Juno News - Canada’s insignificant role on the world stage

00:00:00.000 In 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the world that Canada is back. Well, in the six years

00:00:06.120 since, he has embarrassed the country over and over again, and Canada is more significant than

00:00:10.880 ever. I'm Candace Malcolm, and this is The Candace Malcolm Show.

00:00:17.860 Hi everyone, thank you so much for tuning into the show, and as we get closer to Christmas,

00:00:22.260 we like to take a step back and take a broader look at the country, look at some of the deeper

00:00:27.280 themes as the news cycle slows down a little, and we are doing that today. I'm delighted to be

00:00:32.360 joined by a Member of Parliament, a Conservative Member of Parliament, Garnett Genis. Garnett is

00:00:36.840 the MP for Sherwood Park, Fort Saskatchewan. He was first elected in 2015, has been re-elected with

00:00:42.380 more than 50% of the vote in every election since. In Parliament, he has been a vocal proponent for

00:00:48.140 Alberta's interest in Ottawa, fighting back against the carbon tax and advocating for more Canadian

00:00:52.600 oil and gas. Garnett currently serves as the Conservative Critic for International Development.

00:00:57.680 In his time as an elected official, he has prompted a return to Canada's principled foreign policy,

00:01:03.820 and has gained a reputation for being a tireless advocate for human rights and religious freedoms,

00:01:08.540 both domestically and abroad. So, Garnett, thank you so much for joining us today.

00:01:12.620 Well, thank you, Candace. It's great to be with you and have this conversation.

00:01:16.240 So, I want to talk about foreign policy, and we will get there, but before, there's just one question

00:01:21.020 that I really want to ask you about. A recent bill that was passed, received unanimous consent

00:01:26.160 and passed without a vote in the House of Commons, and I'm talking about the government's bill on what

00:01:31.720 they call conversion therapy. So, I know that you ran a campaign on this topic. Everyone, you said

00:01:37.380 everyone in theory opposes the idea of conversion therapy. I think that the name of the bill was called

00:01:43.400 conversion therapy because it elicits such a negative response when people hear about it. They think of

00:01:48.040 a sort of outdated, cruel practice. And yet, your criticism of it was that the bill was too broad

00:01:54.960 and too vague. And because of the vagueness and the broadness of the wording, it could actually have

00:02:00.800 a negative impact on freedom of speech. It could ban just normal conversations between teenagers and

00:02:07.320 their parents, between qualified therapists, between members of their church. If someone seeks on their

00:02:13.180 own, you know, freely seeks to go get counselling, that could actually be banned by this law. And yet,

00:02:20.540 you know, when it came through the House of Commons, all of the Conservatives voted in favour of it. This is

00:02:25.980 after twice opposing the bill, and from best I can tell, it hadn't been rewritten and those definitions

00:02:30.700 hadn't been changed. So, I want to ask you your opinion on this bill, and why is it that the Conservatives

00:02:36.380 stopped opposing this bill? Sure. Well, I guess a little bit of the context. I think, you know,

00:02:46.460 in general terms, you described my position on this issue well. I'm opposed to conversion therapy. I

00:02:54.140 support efforts to ban conversion therapy. I think when we legislate, we need to look at the definitions

00:03:02.140 that are given to that terminology. If you ban something that everybody agrees should be banned,

00:03:08.220 and yet you define it in a way that is incorrect in terms of the way people conceive of the definition,

00:03:16.140 then you've ended up banning something other than the thing you set out to ban. I use the analogy in

00:03:22.940 the House, if you say we're going to ban hard drugs, I'm with you. If you call coffee a hard drug

00:03:28.860 through an error of the definition, then I'm going to be not with you. So, this is something that,

00:03:38.300 you know, that I think it's a pretty clear thing to point out, to say, hey, like, let's analyze the

00:03:43.180 bill, let's look at the definition used in it. And in particular, in the last parliament, I spoke about

00:03:49.420 the need to fix the definition in then Bill C-6, because the issue was that the definition included

00:03:59.820 it was broad enough to include even private conversations, not involving a therapist or

00:04:05.580 official person of any, or just a conversation. And it was broad enough that it defined as conversion

