SoVote

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

Mr. Marty Morantz

May/12/22 12:11:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what is laughable is that the member seems to want to live seven years in the past. The world has changed substantially. As I said in my speech, we need to be taking the role of China in the world extremely seriously, particularly in the context of Mr. Putin's invasion of Ukraine, how President Xi Jinping views this aggression and how it might impact his decisions as they relate to Taiwan. What is laughable is that the member is living in 2015 when he should be living in 2022.

92 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Maguire (Brandon—Souris, CPC)

May/12/22 12:11:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague just listed a whole host of reasons. We can go back in history all we want, but we have a war in the world right now that started about two months ago with Ukraine. This changes the dynamics of all of our export opportunities in this country. It even changes the role of our exports to our allies in western Europe, which are that much more important because those natural resources, and I am on that committee, are also impacted by events in China. We have seen some of the interference it has had in our own democratic process here in Canada, and it is much more relevant to speak to that right now than it was in the past.

124 words

Mr. Marty Morantz

May/12/22 12:12:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the question touches on a couple of important areas. When it comes to food security and energy security in Europe, the world changed in February when Mr. Putin invaded Ukraine. That is a really important point. It should not be lost on any member of the House that food security affects countries everywhere, including China. This is just another reason why we need to have this committee: so we can have a good analysis and understanding of the geopolitical implications of China's position on a whole host of issues.

92 words

Mr. James Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, CPC)

