SoVote

Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)

May/12/22 11:39:32 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her intervention. I always appreciate hearing her in the House. My colleague who brought this motion forward today talked about the need for this committee. He had many different, great reasons for that. One thing that has been mentioned today is the foreign affairs committee, which is dealing with the war on Ukraine. China has a big role in that and it has not condemned the war. When it comes to relations with Russia and China, they are very amicable, at a time when our Prime Minister, who was in Ukraine this week, is donating $50 million more in taxpayer dollars to it. Does that alone not warrant, notwithstanding the rest of the reasons, the establishment of this committee, apart from the foreign affairs committee?

132 words

All Topics

Ms. Heather McPherson

May/12/22 11:40:23 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, one of the issues I am grappling with is the geopolitical situation we find ourselves in. Russia and Ukraine are, of course, front and centre in that, but the ripples and implications of it on a broader scale are very clear. One thing that I have been working on has me quite worried. When we look at China, it appears to me that it is determining whether it is going to side with Russia or against it. I am also looking at nuclear disarmament. Now, more than ever, we need to look at the fact that we have a megalomanic madman in Putin, who has a nuclear bomb. I do not think any of us wants to be held hostage by somebody with a nuclear bomb. What we also need to be looking at in the foreign affairs committee is how to disarm. I would love to have a committee, to be perfectly honest, on nuclear disarmament in this world. We could move that further so that countries like Russia cannot not hold us over a barrel and—

181 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/12/22 11:41:35 a.m.
Watch

Sorry, but I have to go to other questions. The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.

17 words

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

May/12/22 11:41:41 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's passion for defending human rights. I sit with her on the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. I completely agree with her. There are many problematic conflicts around the world that are not getting any media attention. In fact, when the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees came to Ottawa a month ago, he said that this was a problem because all eyes are on Ukraine right now, but there are conflicts all over the place. I would like to talk to my colleague about the very specific case of one of my constituents. Lazhar Zouaïmia is a human rights advocate for Amnesty International. He went to Algeria and was imprisoned there. He had a hard time leaving that country, but has finally returned to Longueuil. This morning there was an article in Le Devoir about the huge number of Canadians who are still trapped over there, not necessarily in prison, but—

171 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/12/22 11:42:46 a.m.
Watch

I have to be fair about speaking time. The hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona.

14 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

May/12/22 11:42:52 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an excellent point. We are unable to acknowledge the areas around the world where there are other challenges. What is happening in Ukraine is going to have ripple effects geopolitically, but it is also going to have massive ripple effects in food security. We know that Lebanon, for example, is going to have real problems, and we should be looking at that. The member talked about Canadians who are being held captive. I have to say that northern Syria should be an area that every parliamentarian is ashamed of. We have Canadians and children in northern Syria and our country refuses to repatriate them. These are innocent children.

112 words

All Topics

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

May/12/22 11:43:46 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for her wonderful insight. I agree with her. In particular, the Conservative Party has demonstrated that it picks and chooses when it wants to uphold human rights. I can think of yesterday, when a Conservative member voted against a unanimous consent motion calling out the brutal assassination of a Palestinian journalist. Foundational for any democracy is freedom of the press. I wonder if my hon. colleague would agree that in light of this, the committee needs to do better in prioritizing all human rights, not just picking and choosing them when it feels like it.

105 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/12/22 11:44:37 a.m.
Watch

We have run out of time. I will allow the hon. member to answer in 20 seconds, if possible.

19 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

May/12/22 11:44:45 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, absolutely, we need to do a better job. I brought forward a motion to look at reproductive rights around the world, and the Conservatives blocked that. I brought forward a motion to look at Palestinian rights, and the Conservatives blocked that. We do need to examine why we are picking and choosing.