00:04:12.780 therapy, any effort to reduce sexual attraction or behavior. So, I think a reasonable inference from

00:04:19.740 that is that like a conversation in which a mentor tells a young person that they should modify their

00:04:26.220 sexual behavior in some way, that that would be construed under the definition as being conversion

00:04:32.860 therapy. And that's obviously not what conversion therapy is. When people who, I mean, many people

00:04:36.620 aren't aware of this, but when people who are aware of conversion therapy, they understand that to mean

00:04:41.980 acts of violence, coercion, degrading someone efforts to sort of compel a change in, in sexual orientation,

00:04:50.060 it's, you know, those, those, those are methods that were sort of experimented with at times in the

00:04:59.100 past. And look, they're wrong, they're degrading, they're evil, and, and also they don't achieve the, the stated objective.

00:05:06.300 Um, so it's, it's, it's a bit of a language trick on the government's part to say, you know,

00:05:12.060 you know, if you, if you, if you are, if you're in favor, if you're against this bill, then you're

00:05:16.540 in favor of conversion therapy, allegedly, um, but then demanding a lack of scrutiny around the, the definition.

00:05:22.380 Um, you know, Candace, you asked some questions about, about process, uh, just, I'll just share with

00:05:28.620 folks that, um, you know, we're gonna, we're gonna be talking a lot about foreign policy. I, I was in

00:05:33.820 Europe for NATO and OSCE meetings last week, uh, and I'm sure we'll get to just the, the emerging

00:05:41.980 security concerns in, uh, uh, in Eastern Europe as a, as a result of the aggressive posture that Russia

00:05:47.900 was taken. I was, um, I was invited to be part of, of, uh, uh, parliamentary delegation that was

00:05:54.460 present for those meetings. And, um, to be honest, I would not have expected, uh, the process that was

00:06:02.220 followed before I, before I went on the trip. Um, I, I didn't expect to be, to be missing votes. Uh, and,

00:06:09.900 um, so I've had some conversations with colleagues about, you know, how, how this unfolded, but I,

00:06:14.940 I can't really speak to the process piece because, uh, those were things that I either wasn't, uh,

00:06:20.140 involved in, or to the extent that I know about them, uh, I know about them because of, uh, because

00:06:24.460 of private conversations I've had with other colleagues. Well, it's interesting because you

00:06:28.940 said that it's a word trick and it's with a definition, the media bought right into it.

00:06:32.220 So the whole idea was, oh, there's these 63 conservative MPs who support this harmful

00:06:37.660 practice called conversion therapy, even though you ran a campaign that was pretty clear, um, called

00:06:43.340 change, uh, fixed the definition that, that said that you were opposed to literal conversion therapy,

00:06:47.900 but you were not in favor of this bill because of the, the wording. So we saw a lot of dishonesty

00:06:52.620 across the board. And I think for a lot of conservatives, it was just strange to see,

00:06:56.700 um, you guys abandon a bill that you had previously, uh, abandoned opposing a bill that you previously had

00:07:02.220 a, a, a really strong opposition to. And then just sort of, uh, you know, having this, I guess,

00:07:06.940 feel a good moment, not over where everyone agrees, which is not really what you want in your

00:07:10.140 parliament you want, um, opposition, but yeah, let's move on. So why don't you tell us a little

00:07:14.060 bit about, uh, what, what, what you're working on with regards to NATO and the aggression of,

00:07:18.780 um, the Russian government towards Ukraine?

00:07:20.860 Well, I, so, uh, last week, uh, I was, uh, I was in Latvia for a couple of days, uh, on,

00:07:28.540 on the sidelines at the NATO summit that was happening there. And then I was in, uh, in Stockholm,

00:07:33.820 uh, for the, where the OSCE summit was and a lot of interesting conversations, uh, with respect to,

00:07:42.380 to the situation in Eastern Europe. I think it's important for more people to know, uh, just about

00:07:47.580 the, the important leadership role that Canada is playing as part of our NATO mission in Latvia.

