Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 121 - 135 of 196
View Jean Yip Profile
Lib. (ON)
Is there any way that the international financial community could bring some further pressure to bear?
Lynette H. Ong
View Lynette H. Ong Profile
Lynette H. Ong
2020-08-17 12:36
In the short run, businesses tend to be directed by where their interests and profits lie, but I believe that in the medium and long term, if governments guide businesses widely—that is, if we design suitable institutional designs—this would actually guide the incentives of businesses and help to steer the businesses away from authoritarian regimes. By imposing labour qualifications and imposing certain standards on businesses that they have to meet, we can slowly guide business from authoritarian regimes.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to address the issue of multilateralism, since the Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke highly of it on July 3. If the COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated one thing, it's the limits of multilateralism. As soon as the national interests of states were implicated, each state simply tried to safeguard its own interests at the expense of the interests of its allies. We've even seen allies going in to get medical supplies to prevent another ally from obtaining the supplies first. Given what the coronavirus crisis has shown us, what are our chances of actually creating some type of common front against China that will stand firm once the national interests of each state become implicated when China implements retaliatory measures?
David Mulroney
View David Mulroney Profile
H.E. David Mulroney
2020-08-06 17:23
Thank you.
It's very interesting to watch various interpretations of multilateralism through the pandemic period. I was interested that Australia, for example, which has much greater exposure to China economically than we do—China is its number one partner—began, as a middle power, to convene other middle powers to say, “Let's find out what happened. Let's have an inquiry into how this virus originated. What was the role of the World Health Organization?” China didn't like it much, but Australia began to get take-up from countries that are increasingly going through some of the things we're going through. There's an appetite for that here. What we were doing at the time was our campaign for the non-permanent seat on the Security Council, which to my mind is the multilateralism of the seventies and eighties.
New Zealand offered an even more interesting example. They listened, of course, to the World Health Organization, but they had some of their epidemiologists talk to epidemiologists in Hong Kong and in China. They went through informal networks to get their own sense of what was happening on the ground in China. It's a very creative multilateralism and a modern multilateralism that I think we need to embrace.
I think we would get a good hearing in Europe, particularly in Scandinavia, but also with the U.K., with France, and with Australia and New Zealand. There are more and more countries that are feeling as we feel.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
I understand what you're saying. However, when you give the example of New Zealand, this doesn't seem to be an argument in favour of multilateralism. As you said, New Zealand had direct contact with Chinese epidemiologists. We saw that state interests were very selfish during the coronavirus crisis. How can we expect states, which are selfishly defending their national interests, to not break a common front against China as soon as China implements retaliatory measures?
David Mulroney
View David Mulroney Profile
H.E. David Mulroney
2020-08-06 17:25
This, of course, has been a worry. The old canard was that you shouldn't gang up on China. The result is that China, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, isolates and dominates countries one by one, with the sole exception of the United States. It has done this to Sweden. It's done it to Norway. It's done it to Japan. Australia and New Zealand have felt this. I think there is a growing appetite to talk about this.
The other thing is, just to return to that virtue of optimism that Dr. Sangay mentioned, this is a strong suit for Canada. We're very good at convening people and motivating them and getting them to share our ideas. This should be the objective of our new multilateralism as Canada.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
What are the chances of creating a common front consisting of middle and, presumably, small powers, given China's efforts to establish its new silk road? On the contrary, will some countries be very reluctant to join a common front to discipline China for its retaliatory measures against individual countries?
David Mulroney
View David Mulroney Profile
H.E. David Mulroney
2020-08-06 17:27
I think the example of the belt and road is an example of how not to do things. Similarly with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Europeans broke rank in the most undignified way to rush to be the first, and certainly not the last, to curry favour with Beijing, but I think there's a recognition that this is not a smart way to approach it.
What I would do is sit down with half a dozen countries—Australia and New Zealand certainly, but also Sweden—countries that have felt the same kind of people-to-people reprisals we have felt, to say, “How can we come up with common consular language when it comes to the risk you face visiting China? How can we support one another when we have one of our nationals detained?” I never believe in trying to invent a really complicated set of objectives. Why don't we start simply on common measures to protect our citizens? If we had a common travel advisory, that would get China's interest and attention very quickly.
View Randy Hoback Profile
CPC (SK)
Thank you, witnesses, for being here on a nice July day here in Ontario.
I'm going to start with you, Mr. Burney. I know you're in Colorado, but you should be in Ontario. It's a lot nicer here than Colorado today, I would swear.