54 words

All Topics

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

May/12/22 11:45:08 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Wellington—Halton Hills for bringing forward this motion today. I also would like to thank my hon. colleague from Edmonton Strathcona for sharing her time with me and for her incredible insight on this. I am always so grateful to share these issues with her, and I learn from her every day. The member for Edmonton Strathcona put forward a lot of really key points in her speech about what the House needs to think about. While I certainly think it is important to re-establish the special committee to examine and review all the aspects of the relationship between Canada and the People's Republic of China, I think we have to do so with all of the issues that she has brought to the point here in mind and with an understanding that this is a specific committee, a special committee. However, it needs to be brought forward in such a way that we get to the heart of what we need to determine the international foreign policy that Canada holds. I also want to note that when I refer to China today, I am referring to the People's Republic of China and not the people of China. There have been a lot of references to the need for further discussion about future studies from this special committee, and of course, the continuation of issues that were already brought up by the former committee but that have not been fully addressed yet. As a member for the Standing Committee on National Defence, I know we are wrapping up a study on security threat analysis, Canada's position in this quickly changing world and the deterioration of relations with China. These were part of the study, and they are very concerning. It is inadequate to simply say that China is an integral component of our international future, whether it be in trade, the economy, or social or security actions and considerations. It is about how we are moving forward in this world. At a time when insecurity is heightened due to Russia's illegal war in Ukraine, we must ensure that China does not follow suit, and an example of that is with Taiwan. Last night, I had the honour to attend Taiwan night, which is a celebration from the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, and many from this place spoke last night about the incredible contributions of Taiwan to the world. It was one of the first countries that helped Canada during the pandemic by sending much-needed PPE, and Taiwan has shipped over 50 tonnes of medical supplies to Ukraine because of its urgent humanitarian considerations. This must continue and grow. We must support that. I am proud that Canada has joined with many allies in the world to fight for and hold true to the democratic principles of the rule of law and the international rules-based order in Ukraine. Again, as my colleague from Edmonton Strathcona so wonderfully, so eloquently, so rightfully noted, Canada does not do this consistently. We can no longer pick and choose which human rights we will uphold. It is time that all parties, mine included, take a long look at our own internal policies, our determination to fight against the violation of human rights domestically and internationally for our allies, and those who are not yet aligned but hopefully will be in the future, to clearly define the principles of international human rights and a rules-based order for all. As I mentioned, I am a member of the national defence committee, and we have clearly heard from witnesses at that committee that China is a security concern. Canada sent the HMCS Winnipeg through the Taiwan Strait as a signal of support and a showing of strength against that aggressive posturing of the People's Republic of China. That is simply one example of why I support this motion and the re-establishment of this committee. The global security environment should be a focus of this committee. I would also insist that the committee study the vital need to fix the diplomatic crisis between Canada and China. We need to do a deep dive into the past four years and the mismanagement of this diplomatic disaster. The incarceration of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor continued for more than three years. They experienced severe conditions and a failure to have legal counsel or contact with their families. This was a horrendous situation. Although they were thankfully released, as my colleague noted, there are so many that still remain incarcerated. I know that Canadians from coast to coast to coast are still very concerned about this issue. Canadians asked us to work together and New Democrats are always willing to do that work. We must work together to make life better for Canadians and for everyone all over the world. Canadians are concerned about what is going on in China. The protests and demonstrations in Hong Kong have been of much concern for a long time now. Canadians are concerned as to what is happening to the people of Hong Kong and Canadian citizens in Hong Kong. They are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong and the imposition of the government of China’s one country, two systems policy. It is a complex relationship, certainly from a human rights perspective. Concern for the Uighurs is extremely high in Canada. We have to find ways to put pressure in whatever way possible to seek to resolve some of these issues. Of course, we have long-standing concerns about Tibet as well. Again, we have that complex relationship and significant trade relations with China. We have seen how disruption in that trade can so quickly and seriously affect Canadians, particularly as we have seen for Canadian farmers with canola, soybeans, peas, beef and pork, which have cost millions and millions of dollars for Canadians and farmers. Some of these issues have been resolved, but others are still outstanding. This important relationship is something we have to take very seriously. This motion could put into effect the kind of collaboration that Canadians want to see in the government of Canada. We still have a Liberal government, at which I shake my head sometimes, but we have other voices that will come to the table. I believe that the continuation of this committee in another Parliament is an important part of the collaboration. Interestingly, my colleague, Jack Harris, the former member of Parliament for St. John’s East, spoke to the first Conservative call for this special committee in 2019. He spoke about that collaboration. While he is recently retired from this place, I am sure he heard his fair share of rhetoric and raised tempers in the House, and maybe sometimes it was his own. I would have to say that I believe those have increased since he left. In his speech to the House, Jack spoke to the former special Canada-China committee, stating: That is an opportunity for a special committee to look at that whole [nation-to-nation] relationship and see if there are ways that we can improve that relationship beyond what is being done now and in different ways. There may well be things that are being overlooked. There may be other opportunities. I certainly hope that the government would see this as an opportunity to reset the tone, to set up a new relationship and send a signal to China about what we want and how we want to achieve that in ways that we could not do in another form in this Parliament. Of course, I cannot prejudge what will happen at the committee, but New Democrats certainly do not want this to be another point for political battle between the opposition and the government or to see finger pointing. We do not think that is going to help the circumstances. As my colleagues have rightfully mentioned at the foreign affairs committee, as well as other committees, this can be where things get held up, when we do not get to the key issues or talk about all the incredible ways that Canada could be an important part of that human rights conversation. It is one thing to be critical, of course, of the government's failures. I am, and they are certainly obvious in some cases. In his discourse, Jack Harris stated: We have to recognize that diplomatic relations are just that, diplomatic, and they have to be carried out in a spirit of willingness by all members in this House who might participate in this committee, and by all parties in this House, and that must be kept in mind in the operation of such a committee. Without that spirit of collaboration, there could be a danger that the relationship could be harmed. It is a leap of faith of the members of this House, a test of the notion of collaboration and a test of the maturity of this Parliament to be able to operate such a committee in a way that meets the needs of Canada in trying to find a solution, but it is also an opportunity for constructive criticism or at least for attempting to find out what does work and what does not work. I will conclude my remarks by saying that we do support this opposition motion. A Canada-China committee is an important tool for parliamentarians to study the many issues that affect Canadians in our relationship with China. We support that reset of that relationship. We support Canadians knowing that they are safe and that they will benefit from this important and challenging relationship.

