Senator Batters: In your speech tonight you referenced that Russian assets in Canada were thought to be “negligible.” I’m just wondering what basis you have to say that, because I thought that that wasn’t the case. It seems like every so often, when we hear about potential oligarch assets in Canada, we hear that there have been, thus far, relatively limited real results produced by actions taken by Canada’s government.

I actually thought that very little had been seized thus far in Canada. Why do you think that there is just a negligible amount left?

Senator Omidvar: Thank you, Senator Batters. In December of 2021, just before Russia invaded Ukraine, according to the public accounts of Russia, state bank assets totalling $16 billion were located in Canada. Russia subsequently removed $16 billion to Belgium in, as I said, likely a pre-emptive move. This is all public information that I had gleaned.

What I don’t know is if they’ve got anything left outside of, maybe, their embassy here.

Hon. Denise Batters: Senator Omidvar, I have a couple of questions for you. First of all, as one of 1.4 million Ukrainian Canadians, I want these Russian assets to be quickly and properly seized so that those assets cannot be used to finance Putin’s illegal and brutal war against Ukraine. Could you briefly explain what this bill does that the government legislation you referenced, that was passed in the recent Budget Implementation Act, does not do?

Senator Omidvar: Thank you, Senator Batters, for that question. The bill creates a legal mechanism that would allow the Government of Canada to seize Russian state assets. As I said, there are technically now two rules: one through the court for individual assets and one through executive action. The existing State Immunity Act provides immunity from Canadian courts to all foreign states.

It’s a clarification, I would say, to the proposal that has already been accepted by the Government of Canada.

Hon. Stan Kutcher: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak in support of Bill S-278, An Act to amend the Special Economic Measures Act (disposal of foreign state assets). Since Senator Omidvar has done a great job of addressing the legal issues, including answering interesting questions related to this legislation, I will focus my remarks on some of the costs of Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and genocidal war on Ukraine and how Russian state assets currently frozen and available can now be used to help offset these costs.

On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine, an unprovoked, illegal act of genocidal violence upon a sovereign nation that was the biggest attack on a European country since World War II. This was followed by immediate and heroic resistance from the Ukrainian people. Against all odds and to the surprise of many nations, the offence of the much-vaunted Russian army ground to a halt, stopped by the Ukrainian people who would not accept defeat and who used all they had to mobilize and defend themselves. We all remember the iconic images of Ukrainian tractors pulling captured Russian tanks.

Canada immediately condemned this unprovoked and egregious attack by Russia on Ukraine as a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and a violation of Russia’s obligations under international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Other nations for whom the upholding of the international rule of law was paramount also issued their own condemnations of this illegal attack.

As Senator Omidvar has pointed out, human rights and international law are cornerstones for the anchoring of her bill, so let’s turn to human rights.

The United Nations, with Resolution ES-11/3 on April 7, 2022, removed the membership of Russia in the UN Human Rights Council over:

. . . grave concern at the ongoing human rights and humanitarian crisis in Ukraine . . . including gross and systematic violations and abuses of human rights . . . .

And it demanded that Russia withdraw its forces from Ukraine. On the human rights, on the international law, the UN General Assembly Resolution ES-11/4 was passed on October 12, 2022. It noted that the annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts by Russia were “. . . invalid and illegal under international law” and demanded that Russia “. . . immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw . . . ” from Ukraine as it is violating its territorial integrity and sovereignty.

As part of the Western world’s response to the Russian genocidal invasion and the ongoing war of Ukrainian resistance that followed and still continues, the G7 countries initiated numerous sanctions against Russia and, consistent with international law, decided to freeze Russian assets held within their jurisdictions. On October of this year, the G7 announced that these assets — so far estimated at around US$300 billion — will remain frozen until Moscow pays war reparations to Ukraine.

This announcement came soon after Belgium announced that it will collect around 2.3 billion euros in taxes on frozen Russian state assets in 2023 and 2024 held within its jurisdiction and will use that money to help aid Ukraine with both military and humanitarian support. Belgium moved independently of the European Union to undertake this initiative since it is applying its own national tax code to the frozen assets.

According to the Bloomberg story on this situation:

. . . the EU, along with Group of Seven nations, are still discussing a plan to tax the profits generated from immobilized Russian sovereign assets and funnel the revenue to Kyiv.

On Wednesday, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen backed the idea, calling it a “reasonable proposal” that is distinct from actually seizing the cash.

Commenting on this action, President Zelenskyy noted that “Belgium has become the first country to start using frozen Russian assets to support protection from Russian terror.”

On October 12, soon after the Belgian announcement, the Estonian government approved a draft law that, if passed by parliament, would allow many immobilized Russian assets to be transferred to Ukraine.

Colleagues, the Western world is being reminded of the horrific global costs of terror and the need to move vigorously to defend the values that underlie the international rue of law. In Ukraine, we have witnessed an imperialistic power — Russia — launch an unprovoked, illegal and genocidal war on a peaceful, sovereign state.

More recently, we have watched in horror as a terrorist organization slaughtered hundreds of innocent civilians and then used its own people as human shields against retaliation. History has often noted that evil, when left unaddressed, ends in tragedy. We have a responsibility to do our part to respond vigorously and to do our best to avert the tragic consequences of inaction.