In one of your articles you talked about the “economic prosperity network” that was being created. That was the U.S. basically working with Japan, Australia and like-minded countries to develop a system to have each other's back in times of need, for example, like now on personal protective equipment or ventilators and things like that.
In discussions with other people around the world, the members of the Conservative caucus trade members have been talking to groups, associations, and other trade ministers. We're starting to see countries form these groups or cartels where they're not only talking about having each other's back, but actually setting regs. They have the regs set, and if you're going to trade with that bloc, that's the reg, that's the safety standard, that's the item you're going to trade in, which will set the global regs.
What's your comment on that and why do you think Canada should be involved with that?
Derek Burney
View Derek Burney Profile
Derek Burney
2020-07-09 14:55
Well, it goes to the fundamental point I was trying to make in my opening remarks, which is that the world is turning more to self-reliance and self-interest, and that the American initiative was very much in that direction.
I think a lot of countries found that they were far too dependent on China, in the first instance, for the supply of the kind of medical equipment that we found necessary to deal with the pandemic.
Derek Burney
View Derek Burney Profile
Derek Burney
2020-07-09 14:58
I'll try. In effect, I was saying that I think this initiative that the Americans are leading is exactly what I was referring to in my opening remarks about the world turning more to self-reliance and self-interest.
One of the lessons we've learned from the COVID-19 pandemic is that many of our companies became too dependent on supply chains linked to China, and so the Americans are trying to get—I might even suggest, in the context of a trans-Pacific partnership concept—a group of like-minded countries to ensure that we are not dependent on unreliable sources of supply for dealing with future pandemics. I'm thinking that Canada should be very much in favour of this initiative.
In fact, one of the earlier commenters talked about the importance of supply chain resilience. One of the ways you can get supply chain resilience is by getting a network of countries to join together to ensure that we aren't caught with our pants down in the way we were with this pandemic.
View Don Davies Profile
NDP (BC)
Last, Mr. Gostin, you mentioned the accessibility of vaccines. How can the international community ensure equitable worldwide distribution of any COVID-19 vaccine or therapeutic that might result in the months and year ahead?
Lawrence Gostin
View Lawrence Gostin Profile
Lawrence Gostin
2020-06-23 11:54
Thank you very much for that question. I'll send you a JAMA article that I co-authored on that very subject.
The idea is that we need to plan for it now. I would like to see that planning under the auspices of the World Health Organization, whereby all countries pledge to not have a price on intellectual property competition and to equitably share the vaccine, but it could be under the auspices of the G7, the G20 or the United Nations.
I think what we need is a coalition, and I can think of Canada as being one of the leaders of this coalition and trying to push countries. We need to plan for equity now, before anybody knows that they're going to win the race. Now everybody has an incentive to co-operate, so we need to plan for that equitable distribution very early on.
Thank you so much for those questions. I do appreciate them.
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2020-06-23 13:52
Thank you, Mr. Chun.
Mr. Chen, you spoke at length, and rightly so, about international co-operation.
Where do things stand with regard to the research being carried out by researchers and scientists in your country in relation to this international co-operation? Are you in contact with them?
I imagine that the issues with the WHO prevented you from taking part in the solidarity clinical trial. I want you to tell us about this. Are you part of this? Are you concerned that this might affect your ability to participate in the trials and to access future treatments or vaccines?
Where do things stand with regard to research and your scientists in relation to the international community?
Winston Wen-Yi Chen
View Winston Wen-Yi Chen Profile
Winston Wen-Yi Chen
2020-06-23 13:54
Yes, thank you.
I'd like to share Taiwan's experience. Taiwan's experience is unique. Even though we are not included in the WHO, we had lots of co-operation and tried to reach out to work with like-minded countries, particularly those with democratic institutions, and made sure that we could get the necessary information in time.
Also, sir, you mentioned research in the development of vaccines, or medicines or testing kits. That also involves teamwork with the international health community. In our co-operation, particularly with Canada, we not only shared our PPE, but we also tried to facilitate the private sector, both in Canada and in Taiwan, to work together to try to establish the PPE supply chain in this country.
I think our co-operation is everywhere. We try to find every avenue to work with our friends. In this country, Canada, we have a challenge in facing this pandemic, so we have tried to find a workable solution and to tackle the issues. I always say that no one should be excluded from the WHO because the virus could be transmitted from one area to other countries. We had to work together as a team. It is so important. That's the reason we think we are on the right side of history. We did the right thing. We have good friends who are continuing to support us.
Results: 121 - 135 of 196 | Page: 9 of 14

|<
<
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data