Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 62
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It is a pleasure to be with you today, Mr. Chair.
China’s increasing authoritarianism and coercive diplomacy are challenges for democracies around the world. All countries are reassessing and realigning their engagement with China, and Canada is no exception.
We are all trying to decide how we can reconcile our trade objectives, our security objectives and our human rights objectives. Given the circumstances, our approach to China is constantly evolving. It is firmly guided by our principles, values and interests, while acknowledging the complexity of our relationship.
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, for example on global problems like climate change. However, it 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.
We must continue to work with our partners around the world to protect the rules-based international order and defend human rights and freedoms. Those are fundamental Canadian values that underpin our foreign policy.
Let me be clear. A path to any kind of long-term relationship with China implies the safe return of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor to Canada. Mr. Kovrig and Mr. Spavor have been unlawfully detained for more than 900 days. Bringing them home is and must remain our top priority in our dealings with China, period. Both men received regular visits two weeks ago from consular officials, who remarked on their impressive strength and resilience. We continue to call for their release while pressing China to allow consular access to other Canadian citizens held in that country, namely Mr. Huseyin Celil, so that we can confirm his well-being. We also seek clemency for Robert Schellenberg and for all Canadians facing the death penalty.
Alongside international partners, we continue to call out China for its bad behaviour. We have called on China to put an end to the systematic campaign of repression against Uighurs and other Muslim ethnic minorities in light of mounting evidence of forced labour, political re-education, torture and forced sterilization. We announced sanctions against four officials and one entity for their involvement.
We are also working with allies at the G7 Quad and Five Eyes to condemn China's growing militarization in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, where China claims vast areas, which fuels regional tensions.
China's economic might has emboldened its ambitions and interests beyond the Asia-Pacific region, where it has enjoyed enormous clout for centuries, to span the entire globe, including here in Canada. Growing competition with China and the pervasive use of digital technology forces us to work with other governments, businesses and universities to protect intellectual property and digital infrastructure and even to shield our democratic institutions from foreign interference and election meddling.
Hostile activities by state actors pose strategic long-term threats to Canada. They can undermine our nation's economic, industrial, military and technological advantages. Researchers and innovators, for example, are vulnerable to espionage and hacking.
Last September, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry launched the new portal called Safeguarding Your Research, which provides tools and advice to Canadians on how best to protect their intellectual property.
In March, the ministers of Public Safety and Innovation, Science and Industry announced the development of specific risk guidelines to integrate national security considerations into the evaluation and funding of research partnerships.
We are also working with other G7 countries to counter foreign interference, notably through the Canadian initiative called “rapid response mechanism”, which strengthens coordination across the G7 in identifying, preventing and responding to threats to G7 democracies through disinformation.
Unfortunately, we are currently seeing a resurgence in anti-Asian hate, since the beginning of the pandemic, in Canada and around the world.
Canadians of Chinese and Asian heritage are our neighbours, our colleagues, our friends and our family members. They should never feel that they are in danger or threatened because of their origin.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being with us today, Minister. We are pleased to have the opportunity to talk with you on Monday evening every week.
How did you react on April 22 when your colleague, New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta, said it was not necessary on every issue to invoke Five Eyes to create a coalition of support around particular issues in the field of human rights?
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
I have no comments to make concerning what she said and what you have reported. I will simply tell you that our relationship with New Zealand is very close. It is a member country of the Five Eyes alliance, obviously, and they are also colleagues in our trading relationships under the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership or CPTPP. I have regular conversations with the New Zealand Foreign Minister.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
I certainly understand that, Minister. You have said things that are obvious on which we are all in agreement. However, the question that concerns me—I do not know whether it concerns you as well—relates to the alliances we are trying to create to stand up to the superpower that the People's Republic of China has become, particularly in respect of arbitrary detentions.
The New Zealand minister said that it is not necessary on every issue to invoke Five Eyes to create a coalition of support around particular issues in the field of human rights.
Does that not throw cold water on the nations that are trying precisely to create coalitions to ensure respect for human rights, particularly when it comes to foreign nationals in the People's Republic of China?
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
I would say no, for two reasons.
First, it is very obvious that New Zealand is our ally when it comes to human rights. It has made that very clear by supporting the declaration on arbitrary detention.
The other reason is that we are involved in a number of multilateral forums, of which the G7 is one, that very strongly raised the question of human rights in China at the recent foreign ministers' meeting. We spoke with one voice. It is therefore not just the Five Eyes. It may be the G7 or other multilateral forums in which various countries speak out on China and human rights.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you again, Minister, deputy and officials for being with us.
On that last topic, it might be important to remind the committee that it is established so that the government, whether majority or minority, always has a minority on that committee. Thus, the Liberal government will have only five out of 11 possible members on the committee. This is something we fought for when the Harper government refused any parliamentary oversight on any security issues.
That's just Rob needing to get in there with that lived experience.