May/12/22 12:13:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is indeed an honour to stand today to talk about the re-establishment of the Canada-China special committee and the work we need to undertake with respect to our relationship with China. I want to thank my colleague from Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley for his very strong intervention, and indeed all members of the House as we consider taking on this important work. The month of May is Asian Heritage Month, and I want to recognize all the great contributions that Asians and Chinese Canadians have made to this country. I want to mention the Hon. Philip Lee, who was the lieutenant governor of Manitoba, and the great work he did in representing the Crown in Manitoba, which he did with dignity and grace. He was an excellent representative of the Government of Manitoba. Earlier this week, a number of my colleagues were outside on the front lawn talking about the 30th anniversary of Falun Dafa, which is known as World Falun Dafa Day. We talked about all of the great contributions that Asian Canadians are making to Canada. We can look at how Falun Gong practitioners have come here and how they practise what they preach: truthfulness, tolerance and forbearance. They have brought those qualities and values to Canada and made us a better country. Unfortunately, Falun Gong practitioners in China are being persecuted, arrested, subjected to illegal organ harvesting, which is disgusting, and brutalized by the communist regime in Beijing. They expect us to use this committee to get to the bottom of what is happening under the communist regime and to stop it by sanctioning those who profiteer from this disgusting illegal organ harvesting. We need to make sure there is legislation coming through. There is a bill coming from the Senate, Bill S-223, that will address this issue and hold to account not just those who are committing the atrocities in China, but those around the world who are paying for and benefiting from those organs in a way that would be considered illegal in Canada. We need to put a stop to it. As we look at the work that this special committee on Canada-China relations can do, it can dig down into the human rights abuses that are happening, not only to the Falun Gong practitioners I have mentioned, but also to the Uighurs, Tibetans, Christians and other minority religious groups throughout China that have been completely ostracized by the regime in Beijing. We know they are not allowed to practise freedom of religion. We know they have not been able to assemble peacefully because they will be arrested and ultimately end up in prison or in forced labour. We are seeing more and more the Chinese government using people of ethnic and religious diversities as forced labour, and we have to make sure that no Canadian companies are profiteering or using supply chains that involve this type of forced, illegal labour. We have talked about supply chains. If we look at what has happened in Canada during the pandemic, the supply chains have been disrupted, partly because so much of that is coming out of China itself. We need to have sovereign control over a lot of those supply chains. We need to make sure we are working with our friends and allies around the world so we can have dependable supply chains, so we can get the electronic chips that go into the cars that are now sitting at parking lots and auto dealerships around the country; they cannot move because they lack some of the computer chips that are needed to operate the vehicles. We know that supply chains were disrupted when it comes to PPE and that we were scrambling because of the unwillingness of mainland China to bring forward any of the supply we so desperately needed. We need to look at how we can strengthen our supply chain and work more with our allies and trading partners without having Chinese companies, which are often controlled by the state, coming into that supply chain and disrupting it. For our own economy, for our own citizens, it is important that we have control. It is about national security. One of the biggest disappointments in the past six years under the Liberal government, and now the Liberal-NDP coalition, is that Huawei is still out there as a potential supplier of 5G technology to our mobile cellular system and Wi-Fi systems. We know Huawei has been tied to espionage around the world. That is why our Five Eyes partners, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, have all banned Huawei from their mobile systems, yet here we are, still waffling because the government cannot make a decision. That is despicable. We need to make these decisions. We can look at how Huawei in particular has worked, even here in Canada. When I was parliamentary secretary for national defence, we took over the Nortel campus, when Nortel unfortunately closed its doors, and made that into the new campus for National Defence. It took years to clean out all the switches and wiring installed by Huawei, which had the ability to spy on Nortel, and ultimately on National Defence as it took over these buildings. National Defence was not there when this was originally installed in the Nortel campus, and it was not meant to be used against National Defence, but with National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces moving into the Nortel campus, the dynamics changed completely. There is a huge track record by Huawei of not being trustworthy. It is under the Communist Party of China's control through its own charter as a corporation, and it has to co-operate with the Government of China when it wants Huawei to spy on other nations, corporations or individuals. We need to be very forthright in how we deal with it. One of the things the committee should look at is how Canada can insert itself in some of the national security conversations that are happening on a global scale. In the Pacific, there is already what is called the quadrilateral dialogue, which involves India, Japan, the United States and Australia. Canada is not part of that discussion, and it should be. This committee should look at how Canada can get involved in these conversations to strengthen the Indo-Pacific region, how we can make sure we counteract some of those geopolitical games that the communist regime in Beijing has been playing in the South China Sea, how it has been rattling sabres to scare Taiwan, and how it has installed a new administrator for Hong Kong and continues to violate the democratic and civil liberties of the Chinese community in Hong Kong, which includes 300,000 Canadians. We need to make sure we deal with this at the special committee on Canada-China relations. The other organization that was just set up is being built around a national defence co-operation agreement called AUKUS, which includes Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. They are co-operating not just on intelligence sharing, which the Five Eyes has done, but also on national defence issues, including empowering the Australian navy with submarines, as well as on greater training, co-operation and collaboration among those three allies of Canada. We should be part of that group. It may be too late for us to get in, and maybe there needs to be a path forward on how Canada can become part of that security agreement, but we are a Pacific nation. As a Pacific nation, we should be more involved in defence issues in the South Pacific, and indeed in the Indo-Pacific region, to counterbalance what is happening with the Chinese geopolitical sphere and the way China is trying to influence and potentially use force as it builds up its military to levels we have never seen. Finally, when we look at China through this committee, we also need to look at how China is being used as a back door to take Russian goods and enrich the Russian military machine that we see waging war in Ukraine today. We need to make sure we are counterbalancing that, by looking at China and trying to get it to move away from enriching Putin and his kleptocrats. We need to make sure we get more sanctions on Russia, and that includes talking to China about how it should participate in the rule of law under the international agreements we have and isolate Russia, rather than enriching it so it can wage war on the great people of Ukraine.

1450 words

Mr. Anthony Housefather (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, Lib.)

May/12/22 12:23:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am looking at an article entitled “Chinese firm's Canadian contracts raise security fears: Barred by the U.S. and Australia, tech giant Huawei makes inroads in Canada”. It is dated from 2012. In that article, former prime minister Stephen Harper is touting the greatness of Huawei. As the hon. member mentioned that Huawei's charter makes it subservient to the Communist Party of China, did that charter also exist in 2012?

77 words

All Topics

Mr. James Bezan

May/12/22 12:24:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a sad state of affairs when my friend has to go back a decade to find any article that links our former government to Huawei. I will say this. Huawei was here for a while and it has been trying to break into the Canadian and American systems. It had access to 3G technology and was supplying 3G technology to Canada, to the United States and to European nations. Everybody, at that point in time, 10 years ago, was hoping that the communist regime in Beijing was going to march forward into market-based economies that would respect human rights, democracy and civil liberties. That is not the case today. We know a lot more, and we should be banning Huawei.

