Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1846 - 1860 of 1860
View Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you.
You said that any new rules or laws would be limited, despite the government's pledge to make such changes.
In your research, have you explored ways to limit the damage in the event that the agreement is ratified?
Michael Geist
View Michael Geist Profile
Michael Geist
2020-02-19 16:28
It's a great question. I think it depends a little bit on the issue. As I highlighted in my opening remarks, on the issue of facing significant retaliatory tariffs on anything from steel to dairy—or perhaps even sugar, who knows—in theory, the U.S. could target whatever they want to target as retaliation. To me, that sends a strong message about some of the cultural policy proposals we've seen, particularly coming out of the Yale report. Frankly, I think they ought to be avoided. I think they're highly problematic, and they make us very vulnerable in that respect.
On how to address some of the potential privacy concerns that may arise as part of this, I think there is some room to navigate. It's not that we've given up everything with respect to our ability to enact new privacy laws, but it will be unquestionably more challenging if we want to move towards some restrictions on data transfers for highly sensitive information or if we say that very sensitive health information has to remain within Canada. We'd have a very hard time doing those kinds of things under this agreement.
View Daniel Blaikie Profile
NDP (MB)
Thank you very much.
I want to follow up on a couple of those questions. In particular, with respect to data localization, part of our concern when we're talking about the United States is that they have the Patriot Act. One of the incentives for data localization requirements for Canada would be to ensure that Canadians' data isn't covered by the Patriot Act.
I wonder if you want to speak to that a little on the level of individuals, but also on commercial information that we may not want to have stored.
Michael Geist
View Michael Geist Profile
Michael Geist
2020-02-19 16:29
It raises an interesting point.
People may recall that this particular issue arose nearly 20 years ago, when the Province of British Columbia was seeking to outsource some of its health information. That health management information was going to go the United States, and there was concern about the applicability of the U.S.A. Patriot Act.
I would say that in the current environment, it speaks to a broader concern. If we think of a spectrum of privacy safeguards around data, with the Europeans and the GDPR having some of the strongest rules, the U.S. in many respects is often viewed as having the most lax rules. They have fairly weak rules. In fact, this agreement builds in the ability for the U.S. to continue to have fairly weak rules without widespread privacy rules. Effectively, as little as telling people what you're going to do with their information, as long as you abide by what you've told them, is good enough. It doesn't set a particularly high floor.
I think there are concerns about the transfer of data into a jurisdiction, notably the United States, where some of those safeguards may not be as strong with respect to privacy. There are questions about the ability of our own Privacy Commissioner to ensure that Canadian privacy rules will be applicable, as well as real doubts among many Canadians about whether their personal information will be appropriately safeguarded in that kind of environment.
View Randeep Sarai Profile
Lib. (BC)
Thank you, Mr. DiCaro.
Mr. Geist, you gave a good analysis, saying we should ratify this but we should work to correct some of the privacy and other provisions in the next 30 months. What would you say are the key provisions that need to be protected for Canadians in this digital age, and what are the foremost ones that need to be done?
Michael Geist
View Michael Geist Profile
Michael Geist
2020-02-19 16:44
Let me clarify. The issue of copyright term extension is where there is this 30-month phase-in transition period, and on that issue I think we ought to follow the recommendations we saw from the copyright review.
In terms of moving ahead with ratifying and solving this, the challenge is.... I don't know enough about the sugar industry or the labour practices or about the myriad other issues, but I just want to highlight how difficult it becomes when you're effectively being asked whether to trade your privacy for greater access of beet sugar or better labour standards. I don't know. I know about privacy, and I think one of the challenges we face in the current trading environment, and it is particularly pronounced in this deal, is that many issues are not as obvious up front, in part because we're not required to make any changes. Like many countries, Canada will often negotiate by saying that our starting point is that as long as we don't have to change our existing laws, we're okay.
The problem here is that we have locked ourselves in on a number of different issues, including copyright, privacy, as well as some of the other issues I've highlighted. I have real concerns that as we get into some of those issues—and they're taking up a lot of bandwidth right now for a lot of people—we may find ourselves having essentially given away some of the potential policy solutions, because we are now restricted by virtue of this agreement, and it is not obvious to me that there's a solution in that regard.
View Daniel Blaikie Profile
NDP (MB)
I want to ask Ms. Hatch and Mr. Girdharry.... We've been talking a bit about some of the data provisions in NAFTA today. I know that with smart home technology there's a lot of data collection that goes on. Obviously, some of that data is to the benefit of the consumers in terms of things that they can do in their homes, but there's another side to that data. Sometimes it's sold and commercialized by the industry.