I thank Senator Omidvar for, through this legislation, providing us with an opportunity to do our part.

Honourable senators, the human, social and financial costs of this war on Ukraine and its peoples are huge. They include costs incurred fighting the war as well as the social, humanitarian and critical infrastructure costs needed to maintain life and an ongoing economy now. In addition, there will be the future costs for rebuilding.

Rebuilding Ukraine and helping its people recover is expected to cost hundreds of billions of dollars, potentially exceeding US$1 trillion, depending on how long the war lasts, its intensity and its geographic spread.

There is also the cost to the mental health of children, families and combatants that may never be properly calculated. Colleagues, how do we cost an amount of money needed to compensate innocent people for the human losses that they have suffered and will continue to suffer, even after the war is over?

The phrase “when the war is over” means that Ukraine will have prevailed since if Ukraine wins the war, there will be no more war, but if Russia wins the war, there will be no more Ukraine. There is an immediate need for more arms for Ukraine — not just to fight to a stalemate, but to achieve victory. Additionally, there is also an immediate need to rebuild critical infrastructure destroyed by Russia — hospitals, roads, bridges, schools, housing, energy supply, water supply and much more. The Ukrainian government says it needs some $14 billion to fund critical infrastructure rebuilding projects in this year alone.

There are other costs to war. Environmental costs, for example. A Washington Post article of March 13, 2023, noted that, so far, the war on Ukraine has led to more than $51 billion worth of environmental damage. As far as I can understand the numbers, this environmental damage cost is in addition to the almost unfathomable sums I have just shared with you.

We know that extraordinary amounts of money have been pledged from many countries to assist Ukraine. The Council on Foreign Relations, in September 2023, reported that since the war began, the Biden administration and the U.S. Congress have directed more than US$75 billion in assistance to Ukraine.

Europe has in total given a similar amount as has the U.S., about US$72 billion.

On July 11, 2023, the CBC reported that Canada has committed more than $8 billion to Ukraine since Russia’s February invasion, including over $1.5 billion in military aid.

Where is this money, so desperately needed to fend off a force that threatens the very existence of any international rule of law, coming from? From the taxpayers of the countries invested in maintaining the rule of law and the values that underpin the international order. While this is not an unreasonable ask, it does promote the kind of negative, anti-Ukraine sentiment that we have recently seen on full display in some sections of our society, in our cousins to the south and, sadly, emerging here in Canada as well.

Is it not reasonable to ask that Russia, the aggressor in this conflict, pay? And why should it not start paying now?

The governments of the United States, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the European Commission have seized roughly $300 billion in Russian central bank assets not long after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Most of this money, more than $200 billion, is frozen in European accounts. These governments have also seized tens of billions of dollars in assets belonging to Russian oligarchs and private entities.

The G7 governments agree with the UN that Russia is perpetuating an illegal war of aggression and that Moscow should be held responsible for footing the reconstruction bill. Experts in international law and international relations also agree.

Writing in Foreign Affairs, former U.S. treasury secretary Lawrence Summers, former U.S. diplomat Philip Zelikow and former World Bank president Robert Zoellick note:

Because the [United Nations] has established that Russia gravely breached the norms of international law and that this breach is a matter of common international concern, it has given member states standing to act. And it has established that Russia has a duty to compensate the states injured by its aggression.

Lloyd Axworthy, a name known to all in this chamber, recently put it quite simply. I’ll quote from an article in The Globe and Mail where he said:

It’s a Robin Hood proposition. . . . You take from the Sheriff of Nottingham who was putting people in jail, and you give it to the people who were affected by this.

The same article in The Globe and Mail in June 2023 noted that according to the RCMP, as of February, about $135 million of assets in Canada has been frozen as a result of sanctions imposed on Russia. Should that money now not be made available to augment the $8 billion that Canada has already pledged? Should that money not be made available now to help Ukraine’s military fight and its people have access to hospitals, clean water, heat and light?

Colleagues, I, for one, think it should.

With the passage of Bill S-278, Canada will go one better than Belgium. Canada will go one better than the suggestion of using the interest from these funds to support Ukraine. Instead of just taking the profits from these Russian assets, why not take the principal as well?

The entire principal amounts currently frozen are already owed to Ukraine under international law. Not using this money now deprives Ukraine of the funds that they need to survive the upcoming winter, which will likely see furious Russian attacks on the infrastructure needed to support civilian life.

Ukraine also needs the funds to purchase the armaments it so desperately needs to end this war as quickly as possible, thus saving the lives and livelihoods of countless of its citizens.

Colleagues, let’s not forget that helping Ukraine goes well beyond investing in its freedom and repairing the ravages of war. It is also a statement and an investment in the necessity of maintaining the international rule of law, for the fight in Ukraine is not just about Ukraine. It is about how this world will evolve: into a place of freedom and justice or a place of unfettered violence and fear.

That is why I will support Senator Omidvar’s bill, and I urge you to do the same as well. Let’s get it to committee and well studied and over to the other place as soon as possible. D’akuju. Thank you. Wela’lioq.