Minister, you have said that the China of today is different from five years ago. It is. One thing that has been required of you is to work multilaterally and to work with like-minded and sometimes even unlike-minded countries to find a way to deal with China. When it came to Hong Kong, our government issued many statements with the EU, the U.S., the U.K. and others. Recently you were at the G7 meeting of finance and foreign ministers, and a statement on the Uighurs and the horrendous situation in Xinjiang came out. You are also working on arbitrary detention. I'm kind of giving you a bit of a smorgasbord. Those are just examples of the leadership roles and the collegial roles you are taking on with respect to arbitrary detention.
I would like your thoughts on this way of working.
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much for the question and for the precision on the NSICOP composition as well.
We believe that if we are to transmit a message to China, that message, broadly speaking, is that we all operate on this planet according to international rules-based law and that it is not acceptable to practice coercive diplomacy between countries. Fortunately, our like-minded partners, such as members of the G7 and in particular our closest ally, the United States, feel the same way.
It is certainly not acceptable to arbitrarily detain innocent civilians from another country because you have a difference of opinion on a particular issue with that country. Sure, we can have differences of opinion with China, but you don't resolve those by imprisoning citizens from the other country. China is not the only country that is guilty of that, but it is an example.
We believe that if we act together multilaterally, we send a stronger message. That's essentially it. There was a very big section in the communiqué from the foreign ministers of the G7 when we met in London. You will probably see a similar important section when the leaders meet in Cornwall next week.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
Do you know how many countries have signed on to this declaration that Canada has led the way on?
View Marc Garneau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Yes. We're at 63 now. It was 58 when I made the announcement in February.
Of course, every time I speak to another country, I bring up the importance of it, because it could happen to them. We're building that. We are in fact moving towards the next stage with respect to the arbitrary detention declaration.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
I've often thought that it's a two-way message. It's to countries that might perpetrate arbitrary detention. It's also a statement to our own citizens to say that we will absolutely have their back, as you have for the citizens arbitrarily detained.
The situation in Hong Kong obviously takes a whole-of-government approach as we're looking at it. This is an issue that I think every member of this committee, no matter what party they're from, is concerned about—
View Lenore Zann Profile
Lib. (NS)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The minister stated earlier that our bilateral relationship with China is complex and multi-dimensional. In recent years, this relationship obviously has presented [Technical difficulty—Editor] and has continued to evolve. We also know that many of our international partners are facing similar challenges. It has been stated many times that Canada believes it's essential to work with our closest allies to have a united approach when it comes to China.
Could the officials please explain to this committee how we are actually collaborating with like-minded partners on this crucial issue?
Marta Morgan
View Marta Morgan Profile
Marta Morgan
2021-06-07 19:48
Our approach to China is evolving to meet the challenges of threats to our national security, to democratic values and to human rights. We have recognized that we need to challenge China on many of those issues.
I think a good example of that, when it comes to working with allies, is the work that we've done on arbitrary detention. As Minister Garneau mentioned, 63 countries have now signed on to our statement on arbitrary detention, which is practised by a number of states globally and goes against the rules that govern the international system.
We work very closely with international allies through the G7, for example. You saw an extensive statement coming out of the G7 foreign ministers meeting at the beginning of May condemning the human rights violations against the Uighurs. We work at the United Nations with allies at the United Nations Human Rights Committee, for example, to decry the human rights abuses being committed against the Uighurs and to seek unfettered access for the UN special rapporteur on human rights. There are many examples, whether it's with our G7 partners or with our Five Eyes partners. Sometimes we will work bilaterally, for example, with the United Kingdom on an issue.
I think one of the main messages I would pass is just the importance of building those alliances and working with allies. We are so much stronger when we work together. That's a critical part of our strategy and our approach going forward.
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
Could I ask you to comment on the statement of the New Zealand foreign minister regarding the Five Eyes?
It seems to me that the Five Eyes is an intelligence-sharing arrangement with several nations, but it seems that the Five Eyes designation seems to be used for some other kind of alliance. Do you think that use of the phrase is misused in the public eye and is giving the false impression that this is a different type of activity here? “Five Eyes” names the countries clearly, but this is an intelligence-sharing operation and not more than that. Is that correct?
Marta Morgan
View Marta Morgan Profile
Marta Morgan
2021-06-07 20:05
The Five Eyes is an intelligence-sharing operation, but I think the broader issue here is all the various ways in which we can work together in the various forums. Our Five Eyes counterparts are very close allies to us. They share our values. They share our commitment to democracy. They are among our closest allies, but there is also the G7. Working with the G7 through foreign ministers and through leaders is a critical alliance for us, as are our allies who work with us on the UN Human Rights Council. We need to broaden our allies. We need to have as many allies as possible.
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
I understand that, but doesn't the minister have a point when she says that there are two different types of alliances, and one doesn't always include the other?
Results: 1 - 15 of 62 | Page: 1 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data