Have you given any thought to some of the data localization provisions and other kinds of IT provisions or digital provisions in NAFTA? Has your industry done any thinking about the potential cost and benefit to industry, as well as the potential cost and benefit to consumers?
Kevin Girdharry
View Kevin Girdharry Profile
Kevin Girdharry
2020-02-19 18:40
Yes. Our industry is definitely looking at it because appliances are more smart with IoT. Our issue is definitely trying to be proactive in terms of what data is being collected—it's data privacy—and following standard processes that are out there currently. NIST is one that comes to mind for me.
We've formed a manufacturers' task force within our association to look at that and to adopt the latest standards.
View Daniel Blaikie Profile
NDP (MB)
Does the localization of data figure into your industry's plan for the future at all? Is that something that you see as important for the protection of the privacy of your consumers, or is it something that you're not interested in?
Kevin Girdharry
View Kevin Girdharry Profile
Kevin Girdharry
2020-02-19 18:40
It's definitely on the table. It's definitely something that we're looking at, and it's definitely something that's very important to our manufacturers as well.
View Leona Alleslev Profile
CPC (ON)
Now, clearly, we're seeing that there isn't necessarily the same kind of separation between corporations and government in the People's Republic of China as we would have in North America. With mandated laws in China that say that corporations have to provide governments with that information, how do we mitigate that and protect and defend Canadian interests when doing business with these countries?
Dominic Barton
View Dominic Barton Profile
Dominic Barton
2020-02-05 19:05
I think that when Canadian companies are doing business with Chinese companies, the trade commissioner's officers are very good at explaining the requirements, what type of joint venture agreement you should have and being very open about how that works. I also think we need to differentiate between state-owned companies and the private sector. There's a lot of noise about what's happening where. We need to spend time focused on each company and understand the governance of that company.
Heather Jeffrey
View Heather Jeffrey Profile
Heather Jeffrey
2020-02-04 10:03
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Members of the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations, I'm very pleased to appear before the committee today to provide a briefing on consular services, with a particular focus on the People's Republic of China.
My name is Heather Jeffrey. I'm the assistant deputy minister of consular, security and emergency management at Global Affairs Canada.
This is my colleague, Brian Szwarc, the director general for consular operations.
I will begin my presentation this morning by giving you an overview of the consular services provided to Canadians. I will then summarize the consular relationship with China, as well as our cases and the consular trends in that country. I will conclude by telling you about some of our most high profile cases in China.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs is responsible for the provision of consular services to Canadians abroad. These services are delivered by Global Affairs Canada and are guided by the Canadian Consular Services Charter.
Canadian representatives provide consular services 24/7 through more than 260 points of service across 150 countries and through the Emergency Watch and Response Centre, in Ottawa.
In order to provide relevant information to Canadians during their travels abroad, Global Affairs Canada makes use of two tools. The department's travel advice and advisories provide information on safe travel to more than 200 destinations, and the registration of Canadians abroad service enables government officials to contact Canadians in emergency situations. The Canadian Consular Services Charter details the services that Canadian government officials can provide to Canadians abroad.
These services include, for example, helping in a medical emergency by providing a list of local doctors and hospital services, providing victims of crime with advice and contact information for local police and medical services, assisting in cases of missing persons or the abduction of a child to another country, and the replacement of passports. In cases of arrest or detention, authorities are obligated by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations to advise foreign nationals of their right of access to a consular representative. Once Canada is notified of the detention of a Canadian citizen, the first priority of consular officials is to seek immediate access to that person to determine their safety and well-being.
In such cases, consular officials would advocate for equal treatment in accordance with local laws, liaise with family and legal representatives, and provide detainees with information on the local judicial and prison systems. Our officials offer consular support to all Canadian citizens, regardless of whether they carry another citizenship. However, many foreign states, such as China, do not recognize dual citizenship and might refuse to allow consular access to individuals they consider to be citizens only of their own country. This is a situation that consular officials deal with regularly in the Chinese context.
In total, about 175,000 new cases have been opened throughout our consular network in 2019. The vast majority of cases are of a routine or administrative nature, such as passport services or proof of citizenship applications, and they are generally addressed quickly by our missions abroad.
However, some 6,700 cases are more complex. In general, these are cases where Canadians need help dealing with a difficult situation abroad, such as a death, an arrest or a detention, a crime, a medical problem or issues with child care. The United States, Mexico and China are the countries with the largest number of those complex consular cases.
It is important to note that protecting the personal information of our consular clients is paramount. Consular officials are obliged to work within the parameters set by the Privacy Act. For this reason, the government is often very limited in what details it can provide publicly regarding specific consular cases.