1621 words

All Topics

Mr. Alex Ruff (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, CPC)

May/12/22 11:54:45 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, first off, I give my thanks to my colleague for the support of the NDP in this motion. I would like to give her the opportunity to expand a little bit more on one of the aspects that this committee should be looking at in detail, from my viewpoint, which is the economic impact of and our concerns about global supply chains and the supply chains between Canada and China. I would also like her to comment on the climate change concerns about China being responsible for over 50% of global greenhouse gas emissions and how this is something that the committee should be looking at as well.

110 words

All Topics

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

May/12/22 11:55:25 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there are absolutely so many possibilities for this committee. There are so many challenging issues that could come before this committee. That kind of study would be an incredible opportunity to look at the environmental impacts China is having on the world, but we need to look at our own impacts and to take stock by looking within and internally. We need to look at that impact and ensure that we are not only criticizing, but also moving forward in the ways we need to to ensure we all have a world left to defend.

97 words

All Topics

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

May/12/22 11:56:17 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciated hearing the member for London—Fanshawe's reflections that all folks in this place need to consider more broadly human rights around the world. The member for Edmonton Strathcona had offered to do so. Considering arms sales to Saudi Arabia as one example, she offered the potential to start a second committee on foreign affairs that could look more broadly at these issues, as opposed to what is being proposed here, which would look at one specific relationship. I wonder if the member for London—Fanshawe could elaborate on what this approach could look like.

101 words

All Topics

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

May/12/22 11:56:53 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a possibility. Certainly we have often seen subcommittees formed from standing committees to address certain things. We have not only seen special committees, such as the one we are discussing today. I would imagine, though, that a lot of that has to come from committees, which are determinants of their own destiny. They would have to come to a point where all parties in the House agree to look at those human rights violations and Canada's positioning on it. Unfortunately, as my colleague mentioned, the Conservative Party has been unwilling to do so. Therefore, part of the collaboration we need to talk about is a willingness to look at our own policies internally and the inconsistencies that we have.

124 words

All Topics

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

May/12/22 11:57:53 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I really appreciate my colleague's advocacy for human rights. One thing we know, and that she recalled, is that the Conservatives signed the FIPA, that trade agreement that locked in future generations for 31 years to a trade agreement with China. In this agreement, if the Government of China, state-owned companies or Chinese companies run into social, environmental and economic policies that interfere with the profits of Chinese companies, they go into a secret tribunal. Does my colleague believe that this new committee should be able to have access to all memos and notes from the Stephen Harper government about why these tribunals are done in secret?