125 words

All Topics

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

May/12/22 12:25:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague criticized those benefiting from the Chinese government's largesse. Jean Charest, a Conservative Party leadership candidate, is among those who have supposedly benefited from this regime. He allegedly was paid tens of thousands of dollars by Huawei, an appendage of the Communist regime. I am relying on the knowledge of my colleague, who has been a member of the House longer than I have. Would the study of the contracts between Jean Charest and Huawei fall under the new committee being proposed by the Conservatives, or rather under the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, on which my colleague from Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman sits?

113 words

All Topics

Mr. James Bezan

May/12/22 12:25:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, well, just to put it on the record, I am supporting the member for Carleton in this leadership race, and I do share some of the concerns that my friend from the Bloc just raised. Let us go back, again, to the issue of Huawei. We now know that, within the Five Eyes relationship we have with the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand, all four of those countries have banned Huawei. Why is Canada still dancing around the issue? The excuse used to be that we had to get the two Michaels out of detention in Beijing. Well, they are back in Canada, so why are we dancing around this issue when we should be banning Huawei from having any access to our 5G network?

131 words

All Topics

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

May/12/22 12:26:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it was the Conservative Stephen Harper government that did a trade deal that allowed a large oil sands project to be purchased by a Chinese state-owned company. It was that Conservative government that signed the FIPA trade agreement. The Conservatives want us to have amnesia. They want us to forget about those trade agreements, but they locked that trade agreement into 31 years. That is affecting us today and the next generation and the generation after that. They signed a deal that allows those companies to seek compensation. Not only are they allowed to seek compensation, but they are allowed to do it in secret, at the discretion of the sued party. Would the hon. member agree that this committee should have access to all memos and all documents about why the Conservatives allowed that tribunal to be done in secret?

144 words

All Topics

Mr. James Bezan

May/12/22 12:27:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would just say this to the Liberal-NDP backbencher. We know there was a time, 10 years ago, when we were trying to get China more integrated into the free market system, to work with capitalism-based nations and to work with democratic nations. We now know that this has all been in folly. I do have grave concerns over any of our natural resources being controlled by state-run Chinese companies, which are ultimately controlled by the communist regime in Beijing. I do believe the committee should make its own decisions about what documents it should be looking at and what documents should be brought forward. No stone should be left unturned. I think that, at the end of the day, Canada would be better served by it. The people of China would be better served by it, and Chinese Canadians here would appreciate us being able to work more collaboratively with them and the contributions they make to our great nation.

166 words

All Topics

Mr. Chandra Arya (Nepean, Lib.)