With this overview of consular services offered by the Government of Canada, I will now provide some details specific to our consular services in China. Let me begin by giving a brief update on Canada's response to the novel coronavirus.
The current outbreak is of deep concern to Canadians in China, as well as in Canada. Actions are being taken to assist the impacted Canadians in Wuhan. As Deputy Minister Morgan informed you last week, Canada has secured a charter flight to bring Canadians from Wuhan, China to Canada, and we are finalizing arrangements with Chinese authorities to allow this flight to depart as soon as possible.
Global Affairs Canada is working closely with the Public Health Agency of Canada to provide relevant and timely travel and health information to Canadians in relation to the outbreak. Our travel advice was updated on January 24 to advise Canadians to avoid all travel to the province of Hubei due to the imposition of heavy travel restrictions in order to limit the spread of the virus. On January 29, we further updated the advisory to recommend against non-essential travel to China as a whole due to the outbreak.
Overall, in 2019 alone, consular officials opened 375 new cases in greater China. These include cases of arrest and detention, medical assistance, assault, well-being and whereabouts. There are currently 123 Canadians in custody in greater China. This figure is inclusive of Canadians in mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. I want to stress that the number of Canadians in custody in China has remained stable over the last year.
The provision of consular services to Canadians in China is governed by a bilateral agreement signed by Canada and China more than 20 years ago. This agreement, which is available publicly, details the consular obligations and entitlements of our two countries in order to facilitate the protection of the rights and interests of our citizens.
I will now summarize some of the most high profile cases concerning China, which I think are of special interest to the committee.
Given the public nature of this meeting, I am limited by the provisions of the Privacy Act when it comes to personal information I can share.
The Government of Canada is extremely concerned by the cases of Canadians arbitrarily detained or facing the death penalty in China. Canadian representatives at all levels have raised those concerns with their Chinese counterparts, and they will continue to do so.
Canada opposes the use of the death penalty in all cases everywhere. Aligned with this principle, the Government of Canada seeks clemency for all Canadians facing the death penalty. Canada has raised with China our firm position on the death penalty, and we have called on China to grant clemency to Canadians facing this sentence.
In the cases of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, the Government of Canada has been unwavering in its position and in calling for their immediate release and return to Canada. As you will no doubt be aware, Mr. Kovrig and Mr. Spavor were detained by Chinese authorities on December 10, 2018, accused of posing a threat to China's national security. They were formally arrested on May 6, 2019.
Officials at the Embassy of Canada to China have had regular consular access to Mr. Kovrig and Mr. Spavor since their detention in December 2018, conducting consular visits on an approximately monthly basis. The latest consular visit to Mr. Spavor took place on January 13, and to Mr. Kovrig on January 14, led by Ambassador Barton. The Government of Canada has been very clear that these two Canadians have been unacceptably and arbitrarily detained. We will continue to call for their immediate release.
Mr. Robert Schellenberg was detained by Chinese authorities in 2014 and charged with drug smuggling. He was initially sentenced to 15 years of imprisonment, but at a December 2018 appeal hearing, a Chinese court ordered a retrial. The next month a judge overturned the initial verdict and issued a death sentence. Mr. Schellenberg appealed the death sentence, and a hearing took place in May 2019. The verdict is pending.
Canada has strongly condemned the sentence of death imposed on Mr. Schellenberg at his retrial, and we expressed our extreme concern that China chose to arbitrarily apply the death penalty in his case. We have called on China to grant clemency to Mr. Schellenberg.
The particular cases that I've highlighted today represent only a few cases of the Canadian citizens in custody in China. While privacy considerations limit me from providing any details on specific cases, I want to stress that Canadian officials, both here and in China, are actively engaged on all of these cases and will continue to raise concerns with Chinese authorities.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this consular overview to the committee. We look forward to your questions.
View Stephanie Kusie Profile
CPC (AB)
Perhaps you could expand upon it. How are we protecting ourselves in the new digital economy, please?
Duane McMullen
View Duane McMullen Profile
Duane McMullen
2020-01-30 11:12
Mr. Chair, as the previous question indicated, work is under way in the WTO multilaterally with all countries to figure out the ways to operate in this new environment and, specifically with Canada, we have a number of mechanisms.
In particular, with Canadian companies looking to do business in China, we give them extensive advice, not only about the benefits of that business in China should it work, but also about some of the risks they need to be taking into account—for example, with respect to their intellectual property and other competitive aspects—and ways they can deal with those risks to protect their business, to be successful in China and not have that trade work out badly for them.
Results: 1846 - 1860 of 1860 | Page: 124 of 124

|<
<
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data