00:07:53.420 And this is something that obviously has the support of, uh, of all parties, uh, being, uh, being an active

00:07:58.780 participant in NATO, being part of that, uh, NATO, NATO forward presence. And, um, uh, you know,

00:08:05.660 if you, uh, if you go to Holland, there's a lot of, there's a lot of gratitude, of course,

00:08:09.260 to Canada for the role we played at liberation during the second world war, uh, in Latvia there,

00:08:14.540 there's a lot of recognition of Canada as well for the fact that we're leading a battle group there.

00:08:19.340 And, um, you know, full, full credit to our, our armed forces for the incredible work they do

00:08:24.380 around the world. Uh, sometimes, uh, not with the level of, of resources from, uh, from government

00:08:30.620 that, uh, you know, certainly we've, we've talked in the past about, about increasing our, um, our,

00:08:35.740 our, uh, our, our, our defense, uh, engagement and, and moving towards that, uh, that NATO target of,

00:08:42.380 of 2% of GDP. So, um, so, so, uh, there, there's a lot of awareness of the fact that there's a Russian

00:08:49.100 military, uh, buildup, increasing, uh, Russian military activities. Um, and,

00:08:54.540 you know, concern about, uh, what steps, uh, maybe, maybe taken next by Russia. And I,

00:08:59.660 I don't think that'll be, uh, new information, uh, by, uh, to, to many people, but I just think we

00:09:05.740 need to, we need to really take seriously the possibility that, that, uh, the Putin regime

00:09:10.940 are planning something and, uh, we need to reflect on, uh, on our and NATO's level of, of readiness to

00:09:18.460 respond. So, so maybe you can walk us through a little bit more details, because I think maybe

00:09:23.580 some viewers don't know, uh, what, what specifically is Canada's involvement when

00:09:27.980 it comes to the operation you're talking about in Latvia? How many troops do we have there?

00:09:32.300 And what specifically, uh, is the Trudeau government doing, uh, with, with regards to,

00:09:37.980 you know, the, the, the aggression that we might be seeing from Russia?

00:09:40.940 Yeah. So, so there's, uh, there's a mission in enhanced forward presence, uh, the idea of,

00:09:46.380 of having, uh, uh, more NATO countries present, uh, uh, providing a level of, of reassurance in,

00:09:54.780 um, in NATO countries that are, um, that are sort of geographically closer to, uh, to Russia. So, uh,

00:10:02.540 Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and, and Poland. And, uh, there is a, um, there are, are various countries

00:10:11.260 involved in, in each of those missions. And there is a country that is leading each, each battle group.

00:10:17.100 So, um, you know, uh, the UK, the US, Germany, or the other, other nations leading battle groups

00:10:24.060 and, and Canada's leading the battle group in, um, in, in Latvia. Uh, so, um, we're, we're present

00:10:30.940 there. Uh, we're, um, we're, we're part of, of leading that mission and there's, there's many

00:10:35.820 other countries that are involved and that we're, we're cooperating with. And, um, I mean, I think

00:10:40.700 there's, there's a lot of benefits, uh, to that, uh, operation and the obvious one in terms of

00:10:44.860 demonstrating our, our, our readiness and our solidarity with NATO, uh, members. Um, but, but it's,

00:10:50.860 it, look, it's, it's also a great opportunity for, um, for our, you know, various NATO countries

00:10:57.100 to work together. Uh, and I think, I think the battle group in Latvia is actually the largest

00:11:01.500 in terms of the number of countries that are, that are represented. Um, so, so it's, uh, it was

00:11:07.500 interesting to hear in the briefing, just about that, that breadth being something that, uh, the

00:11:11.420 Canadian armed forces, uh, is able to do really well, which is, which is collaboration with other

00:11:15.980 NATO partners and, and building that, uh, large multi, uh, multinational force. Um,

00:11:23.740 you know, I, I think the, the, the concern around action that Russia would take, uh, I should say

00:11:30.540 that the Putin regime would take would be specifically, uh, into Ukraine. And, uh, in, in, uh, the sort of

00:11:37.580 side meetings I was a part of, um, there's a lot of discussion about this question of, of, uh, of NATO

00:11:42.780 enlargement, uh, because you have, uh, uh, you have, uh, Ukraine, you have Georgia countries that, uh,

