed to global growth. Canada will continue to pursue Taiwan's meaningful participation where its presence provides important contributions to the public good.

Finally, with respect to the committee proposed in this motion, there are several existing parliamentary committees where bilateral relations issues can be and have been raised. At the top of the list is the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, which already this year has undertaken thorough and constructive studies and briefings on China-related issues, including the Xinjiang Uighur autonomous region and Tibet. As I mentioned earlier in my speech, the committee is currently studying the situation in the Taiwan Strait.

The parliamentary committees already in place are the right venues for studying these topics, and it is unfortunate that the Conservatives are proposing a motion that will at best lead to a duplication of work.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, to the member's final comments, I serve on the foreign affairs committee and we are concurrently trying to study the issue of Taiwan, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the question of global vaccine equity. All three are critical points of global crisis.

We are putting forward the humble suggestion that the special committee on Canada-China relations, which was a multidisciplinary committee looking at issues of foreign policy, security and a broad range of other issues, be allowed to continue its work. It is disappointing to see the Liberal members oppose it.

I want to ask the member a specific question about Taiwan, the primary subject of his remarks. At the transport committee, my colleague from Thornhill put forward a motion calling for the full participation of Taiwan in ICAO, and the Liberals proposed an amendment to say they do not want “full” participation but “meaningful” participation, which is ostensibly something short of full participation.

The member spoke a lot about meaningful participation, but I think the public will notice that that is different from saying Taiwan should have full participation and be able to participate on an equal basis. Could the member clarify whether he supports the full participation of Taiwan in international organizations?

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Madam Speaker, for the full participation of Taiwan, yes, I myself would support that, both as an individual and as an MP.

In regard to adding a committee, there were members who spoke here earlier and said committees are jammed up now with doing work. They cannot get space; they cannot get interpreters, and they cannot get staff. I think we should deal with it under the present structure of our committees.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague when he says that the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development is there to discuss international affairs.

That being said, the China file is enormous. It might take an inordinate amount of time to study it. There are 191 other countries for the foreign affairs committee to discuss.

Does he not think that given the scope of the China file, it would be good to have a committee for this file and possibly for other urgent files such as Afghanistan and Yemen?

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Madam Speaker, I believe I answered the member's question in my first answer. We hear all the time at committees, including at the committee I am on, that we cannot get any extra time. We are trying to do studies and hear from witnesses. We cannot get interpreters. We cannot get a room. We cannot get extra time.

Again, rather than adding another committee on top of the committees we already have, we can deal with it in the structure that currently exists. If that creates a problem, we should look at doing something different.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, today it is clear that we are hearing a great deal about human rights. Two days ago, an Al Jazeera reporter, Shireen Abu Aqla, was executed while doing her job and wearing clearly delineated press gear. Her life was so tragically taken away.

When will Parliament condemn this act and speak out against the atrocious violence we are seeing waged against Palestinians by Israel?

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her thoughts on what happened to the reporter.

I could not agree more. It should be condemned totally and it should be condemned by all of the free world. We should let the world know that we do not stand for this in our world, or in any world for that matter. For a reporter, who is there to report on events or what is happening in whatever territory, to be shot and killed like that is absolutely disgraceful, and there should be a full investigation into what actually transpired.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I know that debate on the motion is set to adjourn shortly, so I will try to make my remarks brief so we have time for questions should members have any.

This is an important vote that will be taken on an important motion, for it seeks to answer questions regarding Canada's complicated and increasingly difficult relationship with the Government of the People's Republic of China. Should the House of Commons pass this motion, a special parliamentary committee would be reconstituted, with MPs from all recognized caucuses, to investigate and study how Beijing is influencing or has influenced the federal government, how Beijing is advancing PRC national interests within our country and how Beijing is even at times skirting Canadian laws meant to protect our citizens, values and security.

I am supporting the motion before us because of my commitment to Canada. I am also supporting it because I want better nation-to-nation relations with mainland China. Our connection with Beijing cannot be based on blind trust, especially when we as parliamentarians consider its reversal on Hong Kong, its aggressive posture around the South China Sea, the terrible genocide against Uighurs and Beijing's stated hostilities toward the Republic of China, an independent democracy also know as Taiwan.

In the last Parliament, I served as a member on the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. Over approximately 30 meetings, which I think would have continued had the election not been called, we issued three reports and heard from dozens of expert witnesses concerning Canada's relationship with the People's Republic of China. While it was always illuminating, it was not always news or information that our government wanted to highlight. One example was the concern around security at the Winnipeg lab. There was a debate and struggle at the highest levels on this, including in this chamber, far outside of the special committee. That issue remains unresolved.