May/12/22 12:28:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kings—Hants. The Conservative opposition day motion we are debating today has two points I agree with, while I completely disagree with the objective of the motion to appoint a special committee to examine and review all aspects of the Canada-China relationship. While it is good to have opportunities to review Canada’s relationships with any country so that we can find ways to improve or further strengthen our relationships in a positive way, the objective of this motion is to establish a platform that provides for further degrading Canada’s relationship with China. This motion is designed to provide a stage for harsh and one-sided critics of China. There are things about China that we can and should criticize. I do not foresee any positive outcomes from this proposed committee. Before I talk about the negative implications of having this committee, let me mention the points I agree with. First, the motion states that Canadians of Chinese descent have made immeasurable contributions to Canada. Absolutely, yes. Our wonderful country, Canada, is an ongoing success story of a nation with extraordinary cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity. I would like to recognize and appreciate the important contributions that Chinese Canadians have made and continue to make to Canada’s socio-economic, political and cultural heritage. The history of Chinese Canadians goes back as far as the 1700s, but the big movement started in the late 19th century. The road has not always been smooth. Chinese Canadians faced and continue to face discrimination. If this motion passes and the committee is established, I foresee increased negative perception about Chinese Canadians in our country. In spite of the historical discrimination they have faced, Chinese Canadians, with hard work and determination, have built on the opportunities our wonderful country offers and have been successful in every aspect of society, in the arts, sciences, sports, business and government. To put it simply, Chinese Canadians have made big contributions in building a dynamic and prosperous Canada. The second point the motion makes that I agree with is that the people of China are part of an ancient civilization that has contributed much to humanity. Again, yes, absolutely. China is a country with a 5,000-year-old civilization. Chinese people have contributed greatly to many fields during their long recorded history. Some of the greatest inventions that have been momentous contributions of the Chinese people to world civilization include papermaking, printing, gunpowder and the compass. Other than these two points, everything else in this motion aims to design a platform for degrading Canada-China relations, and negatively contributes to Canada’s interests. If this committee is established, I expect, first, an increased negative perception about Chinese Canadians in our country. We have seen anti-Asian racism on the increase in recent times. The kind of rhetoric I have heard before, and which I am sure will be repeated again in the committee, would lead only to increased negative perceptions of about 1.8 million Canadians who form over 5% of the population. The second negative effect, if this committee is formed, is further deterioration of our relationship with one of our major trading partners, thus affecting our businesses. China is one of our major trading partners. Canadian exports to China in 2021 were worth about $29 billion. Canadian imports from China were worth about $86 billion. In addition to low-tech, mundane products, China is also a major technology and high-end products supplier to the world, from telecom equipment to batteries for electric vehicles. China is also a manufacturing base for many products our industries need. The proponents of this motion appear to be in a make-believe world with no China. Make no mistake, China is and will continue to be a major economy in the world. Canadian businesses need a smooth trading relationship with China, but the end results of this motion, if successful, will achieve anything but that. The third outcome, if this committee is formed, is the negative impact on the flow of Canada’s most valuable and precious resource requirement, which is immigrants with knowledge, expertise and skills. China, for a long time, has been an important source of our skilled immigrants. Highly trained Chinese immigrants have become a significant part of our growing knowledge-based economy. While I do not expect a dramatic slowdown in new Canadians from China, the harsh rhetoric will certainly act as a dampener in our efforts to recruit the best and brightest brains as immigrants to Canada. The fourth negative issue, if this motion is successful, is a further fall in new technology-trained international students from China and a further decline in the numbers of these highly skilled students who become permanent residents and later citizens. In the growing knowledge-based economy, it is not natural resources that give us prosperity or a competitive edge. It is the knowledge, expertise and skills of the younger generation that can continue to keep us prosperous. In the digital economy, it is the bright, young graduates of today who give us the competitive edge. China has been a major source of international students, and while China remains the second-largest source for international students to Canada, the trend is declining. It was about 10% less in 2021. The decline began in 2019 and increased due to the pandemic. The anti-China bullhorn diplomacy will only add to the current problem. Is China perfect? No. China ignores the desire of the people of Taiwan, who have established themselves as an economically successful entity with a vibrant democracy. China has erased the culture and heritage of minorities in its land and the distinctive identities of Tibetans and Uighurs, and we have legitimate concerns for the people in Hong Kong. As one expert put it, China is neither as benevolent as it claims nor as malicious as it is criticized for being. Let me mention what Jeremy Paltiel, a China expert at Carleton University, said in an article on Global News on May 8, 2021. He said that to see China in the context of “friend or foe” is an overly simplistic approach. “I think that’s a false dichotomy,” he said. “China can be both different and not an enemy.” This nuanced understanding helps countries like Canada that are grappling with thorny issues, including human rights. The key to a successful Canada-China relationship is to be mindful of the differences without necessarily agreeing with or accepting them. Understanding is not the same thing as pardoning. “We have to be able to find a way of talking across difference without defining 'difference' as being 'enemy',” Paltiel says. “And if we can’t do that, we can’t live in a diverse world.” To conclude, this motion is not in the interest of Canada and Canadians. Testifying before the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations in the previous parliament, the former Canadian foreign affairs minister and the member of Parliament for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount mentioned a four Cs approach of Canada to its relationship with China: compete, co-operate, challenge and coexist. He stated, “China is rapidly becoming a global influence with which all countries must learn to coexist. That means that we must recognize situations in which it is necessary to cooperate with China.” He continued, “[I]t also means that we are competing with China when it comes to trade and to promoting our values. It also implies challenging China when human rights are violated or Canadian citizens and interests are jeopardized.” However, the objective of the proponents of this motion is not to add value or have a meaningful discussion, but to degrade the relationship between Canada and China—

1327 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 70