00:11:49.500 that, uh, that the Putin regime is, is, uh, interfering in, in various ways, uh, and that

00:11:56.220 don't have that kind of security blanket of being part of, uh, part of NATO. On the one hand, uh, Russia

00:12:03.260 complains about the enlargement of, uh, of NATO, but on the other hand, uh, they don't, um, you know,

00:12:09.740 they, they, uh, they take advantage of, of, uh, uh, of countries that are not covered by that

00:12:16.540 security blanket, and they're more likely to, uh, to intervene and interfere there. So, uh, this is,

00:12:21.500 um, this is a concern, obviously. And I think we have to think seriously about what kind of response

00:12:27.820 we would, we would, uh, we would undertake if we see the kind of Russian aggression that a lot of

00:12:32.860 people are talking about as being a realistic possibility. Uh, you know, probably it would be,

00:12:38.060 it would be further aggression in Ukraine beyond, of course, the ongoing occupation and, and, uh,

00:12:43.420 and issues that are happening there. So one of the things the previous Harper government was known

00:12:48.620 for was sort of a refusal to bow down to, uh, other countries, especially bad actors and adversarial

00:12:55.020 nations. We saw Harper, uh, one stand up directly to Vladimir Putin. He, uh, stood up to the Iranian 0.98

00:13:01.180 regime by, uh, kicking out their diplomats and he, he even stood up to the United Nations. Uh, just

00:13:06.300 interesting. You couldn't have a more stark difference between that and Justin Trudeau.

00:13:08.940 Justin Trudeau, uh, said that he admired China's dictatorship. He shook hands with Iran's foreign 0.81

00:13:15.020 minister just days after Iran shot down a civilian, um, airline flight 752 murdering scores of Canadians,

00:13:23.020 um, including, uh, students and children. Um, it, you know, during your time, uh, as an elected official,

00:13:30.540 and MP Garnett, uh, have you seen Canada's reputation change on the world stage? I know

00:13:35.900 Justin Trudeau, uh, liked to say that he was bringing Canada back, that the foreign policy

00:13:40.620 diplomats were all, uh, you know, applauding when he, when he was elected and, uh, first entered,

00:13:45.500 um, the foreign affairs building. Um, but, but, but, but on the ground out in these, uh, missions that

00:13:50.940 you go on and, and, and working with, uh, our allies, have you seen a change in, in Canada's reputation?

00:13:56.540 And, uh, what, uh, how, how, how has Canada's reputation changed?

00:14:02.060 You know, thanks. That's a, that's a really important question. And, and look, um, as a,

00:14:06.380 as a member of the loyal opposition, I'm obviously a proud Canadian and I want to see, uh, Canada do

00:14:11.900 well. And I'm particularly proud of our, uh, our armed forces and, uh, the courage that the, uh, women

00:14:16.860 and men in uniform show as, as part of the various missions that we're, we're a part of. And, uh, and

00:14:21.820 sometimes not getting the, uh, political support that they, uh, that they should have. Um, you

00:14:27.340 talked about Stephen Harper. I think one thing that, that really came out to me, uh, talking to various

00:14:33.660 people in, in Eastern Europe was, was sort of thinking about that trajectory of, uh, Putin

00:14:39.740 aggression, uh, that, uh, it, the, the kind of, uh, there were, there were various, uh, human rights

00:14:46.700 issues and aggressive actions taken, uh, within the territory of Russia itself. Uh, one critical step,

00:14:53.020 um, I believe in 2008, I might be off a little bit, but I believe in 2008 where, uh, Russia invaded

00:15:00.300 Georgia, uh, and, um, this, this is, has, um, perhaps lessened the conscience of people in Canada.