Nevertheless, despite this at times divisive and heated debate, our work largely was conducted across party lines, even on contentious issues, such as studying the deteriorating democratic and human rights situation in Hong Kong. There was a consensus among members that Canada can and should do more. We saw also consensus on the motion concerning the genocide of the Uighurs within China.

The reason for this consensus is that a growing number of Liberal MPs, mainly those who sit outside of cabinet, feel that the Government of Canada has overstated the importance of China to our nation's well-being or, worse, has abandoned our values and has at times even kowtowed to Beijing. This is something that parliamentarians do not want to see and Canadians certainly do not want to see, and it is why I think the committee operated as well as it did to raise issues, ask questions and seek answers.

These members on the opposite side believe that it is wrong to promote an economic relationship with Beijing as a primary tenet of Canada's foreign policy while staying largely silent on the mistreatment of Uighurs, Tibetans and Falun Gong practitioners, who are prosecuted, as well as on Christians, citizens of Hong Kong and Taiwan, and democracies throughout Asia. These MPs understand that in the years ahead, it will be more important to partner and ally with democratic nations than with totalitarian regimes.

Finally, with the Special Committee on Afghanistan preparing to present its report to the House of Commons, there is opportunity to resurrect the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. It is an opportunity that I ask other members, regardless of party affiliation, to support by voting in favour of this motion.

One reason that I am so outspoken on issues related to Beijing's mistreatment of its own citizens is my time spent in and travelling throughout China. I have long admired China, its diverse people and all its parts. I am what one might have called a Sinophile before relations between Beijing and western nations worsened.

I moved to Hong Kong 25 years ago, and within months of my arrival, the territory's national allegiance shifted from British colonial rule to the People's Republic of China. This was done peacefully, and I know Hong Kong's then 6.5 million residents had hope twinned with trepidation.

The British government had negotiated a 50-year agreement with Beijing that would maintain Hong Kong's domestic autonomy and basic freedoms. Sadly, today those freedoms are largely gone, or they exist on paper but are not respected in the courts or by Hong Kong's leaders, who are appointed by Beijing in mainland China. Democrats have been jailed or forced to flee, the free press has been shuttered and its owners jailed, and the agreement with Beijing on these supposed freedoms is not worth the paper it was printed on.

While Beijing was abandoning its commitment to Hong Kong, it was also becoming more hostile elsewhere. In July 2020, I highlighted the mistreatment of Uighurs. I called on the former minister of Global Affairs to launch an independent investigation into forced labour camps operating in mainland China. In January 2021, Ottawa finally acted by announcing its intention to support tougher restrictions on products being imported from that region.

This announcement was six months late, and unfortunately unlike other international allies, which are taking tougher actions to root out forced labour in commercial supply chains, Canada's government will not impose financial penalties on companies that do not comply with our government's directive. This is largely due to its practice of prioritizing mainland China's interests in order to “get along” with Beijing.

The government must go further to safeguard Canada's values and interests. Financial penalties on companies that use forced labour in supply chains must be added to its reforms. Also, Magnitsky sanctions must be applied to top Communist Party officials who continue to commit crimes. Now, more than ever, Canada needs a principled foreign policy that promotes freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law abroad.

If this special committee was important when it was established several years ago, it is now urgent with the deteriorating war situation in Ukraine. That is because the parallels between what is happening in eastern Europe and possibly in Asia, and I pray it does not, are all too clear.

Russia has declared war for no other reason than to gobble up the independent country of Ukraine. Beijing too claims a piece of territory as its own, in this case Taiwan, as a province. Like Russia, it has said it will use force to retake this piece of territory.

This should concern parliamentarians not only in this country but around the world. We have been put on notice that this is a real possibility, not only because it is happening now in Ukraine, but because China has said it is an option going forward. Of course, we can see the devastating results every day, sadly, on our televisions and smart phones regarding what is happening in Ukraine. Force is an option that Parliament must deal with, recognize and confront.

Questions for this committee could include the following.

As we have seen regarding Russia, Canada has imposed many economic sanctions as a way to punish and deter Russia's aggression. Can we do this with respect to mainland China, and if we do, what is Canada's exposure to sanctions?

What is our ability to help democratic Taiwan, which many members on the government side profess friendship and even admiration for? Can we help Taiwan continue to govern itself peacefully, should Beijing's rhetoric move from words to military action? Importantly, as well, and this is where the committee could probe the federal government, are there voices or opinions in the federal government that Taipei should simply surrender its autonomy so that other nations can maintain good relations with mainland China, in effect trading off friends for opportunity elsewhere?