111 words

All Topics

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

May/12/22 11:58:34 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague is absolutely right. It is one of the things that we were discussing here, that democratic right to openness and dialogue. It is interesting to me that both the Conservative side and the Liberal side continue to play the same games and then criticize each other for those games. In terms of that secrecy, I have long fought against any idea of the ISDS provisions within any trade agreement in any form that they take, and that the giving of special powers and considerations to one group over ultimately another simply cannot happen. That does not exist within that idea of democracy that I want to see in this world.

115 words

All Topics

Mr. Marty Morantz (Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, CPC)

May/12/22 11:59:35 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman. I rise today to speak to the proposal for the creation of a special committee on Canada-China relations. At the outset, I want to make it clear that we have no quarrel with the people of China, who have contributed so much to humanity. As a parliamentarian, I have the greatest respect and admiration for the Chinese people. Chinese-Canadians and Canadians of Chinese descent have helped build this country and have made it a far better place. Their contributions simply cannot be overstated. Our quarrel is with the Chinese Communist Party. In my comments today, when I speak of China, I want to be clear that I am, in all cases, speaking of the Chinese Communist Party. Some members are asking why we need this committee specifically dedicated to Canada-China relations, why we need to study our relationship with China, and why the Conservatives are so concerned about the CCP. It is because Conservatives see an authoritarian China as the most consequential foreign policy relationship Canada will face in a generation. Through policies of repression and aggression, China has frightened countries near and far. In recent years, China has expanded aggressively on multiple fronts. Wolf warrior diplomacy has replaced friendship diplomacy. Perceived slights from foreigners, no matter how small, are met with North Korean-style condemnation. A combative attitude has seeped into every part of China's foreign policy, and it is confronting many countries with their gravest threat in generations. This threat is most apparent in maritime East Asia, where China is moving aggressively to cement its vast territorial claims. Beijing is churning out warships faster than any country has since World War II, and it has flooded Asian sea lanes with Chinese coast guard and fishing vessels. It has strung military outposts across the South China Sea, and dramatically increased its use of ship ramming and aerial interceptions to shove neighbours out of disputed areas. In the Taiwan Strait, Chinese military patrols, some involving a dozen warships and more than 50 combat aircraft, prowl the sea almost daily and simulate attacks on Taiwanese and U.S. targets. China has gone on the economic offensive, as well. Its latest five-year plan calls for dominating what Chinese officials call “choke points”, goods and services that other countries cannot live without, and then using that dominance, plus the lure of China's domestic market, to browbeat countries into concessions. China has become the dominant dispenser of overseas loans, loading up more than 150 countries with over $1 trillion in debt. It has massively subsidized strategic industries to gain a monopoly on hundreds of vital products, and it has stalled the hardware for digital networks in dozens of countries. Armed with economic leverage, it has used coercion against more than a dozen countries over the past number of years. In many cases, the punishment has been disproportionate to the supposed crime. For example, China is slapping tariffs on many of Australia's exports after that country requested an international investigation into the origins of COVID-19, and here at home in Canada, when China wished to steamroll over our courts and the rule of law to free Meng Wanzhou, it banned Canadian canola. This is something that cost the industry over $2 billion. Later that same year, it suspended Canadian beef imports and placed sanctions against our colleague in this House, the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. China uses subsidies and espionage to help its firms dominate global markets and protects its domestic market with non-tariff barriers. It censors foreign ideas and companies on its own Internet, and freely accesses the global Internet to steal intellectual property and spread CCP propaganda. China has also become a potent anti-democratic force, and sells advanced tools of tyranny around the world. By combining surveillance cameras with social media monitoring, artificial intelligence, biometrics, and speech and facial recognition technologies, the Chinese government has pioneered a system that allows dictators to watch citizens constantly and punish them instantly by blocking their access to finance, education, employment, telecommunications or travel. The apparatus is a despot's dream, and Chinese companies are already selling and operating aspects of it in more than 80 countries. It is time for this government to take seriously the threats that the Beijing communist leadership poses to Canada's national interests and security, as well as our interests and values. For example, it is has been over a year, and the Liberal government has yet to release the Indo-Pacific strategy. This committee is critical to examining all of these challenges and threats. It would be all-party and multidisciplinary, with the ability to look at all aspects of the Canada-China relationship, from complex consular cases to national security issues and from trade to global affairs, within the context of a committee that could go in camera with respect to sensitive information. It is crucial that we uphold Canada's role in defending the rules-based international order. Canada must play its traditional role as a “linchpin”, as Winston Churchill described us, between Europe and America. We are a G7 nation. We are a NATO nation. We are a NORAD nation, and we are a Five Eyes nation. For a country small in population, Canada punches far above its weight when it comes to building relationships that are necessary to influencing our national interests, the freedom and liberty of others and the interests of the western alliance. We do not need a three-day study at a standing committee. We need a specialized, multidisciplinary committee that has the ability to explore not just complex consular cases, but trade, defence, security and the actions and impacts of China. We need to grapple with the moral and ethical complexities of a bilateral trade relationship with a country that this Parliament has declared is committing genocide against the Uighur people. China is a country that is quickly eroding the strong democracy of Hong Kong. It is a country that, just in February, signed a sweeping, long-term agreement with Russia that challenges the United States as a global power, challenges NATO as a cornerstone of international security and challenges liberal democracy as a model for the world. It is a country whose aspirations toward Taiwan may be emboldened by Mr. Putin's brutal war of tyranny in Ukraine. Also, we must be ever mindful of the threat of espionage in a digital world. All this bellicosity and belligerence on the part of China is simply not working. In fact, it is only sparking an international backlash: one that our Prime Minister seems to have not fully comprehended. That is why we need a committee, independent of the PMO and executive branch of government, to study these issues and take a serious look at our relationship with China. There has never been any doubt about what China wants, because Chinese leaders have declared the same objectives for decades: to keep the Chinese Communist Party in power, reabsorb Taiwan, control the East China Sea and South China Sea, and return China to its rightful place as the dominant power in Asia and the most powerful country in the world. Competing with and containing China will be fraught with risks for Canada and its allies, but it might be the only way to avoid even greater dangers. That is why it is critical we reinstate the Canada-China committee so that all parliamentarians can study, discuss and carefully consider how best to protect our interests and our sovereignty. I would like to close with a Chinese proverb: “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” I humbly ask my colleagues in the House to let us take that step together.