00:15:07.980 We have a closer relationship with Ukraine. Uh, but, um, I think there, there's, there's a consensus now

00:15:13.340 that, uh, basically there was a, there was a lack of meaningful response, uh, to, to that act of

00:15:20.380 Russian aggression in, in Georgia. And, uh, there was sort of a perception in the Putin regime that

00:15:25.740 they could, could get away with that. Um, in 2014, uh, in the context of Russian aggression in Ukraine,

00:15:34.380 uh, there was a much stronger, if anything sort of stronger than expected response from the

00:15:39.340 international community in terms of showing support for Ukraine, uh, that response on Ukraine,

00:15:46.460 uh, was substantially, I would argue, driven by Stephen Harper's leadership, uh, within the,

00:15:53.260 the G7, uh, and Canada's firm, just refusal to accept a return to, uh, sort of 19th century,

00:16:02.940 so-called great power politics in which big countries can bite off chunks of small countries at will.

00:16:08.300 Um, we, we have to assert the, uh, the principles of international law, uh, the, the, the sovereignty

00:16:15.980 of states, the principle of self-determination, uh, against this kind of, uh, this kind of, uh,

00:16:21.660 might makes right narrative. And Canada did that boldly, decisively, uh, and, uh, you know,

00:16:29.580 Stephen Harper being, uh, well-respected, uh, the senior member of the G7, uh, was, um, was,

00:16:36.300 was able to, uh, maybe say things that Europeans or Americans at the time were unwilling to say,

00:16:42.380 but ultimately, uh, to pull that consensus, uh, towards us. So I think when you are a, um, you know,

00:16:50.620 when you're, when you're somewhere in between a super tower, uh, pardon me, when you're somewhere

00:16:54.780 in between a superpower and, and, uh, and, and very small when you're kind of, uh, at that,

00:16:59.980 at that middle level as Canada is part of many international organizations, um, you know, you,

00:17:05.980 the degree to which you're listened to really depends on the strength and credibility of your,

00:17:10.700 of your leadership. Um, the U S people have to listen to the U S regardless of what they think of

00:17:16.700 the present of the day because of its, its, uh, its size and, and geopolitical importance. Uh,

00:17:23.980 Canada is the sort of country where, um, where, where we have an opportunity to be heard,

00:17:28.380 but, uh, it's not inevitable that we will be heard or that we will be, we will be listened to. And I

00:17:34.140 think what I, what I see, and you can, I can see this quite clearly from the Biden administration,

00:17:38.060 its posture towards the, the Trudeau government is, um, you know, doing all the kind of nice things

00:17:44.700 and photo ops, but, but not really, uh, taking our concerns seriously, uh, not really responding

00:17:51.180 to them. Uh, and, uh, and, and I, I think Canadians have this perception of our, of our prime minister

00:17:58.300 as kind of in it for the image and, and not being that serious about the substance. Uh, and I think,

00:18:04.940 uh, look, look, Canada as a country still has a great reputation around the world. Um, but it is very

00:18:10.460 hard to imagine Justin Trudeau playing the same kind of leadership role today, uh, as Stephen Harper

00:18:17.660 did on, uh, on Ukraine. Um, that, that leadership required a willingness, yes, to work within

00:18:23.980 multilateral frame frameworks, but to lead and to be the first out of the gate and to, and to pull

00:18:28.940 other countries towards us in terms of the process of building consensus. Uh, I, I don't think, I don't

00:18:34.540 think, uh, we are, we are likely to see that kind of leadership from Justin Trudeau. We, we certainly

00:18:39.740 haven't, uh, in the past. It's been interesting. You talk about Russia. You look at maybe China and

00:18:44.780 other, another, uh, important, uh, geo strategic challenge that, that Canada faces. And, um,

00:18:50.220 obviously the Trudeau government came in, uh, promising this, this golden age of, of relations,

00:18:56.060 uh, between Canada and China. Uh, and, um, and now what we've seen is, is like a shift in some of the

00:19:02.700 rhetoric, right? The, the liberals, the liberals are adopting some of the language of conservative

00:19:08.700 foreign policy in, in some of their, the way they try to frame what they're doing,

00:19:13.260 but we're not seeing it in the substance. Uh, we're, we're seeing a shift in posture,

00:19:16.860 but not a shift in substance of our foreign policy. And that's, that's a big concern.