We see the need for this committee to act and to ask questions by looking at Europe, where Putin's war machine continues to commit atrocities against the Ukrainian people every day for one purpose alone, and that is submission and control. This is something we never imagined would happen after the Iron Curtain fell, but it has created deeper concerns about how the world would respond if Beijing invaded Taiwan in the same fashion. I think parliamentarians have a duty to ask some of these questions and to receive responses from the Government of Canada, if for no other reason than for us to satisfy ourselves that they are being considered and that solutions are being drawn up in concert with our allies.

At the same time, there must be a study into how Beijing continues to deepen its influence in our domestic affairs, through our markets, espionage and intimidation. Many of us will recall the Zijin Mining Group, a state-owned enterprise from China, purchasing Canada's Neo Lithium Corporation earlier this year, a fire sale of a critical mineral mine in Canada that should have prompted a national security review and should have been blocked. Unfortunately, this did not happen. This is another area where the committee should investigate to see what information went into this decision. Why, when it comes to Beijing, is the government reluctant to turn down these kinds of purchases? I believe that members on both sides of the House believe that critical mining projects in Canada should be owned and operated by Canadian firms or trusted allies, in order to maintain and protect our national security.

There is another study this committee could look at. What about the Canadian success story of Nortel Networks? In 2004, over 70% of the world's Internet traffic ran on Canadian fibre optic technology produced by Nortel. It is believed that the Chinese military launched concentrated cyber-attacks for 10 years against Nortel's headquarters in Canada, stealing thousands of sensitive documents and other company secrets. Nortel simply could not compete against Huawei, and ultimately ended up in bankruptcy. To quote Global News, “it would be similar to a foreign army constructing a hidden tunnel into Canada’s treasury vault, and marching out unimpeded with gold bars.” Were Canadian pensions, life savings and technology stolen? Again, another question for this committee.

A third one, which I think is of growing importance, is the use of our capital markets by the People's Republic of China and its state enterprises to advance China's financial interests. This is something that has gone largely unexplored. I do not think there is a sense of the exposure that Canadian capital markets have toward the People's Republic of China. This is something that could be detrimental to our country's well-being, should we ever see a conflict erupt between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China.

I have heard some of our friends opposite talk about the need to help Taiwan join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. I think this is welcome news. I think it is a sign of great progress that there is certainly multipartisan support for seeing Taiwan step up and play a greater role in international relations and affairs. Taiwan's entry into the CPTPP would also promote high-standard trade rules. Regrettably, China also wants entry into this organization, but I do not believe it meets the labour, environmental and human rights issues that would see it come in. Having said that, I think this is a discussion for parliamentarians to engage in.

I will end with a request that members consider this on the merits of the motion, with some concern that while we saw all opposition parties unite on this in the past, that might not happen this time. I do not know the reasoning or the deal-making that went behind Motion No. 11, which has now tied the NDP and the Liberals into a pact. It is my deep hope that the NDP will show its commitment to human rights and international affairs and vote, as it did before, to continue this committee, for no other reason than to ask questions and see where the answers take us. I think it would be wrong and the NDP's standing would fall should it vote otherwise on this motion just as a way to keep relations happy with the Liberals.

It is important that all members, from all parliamentary caucuses, have the opportunity to be heard on these issues, that we ask questions, look for answers and table reports that will protect Canada, ensure that our citizens are safe and, in the long run, work to improve relations between the People's Republic of China and Canada.

I appreciate the time to make these comments.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Madam Speaker, I applaud my hon. colleague for the excellent job he did in explaining the complexity of the relationship between Canada and China. However, where he failed to convince is on the necessity of this particular committee, knowing that there are already four existing committees that can deal with the different complexities and issues related to the Canada-China relationship. Could the member explain what this committee would add that is not already covered by the four existing committees?

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member recently mentioned one, the foreign affairs committee, which is already overworked with looking at a number of international issues.

What it would bring that the others do not is a focus on one of our most important foreign relations in the world. That focus would allow it to raise questions, seek answers and hear from Canadians, from expats from mainland China and from observers around the world. It is the intensity and the focus. I can understand why the government would prefer to avoid that, but that makes it all the more important, particularly as we see what is happening in Ukraine, and how Beijing's threats have gone from being something we had a difficult time wrapping our brains around to what we now see every day in eastern Europe.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from New Brunswick Southwest for his fine speech.

We know how important technology is and how serious the repercussions can be if there is no oversight. China has so much economic power that any direct or indirect support for Taiwan would have serious repercussions for Canada's economy, given that a large part of the supply chain is in China.

I would like my colleague to tell me once again about the importance of the Special Committee on Canada-China relations. Why is it important?

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I believe this is a key question for the committee to consider.

If there is a confrontation between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China, what will be the impact on Canada, our workers and our goods?

Until now, no one has asked these questions because we did not really believe it was possible before the war in Ukraine broke out. Today, it is possible. We must ask these questions and get answers for Canadians so that Canada can respond accordingly.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, we absolutely have to uphold human rights, without qualification.

Yesterday, the NDP put forward a motion condemning the murder of a Palestinian journalist. It was voted against by a member of my hon. colleague's party. I wonder if he agrees with me that it is important not to be selective about when to uphold human rights and when not to uphold human rights. Especially with the motion the Conservatives have put forward today, it seems like they are contradicting themselves in terms of the Conservatives being actual human rights defenders.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, like the NDP or any party, the Conservative Party does not speak with a single voice. There are many different opinions. As to the issue that is being raised, illuminating difficulties and challenges in one area where there is a relationship, in this case China, does not mean Parliament or a committee does not look at it elsewhere. The wrong approach would be to say that because a motion was rejected yesterday, this motion should be rejected.

To my NDP colleague, who obviously feels very passionately about what has happened with the murder of the journalist, which is something terrible, I would just say that I think she would agree that not looking at either does not make this country a better place. Let us look at the motion ahead of us and vote on it. We can come back to other debates on other days.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, just briefly to the previous question, I think all members of the House agree that it is a terrible thing that a journalist was killed in a war zone. However, to presume, as one member of this House did, that this person was intentionally shot, execution-style, is not something that any independent investigation has concluded. It is important to have that independent investigation before making the presumptions that members of the House make. It is typical of some members of the House, when we try to have a conversation about the genocide going on in China, that they always want to say, “Well, what about Israel?”

I know the member spent some time living in Hong Kong. Many people were deeply concerned about the arrest we saw this week in Hong Kong of Cardinal Zen, who is a great champion of democracy. He is a 90-year-old retired cardinal who is much loved within the Catholic community and beyond. There is also the arrest of Denise Ho, a singer who is a Canadian citizen and a prominent activist on LGBTQ issues. There are a number of other people who were arrested as well. It is disappointing to see such prominent figures, including a Canadian and a senior religious leader, arrested. It shows the flagrant disregard of the Chinese government for the agreements it has made with respect to Hong Kong.

I wonder if the member, as someone who has spent time in Hong Kong, has a reaction to those events.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I do, because it is a pattern we have seen, not just with Beijing's increased heavy-handedness in Hong Kong, but with its outright control of the institutions of government there, which had been free, self-governing and a beacon for people throughout not just Asia but the world.

My hon. colleague mentioned a number of people. There is Jimmy Lai as well, who was the owner of the Apple Daily. What the government seeks to do by these arrests, whether of people in the arts, religious figures or business figures, is to send the signal that if it can arrest and stop these people, it can arrest and stop whomever it likes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

The committee in question existed before the election was called. That is another consequence of the snap election that was held last year. As far as I know, the situation in China has not changed since then. As the critic for status of women, I am particularly concerned about what is happening to Uighur women. My colleague talked a lot about human rights. Uighur women are being forcibly sterilized.

I am also a member of the All-Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking. What is happening in factories in China and the impacts on the supply chain show how important it is that we examine this issue. Those are some other reasons to reinstate the committee. Let us not forget that it existed before the last election.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, that is absolutely true. Had there not been an election, that committee would still be sitting.

When we talk about human rights in China, we are talking about the same rights that we have here in Canada, for indigenous people, women and parents. Those same rights need to apply to citizens of China, Taiwan and Hong Kong.

As parliamentarians and Canadians, we need to consider these issues, ask hard questions and find solutions to make the world a more peaceful place with fewer wars.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am very concerned that we do start such a committee, and that one of the first things we take up is the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement, which has been lopsided and given the People's Republic of China abilities to suppress Canadian interests.

As it was the member's government under former prime minister Harper that executed this extremely lopsided agreement, would he support that we study it at this point?

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I would. I think many of us have miscalculated China. Twenty-three years ago, when I was writing for the National Post, I believed, like a lot of people, that trade and globalization would see China develop and respect human rights. I was wrong, as I think a lot of western commentators were. I am prepared to adjust course now and look at China with a more critical eye. If that includes looking at deals as the member mentioned, I think there should be no bounds on this committee, because, believe me, I think Canada has made mistakes. We could correct those mistakes and move forward.