1316 words

All Topics

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

May/12/22 12:08:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am sure my colleague heard the government's argument that there is no need for such a committee because that work could be done by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. We know that the totalitarianism and foreign policy of the People's Republic of China are creating issues in many different areas. Take, for example, Huawei, the crackdown in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and what happened at the Winnipeg lab. In short, this committee could examine many issues and then hand over what they discover to the standing committees for a more in-depth study. In order to get everyone on board today, does my colleague not think that it would be wiser to put a time limit on this committee's mandate and have it disband on a specific date? There seems to be some concern that this committee would become permanent.

149 words

Mr. Marty Morantz

May/12/22 12:09:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is plain and simple. The foreign affairs committee is seized with so many issues, and the relationship with China is so complex and multi-faceted, that we really do need another committee to study it. My friend referred to a couple of things, but when I think about the list, there is Huawei, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the Uighurs, Tibet, the recent pact with Russia, trade issues, espionage and human rights. There are just simply not the resources or time at the foreign affairs committee to deal with these. Around the discussion of the timing of the committee, that is a reasonable question. Let us see how the debate unfolds.

112 words

Mr. Matthew Green (Hamilton Centre, NDP)

May/12/22 12:10:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I find it laughable that the Conservatives basically reference the Communist Party of China now as though it was not the Communist Party of China when Harper signed FIPA. I will reference some of the ways in which that deal was described. It was absolutely “naive” with “capitulation to China on everything”, and, “The terms agreed to by Ottawa are unprecedented and would be laughed out of Britain, Brussels, Canberra or Washington. Beijing has negotiated a heads-I-win-tails-Canada-loses deal.” Would the hon. member not agree that much of the malaise that we are in right now with China economically is due to the 31-year deal that the Harper government signed when he was in power?

128 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 70