00:19:20.860 Well, I do want to get to China, but, uh, before we do just quickly, there, there,

00:19:24.460 there was an announcement not too long ago, um, of a new submarine deal between the UK,

00:19:28.940 the U S and Australia. And when I saw that news Garnett and I, and I read the details to me,

00:19:33.820 it was like, okay, we used to have this agreement called the five eyes and it was, it was Canada

00:19:37.900 in that mix and New Zealand as well. And here we have this new, uh, you know, groundbreaking

00:19:42.860 technology and this, this, you know, next generation deal that, that, that Canada was just completely

00:19:47.980 left out of. So I'm wondering if you could comment on that specifically and why Justin Trudeau, why

00:19:53.900 under, under Justin Trudeau's leadership, Canada wasn't involved in those discussions you talked

00:19:58.220 about not meeting our 2% NATO, uh, requirement, uh, that, that seemed to be perhaps an opportunity

00:20:04.620 to at least, uh, push it in that direction. If we were to make investments in, in, um, submarine

00:20:10.540 technology, icebreakers in the North, why, why isn't Canada involved in these conversations?

00:20:15.980 Well, um, I think it's a, it's an important question and it's a question we've asked. So

00:20:21.500 we have an opportunity as, as members of parliament to submit something called order paper questions,

00:20:25.500 which is, uh, you know, people are thinking of, of questions in parliament. They think of the cut

00:20:29.740 and thrust of question period, which is obviously one, one great opportunity, but we also submit

00:20:33.820 written questions, which are, um, which are, are usually kind of detailed requests for information.

00:20:39.500 Uh, and it's, it's, it's harder for the government to, to avoid, uh, providing, providing answers to

00:20:45.180 those. So, so, um, although they, they still find ways of doing so. So, um, so I've submitted a,

00:20:50.060 uh, a question specifically on AUKUS, uh, the, the UK, uh, US, Australia deal, uh, asking,

00:20:57.660 was Canada part of discussions, uh, was Canada invited to join? Would Canada be interested in

00:21:03.340 joining? Um, and I'm, I'm hopeful that, uh, that within the deadline of that question,

00:21:08.940 the question, the response will have to be submitted when parliament returns in January.

00:21:12.460 At that point, we'll be able to see, uh, what the, what the response is. Um,

00:21:17.900 um, but, but look, I mean, obviously this raises some, some red flags when we see kind of within

00:21:25.900 the five eyes, some members of the five eyes, uh, establishing agreements, which, um, I mean,

00:21:32.140 they're, they're, they're going to be some aspects of, of, for instance, U S Australia cooperation

00:21:36.460 that are going to focus on specific theaters where we're, where we're less present, but there's,

00:21:40.460 uh, there's a lot of elements of the AUKUS deal. Some of which I think would be, um, would be very

00:21:46.060 relevant to, uh, to Canada. Um, shortly after that, I think people, people noticed the, uh,

00:21:53.020 the, the interaction between, uh, between president Biden and the prime minister of

00:21:59.180 Australia in which he said, the U S has no more reliable friend and ally than Australia. Um,

00:22:05.100 which I think, you know, from a Canadian perspective is sort of like seeing your spouse out for dinner

00:22:08.860 with somebody else. Um, you know, Biden has described his relationship with Canada as the

00:22:14.140 easiest relationship. Um, so it's, it, it, it is interesting, you know, Trudeau has, has sat across

00:22:20.220 from three different American presidents. And I think a lot of people were willing to give him a

00:22:25.100 pass on certain things with Trump because they, they perceive Trump as a, as a, as a tough customer.

00:22:29.900 But, um, when, when you have, uh, two, two democratic presidents, uh, and still, uh, really a failure to

00:22:37.420 achieve results and, and mean gaps in terms of ability to cooperate, uh, you start to wonder,

00:22:43.500 you know, maybe, maybe, maybe our current leadership is missing something in terms of,

00:22:48.300 of effective engagement of our allies. Well, so, so our relationship with the U S I mean,

00:22:54.540 you shouldn't be seen as being easy. If you're, if you're Canada, you should, you should still,

00:22:58.860 uh, make demands, whether it be pipelines or, uh, you know, exemptions to meet in the USA tariffs.

00:23:04.780 Um, that, that, that should be an easier relationship because we have so much in common

00:23:07.820 and we share so many, uh, mutual values. Um, so, so, so, so compare that with, you know,

00:23:13.740 seeing Trudeau have very few results with our, uh, greatest partner and ally, the U S.

00:23:19.260 And then juxtapose that with, with China, where you have an adversarial regime, you have a

00:23:24.140 a, uh, terrible, um, offender of human rights. You have, um, uh, you know, a country that is,

00:23:29.980 is acting more and more belligerent, um, on the world stage. And yet, you know, we have Trudeau

00:23:35.500 failing to negotiate a trade deal, uh, waffling, uh, waffling on Huawei and, and, and how, how we're

00:23:41.420 going to deal with them. Um, not really standing up in the way that many wanted to, uh, see with the

00:23:45.900 two Michaels who are arbitrarily arrested in the U S we see, um, both Democrats and Republicans

00:23:52.300 in agreement, um, about China's aggression and, um, the need to build up their own domestic economy

00:23:57.900 so that they're less reliant on imports from China. Um, Canada doesn't seem to have an appetite to,

00:24:04.620 to implement, um, some of those same trade restrictions against China. So I'm wondering

00:24:08.940 if you could comment both on the foreign policy side, uh, with China and how, how Trudeau deals

00:24:13.180 with them and how, how we ought to deal with them in a different, different way. And then, uh,

00:24:17.580 also address the issue of, uh, trade and, and whether we are too reliant on upon China, whether we

00:24:23.740 ought to be, uh, building up more of our own domestic or at least North American, um, manufacturing

00:24:28.700 base so that we're not reliant on, on China, um, in the future. Yeah. So I, I think on, on the trade

00:24:34.060 piece, uh, it's maybe important to distinguish between the question of, of trade in general and the

00:24:39.660 question of strategic dependency, um, you know, trade, you know, you can, you can engage in commerce,

00:24:45.580 um, without being in a position of, of, um, of strategic vulnerability, where there are things

00:24:51.660 that you are going to need at critical times and, uh, and that access could be managed by,

00:24:59.100 by an authoritarian political actor for their own strategic, strategic reasons. Right. So

00:25:03.820 we saw that a little bit with COVID with the, with the vaccines as well as with PP and E that we were

00:25:07.900 reliant on China and they, they didn't really seem to care and they didn't really seem to be

00:25:11.900 reciprocal in, in terms of following through on agreements that we had with them. Yeah, certainly

00:25:16.300 it became evident through the study we did at the special committee on Canada-China relations in

00:25:21.260 the last parliament that, uh, that there were political decisions aimed at Canada in response to,

00:25:26.060 to political factors. And, uh, there is, there are, there are many advantages to focusing on,

00:25:31.900 on, uh, expanding free trade among free nations, rule of law nations where, um, you know, where,

00:25:38.540 where, uh, contracts are, are formally enforceable and, um, and there can't be threats made against,

00:25:44.460 uh, judges, business people and, and, and, and so forth. Um, that doesn't mean we, we can't and

00:25:50.060 shouldn't trade with countries that, uh, that don't share our values. I mean, I think there are,

00:25:54.620 there are good arguments for both the economic benefits, but also the potential

00:25:58.460 just engagement that can, can flow from that. But, uh, separate from the question of trade in

00:26:04.300 general, we, we have to be attentive to this question of, of strategic dependency, uh, that,

00:26:10.060 that came through the, the pandemic and, um, and, uh, you know, we, we, we see it in other issues as

00:26:15.980 well. I know during, during a recent trip to Eastern Europe, a lot of, um, a lot of people are,

00:26:22.140 are interested there in questions around energy security, right? And, and we, we should,

00:26:25.820 should, uh, think about the role that Canada can play, uh, as a, as a, an exporter of energy

00:26:30.700 resources in, uh, in supporting energy security, because that's another, uh, one of those, uh,

00:26:35.980 those strategic, strategic, uh, commodities and points of strategic vulnerability for certain,

00:26:42.060 uh, for certain like, like-minded countries, um, on the sort of relationship with, with, uh,

00:26:49.180 with China in general, um, how we kind of relate to the Chinese government. I think for a long time,

00:26:53.980 the Trudeau government has just been very naive. Uh, they've, they sort of assumed that if you're,

00:26:58.860 if you're treating someone in a certain way that they will, uh, reciprocate that, uh, that, that

00:27:04.540 treatment. And, um, we've seen in, in response to, I think, very effective work in the last

00:27:11.260 parliament, again, through the special committee on, on Canada-China relations, being a, being a big

00:27:14.780 part of it. Um, the, many, many of the government's failures on this and, and failures in perception

00:27:23.340 have been exposed and that has forced certain changes in tone and language. Uh, the, um, uh,

00:27:33.100 the, two U.S. administrations actually have recognized the Uyghur genocide. Canada's parliament

00:27:38.700 has recognized the Uyghur genocide. Uh, the government has, has failed to provide that

00:27:43.340 recognition, um, in terms of our own domestic security, right? Uh, we haven't, we have not,

00:27:50.140 uh, recognized yet the, the security threat posed by, by Huawei. The government says its decision

00:27:56.140 with respect to Huawei is still, uh, still pending. So, um, there are these, there are these key issues of

00:28:01.820 substance, uh, protecting our own security, defending our own interests, standing with our allies on issues

00:28:07.420 of human rights where Canada, uh, needs to step up and, and has not stepped up yet. Um, and I would

00:28:13.740 say just protecting our own security is, in, in this context is, is a particularly urgent priority.

00:28:19.740 Uh, the biggest security threat facing Canada right now is foreign state-backed interference in

00:28:24.700 our country. Uh, the, the sort of silent invasion, uh, that one, one Australian writer, uh, described

00:28:31.660 where, um, where the institutions of, of, uh, of, uh, of a foreign state, you know, rather than,

00:28:37.980 rather than rolling up, uh, with, with tanks and flags on a beach, uh, are seeking to, uh, to, to bring

00:28:45.580 institutions in other country, on countries under their control. And, um, and, and we really need to

00:28:52.140 wise up about this and respond to it more effectively. Well, there, there have been, uh, there's been

00:28:57.180 several books written about, uh, Chinese spies and infiltration into Canada. Uh, we saw it, uh, flare

00:29:03.340 up not too long ago in Vancouver when, um, there were, you know, high school kids fighting over, um,

00:29:09.420 you know, the invasion of, um, or the, the changes of law in Hong Kong that will give China more autonomy.

00:29:14.860 We see, uh, pro-China rallies in, in Vancouver frequently. So, uh, unfortunate stuff is definitely

00:29:20.540 happening in Canada. Well, Garnett, I really appreciate your time, really appreciate all your, uh, expertise

00:29:25.580 and, and shedding light on all of these issues to help us, uh, get a better understanding of what's

00:29:29.260 happening, uh, you know, inside Canada's, uh, foreign policy, um, area. So, so we really appreciate

00:29:35.820 you coming on the show and, um, wishing you a very Merry Christmas to you and your family.

00:29:40.540 Well, thank you so much. Merry Christmas to you. And I'll maybe just say in conclusion that

00:29:44.220 these foreign and security policy issues, um, they're not often top of mind for Canadians. Um,

00:29:50.940 but when something goes wrong in the world, uh, they can, they can move from low down the list,

00:29:55.820 to the top of the list very, very quickly in terms of their significance and their impact.

00:29:59.740 So, uh, obviously, uh, you know, conservatives are working hard to hold the government accountable

00:30:03.740 on the economy, on inflation, uh, on, uh, on justice issues, on domestic freedoms issues.

00:30:08.700 Uh, but these, but these foreign, foreign affairs and, uh, and security issues, uh, they,

00:30:14.700 they have the potential to have a very significant impact, uh, on our, on our lives. And it's important

00:30:19.580 for us to be vigilant and asking the government questions about, about what their, their plans are.

00:30:24.140 So again, Merry Christmas to you and thanks for the opportunity.

00:30:26.780 All right. Thank you so much, Garnas, Janet MP for the Conservative Party.

00:30:31.100 I'm Candace Malcolm, and this is The Candace Malcolm Show.

Juno News - December 14, 2021

Canada’s insignificant role on the world stage

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript