GUEST COLUMN MICHAEL COOPER: Canada's Position on Taiwan
Plus the CBC lawsuit against the Conservative Party, Amendments to Bill C-10, Update on Enbridge Line 5, and a New Report on Childcare
GUEST COLUMN MICHAEL COOPER: Canada’s Position on Taiwan
In less than two-years, the China Communist regime has crushed civil liberties and political freedom in Hong Kong with its national security law. Pro-democracy protests have been met with violent crackdowns and arrests directed by Beijing. Hong Kong lawmakers opposed to Beijing’s power grab have been jailed. The partially democratic Hong Kong Legislative Council has been eviscerated, now the subject of a “supervisory agency” controlled by Beijing. Hong Kong’s “Basic Law”, a set of legal principles based upon the rule of law, has been replaced by a constitution that provides for one-party rule. Dissent against Beijing is now officially a crime as Hong Kong has been reduced from a semi-autonomous zone to effectively another province of mainland China.
Having annexed Hong Kong into the full orbit of Beijing-based Communist control, Taiwan is now in the crosshairs of Beijing. Admiral John Aquilino, commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said that China considers taking control of Taiwan its “No. 1 priority.” Taiwan’s Foreign Affairs Minister in a December interview said that many people in Taiwan believe that China’s invasion of Taiwan “may have already started.”
Since last year, the Beijing-based Communist regime has significantly escalated tensions with Taiwan. Wu and others have characterized it as a “grey-zone” assault employing tactics that fall just short of outright military action, including infiltration, cyber-attacks, spreading disinformation, and military intimidation.
Since June 2020, Chinese military planes, including fighter jets and bombers, have regularly flown into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone (ADIZ). A record 380 sorties were flown into Taiwan’s ADIZ in 2020, a significant increase from only 26 sorties during the period of August 2016 to December 2017, according to a Taiwan national defence report. In the first four months of this year, Chinese jets have already made more than 260 incursions into the ADIZ, and Taiwanese airspace has been broken twice. This has forced Taiwan to scramble fighter jets putting a significant strain on Taiwan’s much smaller air force.
In a further escalation, China has deployed a massive number of sand dredgers off Taiwan’s Matsu Islands, situated near the median line of the Taiwan Strait, the unofficial buffer between China and Taiwan. This tactic has forced Taiwan to deploy its coast guard to escort them out. Last year, Taiwan expelled nearly 4,000 Chinese sand-dredgers and sand-transporting vessels from waters under its control, a 560% increase from the 600 Chinese vessels that were expelled in 2019.
Meanwhile, Beijing’s rhetoric toward Taiwan has become increasingly belligerent. In January the Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman threatened that “Taiwan independence means war.” The Chinese state news service Global Times wrote in an editorial that China would “severely punish the reckless acts of ‘Taiwan independence’ forces.” This as President Xi has said that China will not rule out the use of force, if necessary to take control of Taiwan.
Taken together, these tactics are part of a campaign of psychological warfare designed to tax Taiwan’s defence forces, intimidate Taiwan’s political leaders, demoralize Taiwan’s population, and make such harassment so routine that the world no longer takes notice.
In the face of a significant escalation of aggression towards Taiwan, the Trudeau government has all but turned a blind eye choosing to keep its distance from Taiwan as part of an ill-conceived strategy to placate Beijing. This is exactly the wrong approach. The threat of Taiwan losing its de facto independence must be taken seriously. China’s aggression towards Taiwan undermines peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region, is a direct challenge to the international rules-based order and is a threat to democracy larger than the democracy that is Taiwan. The loss of Hong Kong and now the threat posed to Taiwan is part of what is likely to be a long contest between democratic values, and China’s ambitions to spread its authoritarian model around the world.
There are several practical measures that Canada can take to help Taiwan.
As a starting point, Canada should join the United States and impose Magntisky-style sanctions on the Beijing-based Communist Party officials responsible for dismantling democracy in Hong Kong. So far, 34 individuals are subject to U.S. sanctions, including Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam. This will help send a message to Communist Party leaders to think twice about doing to Taiwan what has been done to Hong Kong.
Canada should loosen its strict interpretation of its “one China” policy. In the joint communique that sets out Canada’s “one China” policy, Canada recognizes the Beijing-based Communist government as the “sole legal government of China” but merely “takes note” of China’s Communist regime’s contention that Taiwan is an “inalienable part” of the territory of the People’s Republic of China. It follows that Canada’s position on the legal status of Taiwan in no way accepts Beijing’s position that Taiwan is part of the People’s Republic of China, a territory that the Beijing-based Communists have never controlled. Too often Canada has acquiesced to Beijing’s interpretation, instead of exercising the flexibility that the policy provides.
As part of that, Canada should enhance diplomacy, including sending ministers to meet their Taiwanese counterparts. This is long overdue. The last time Canada sent a minister to Taiwan was more than two decades ago in 1998. As it currently stands, there is no direct engagement between Canadian and Taiwanese ministers, and otherwise extremely limited engagement between Canadian officials and their Taiwanese counterparts. This at a time when many of our allies are strengthening their diplomatic engagement with Taiwan. For example, in April an unofficial U.S. delegation sent by President Biden visited Taiwan. Moreover, the Biden administration recently issued new guidelines on contacts with U.S. officials and their Taiwanese counterparts to “encourage U.S. government engagement with Taiwan that reflects our deepening unofficial relationship.” It’s time that Canada followed the lead of our allies and increased engagement with Taiwan. This would send a powerful message of Canada’s commitment to defend democracy and liberal values under attack by Beijing.
Canada must do more to support Taiwan’s participation in international forums, including the annual World Health Assembly (WHA), the decision-making body of the World Health Organization and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). At a time when the world has been battling COVID-19, it is preposterous from a global public health standpoint that Taiwan is excluded from participating even as an observer at the WHA. After all, the world has much to learn from Taiwan which weathered COVID better than just about anywhere. Taiwan suffered only 12 deaths while avoiding lockdowns save for a few weeks in March. Similarly, from an aviation safety standpoint, it makes no sense that Taiwan is blocked from ICAO, despite hosting the 11th busiest airport in the world at Taipei. Although, Trudeau has expressly stated Canada’s support for Taiwan’s “meaningful participation in international forums”, Canada needs to be more forceful in demanding Taiwan’s participation.
Taiwan is eager to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Transpacific Partnership (CPTTP). Canada should welcome Taiwan’s bid, and take a leadership role in persuading the other signatories to include Taiwan. Taiwan is one of the world’s 20th largest economies and would be the fifth largest economy in the group. It is already well-integrated in the Indo-Pacific region, and Taiwan’s economic and regulatory institutions meet the criteria for membership. Moreover, Taiwan’s inclusion in the CPTTP would benefit Canada as Taiwan offers high-tech products and services that Canada needs and is a promising market for Canadian commodities.
Any of these measures may result in retaliation from the Beijing-based Communist regime. However, going along to get along with Beijing is not the answer. After all, the Trudeau government tried that approach, and it has failed. The China Communist regime has responded with hostage diplomacy, threatening the safety of Canadians in Hong Kong, sanctioning Canadian Parliamentarians, and imposing punitive unfair trade measures.
It is time for Canada to adopt an approach to Taiwan that better reflects reality. Taiwan, after all, is an economic powerhouse of 23.5 million people, and Canada’s 12th largest trading partner. It is a beacon of democracy in a region where it is increasingly under attack from the Beijing-based Communist regime. Taiwan’s government exercises effective sovereign control over Taiwanese territory with the overwhelming support of its people. In that context, deferring to Beijing is out-dated and simply doesn’t make sense in 2021, if it ever did.
What’s more the Trudeau government’s hands-off approach towards Taiwan as Beijing dangerously ups the ante only encourages Beijing’s bad behaviour. By contrast, the more that Canada and our allies recognize Taiwan’s sovereignty, the more difficult it will be for China to exercise force against Taiwan. The U.S., Japan, India, and several European Union countries to name a few, have all strengthened their ties with Taiwan in recent years. It’s time that Canada joined them.
Michael Cooper is the Member of Parliament for St. Albert-Edmonton and Vice-Chair of the Canada-China Legislative Parliamentary Group.
CBC Loses Lawsuit Against Conservatives
During the 2019 election, the Conservative Party of Canada used short clips from the CBC in a campaign ad and in four tweets on Twitter. These were used to highlight the Prime Minister’s failures during his first term in office, and it is common practice for clips from media sources to be shared on social media. The CBC decided to sue the Conservative Party of Canada despite other political parties making use of such short clips in their past advertising.
On Thursday, a federal court threw out the CBC’s lawsuit. This was the first time a broadcaster had ever sued a political party. The CBC argued that the Conservative party used CBC footage in a way that depicted the Prime Minister in a poor light.
The court ruled that the material was allowable. The CBC failed to show how this use of footage caused the broadcaster any harm. In such situations, it would have been better to err on the side of caution when the trust in media is reaching new lows. Taking court action like the CBC did during the 2019 federal election further hurt their public image and judicial decision now rendered against them is further proof of their error in judgment.
More proof that we need to defund the CBC.
Heritage Committee and Bill C-10 Amendments
Over the past few weeks I have been sharing with you the developments and concerns over Bill C-10, the Liberals’ new legislation that would, among other things, give the CRTC power to censor posts made by private citizens on social media platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, and Instagram. Since the bill’s introduction, a number of amendments and motions have been so far. These newest development includes:
In light of backlash from removing clause 4.1 in C-10 that would have excluded user-generated content posted to social media sites from CRTC regulation, the Liberals tried to save face by passing an amendment that aimed to clarify the role of the CRTC. Rather than relieve tensions, this only exacerbated opposition concerns about the bill’s threat to free expression. Canadian internet law expert and university professor Michael Geist, commented on this amendment by stating "[Heritage Minister] Guilbeault and the government promised to remove regulation of user generated content by the CRTC. Instead ... it effectively confirmed that denials about the effects of the bill were inaccurate and left a regulatory framework in place”. My colleagues on the Heritage Committee will continue to call for the government to ensure that Canadian’s charter-protected rights are not violated by poorly crafted legislation.
With the support of all parties, members of the Heritage Committee agreed to pause their review of the legislation to allow the Justice Department to look into whether Bill C-10 in its current form presents a threat to the free speech rights of Canadian social media users. This comes on the back of a successful motion for a revised charter statement on C-10, a statement issued by the justice minister to examine the potential impact new legislation may have on Canadians' rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Responsibility now lies on the Department of Justice to conduct a thorough legislative review before the committee resumes its review of C-10.
Regardless of how the judicial charter statement is revised and how C-10 is amended in the coming weeks, the Conservatives are calling for the entirety of the legislation to be withdrawn by the federal government. Trust has been broken. It is a reasonable public policy goal to reign in the power of social media platforms and to demand greater accountability as well as transparency in their use of algorithms. Such legislative tools have to put the rights of Canadians and consumers first. C-10 has failed to achieve that and the heritage minister has failed in his duties.
I encourage you to take action and share your concerns on C-10 by sending the Heritage Minister an email at steven.guilbeault@parl.gc.ca.
Update on Enbridge Line 5
Over the past few months, Gretchen Whitmer, the Governor of Michigan, has been making calling for the shutdown of Enbridge Line 5, a pipeline carrying Canadian product that crosses through the United States and supplies Quebec and Ontario with over half of their oil needs. Michigan’s governor has formally asked Enbridge to turn off the taps; however, Enbridge has refused to yield unless issued to do so by a court. This demand is in violation of the Transit Pipelines Treaty, a document which President Joe Biden supported as a U.S. Senator. After many months of tension, the Canadian government has only recently declared its formal opposition to Governor Whitmer’s order.
Similar to the cancellation of Keystone XL, the Ottawa Liberals’ lack of any forceful defence of the Canadian energy sector speaks volumes. Enbridge Line 5 comprises a vital artery of North America’s energy infrastructure and cutting it would be a disaster for both Canada and the United States. While the effects of this decision would be felt most heavily in Ontario and Quebec, shutting down Line 5 would also serve as yet another kick to Alberta’s embattled energy industry and the families who work in that sector. Line 5 carries oil produced in Alberta, and after the cancellation of Keystone and the inability to access new foreign markets, any step to reduce transport capacity in Canada would have financial consequences for Alberta.
The fact that Canada’s ability to supply itself with energy has been existentially threatened due to the actions of one American governor speaks to the need for a more robust energy network in Canada. Had the Trudeau Liberals’ not terminated the Energy East pipeline, things would not be as precarious as they currently are for the integrity of our national energy network. The federal must take steps to ensure that Canada’s energy needs are met with or without the United States. That starts with increasing domestic transport capacity for oil and gas in Canada.
Erin O’Toole wrote a great piece on Enbridge Line 5 for the National Post. If you have not read it yet, I encourage you to do so at the link below.
Newest Canadian Report Finds Big Risks on Liberal Institutional Daycare Proposal
A national single-model, or one size-fits-all, child daycare system had been debated since the 1970s and was part of the Paul Martin Liberal government proposal during the 2006 federal election when they were defeated by the incoming Stephen Harper Conservatives. In that federal election, the conservatives earned the right to govern partly on the promise to abandon the Martin Liberal proposal in favour of the Universal Child Care Benefit or UCCB that created the now well known and broadly accepted monthly direct-to-parent payments to meet childcare costs.
In Budget 2021, the federal Liberals are proposing to direct more than $30 billion over 5 years and $9.2 billion annually thereafter. Is this enough? And will it meet the stated goals? Moreover, can the Canadian taxpayer afford it? The Cardus Institute has produced a report based partly on peer reviewed data called, Look Before You Leap, and clearly the numbers don’t add up. The 50-50 cost sharing model implied by the federal government would result in very large deficits for provincial governments, including Alberta.
The benefits of high quality childcare are broadly researched and accepted. But high quality comes with a steeper cost to the taxpayer and there are no shortcuts. The drivers of costs analyzed in the Cardus report include staff-to-child ratios, salary growth for staff at childcare centres, and per space payments for childcare spaces. Labour is indeed the highest cost. The Quebec model is found to be a baseline system (not universal) that offers low quality care and was found in peer reviewed research to have negative outcomes for children and parents.
Cardus estimates that a low cost model would cost $17 billion annually across Canada. Once you deduct the $9.2 billion commitment from the federal government and deduct the expected $3.6 billion fees that parents will be it would leave a $4.2 billion unfunded liability for the provinces. The high-cost model unfunded liability grows to a whopping $23.3 billion. For Alberta, this means costs between $642 million and up to $3.3 billion. In a year where the provincial government ran a record-breaking $20 plus billion deficit, this proposal from the federal government would further the debt hole. Research reviewed by Cardus from 1984, 1998 and 2009 gives a potential range in costs of $12.1 billion to $26.1 billion.
Safe to say that the federal government proposal is not a 50-50 cost sharing proposal, nor is it wisely setup to avoid runaway costs that could break provincial budgets. The federal government proposal also ignores the changing nature of work with up to 1 in 4 Canadians working non-standard hours such as evening or night shifts as well as weekends. The federal government has only set aside 10% of their childcare spaces for such non-standard hours. The Liberal government proposal while sounding enticing comes with very large costs for potentially a low quality baseline childcare system. This is not the universal proposal from the 1970s. In the coming weeks and months, as more details emerge about the federal government proposal, I will be reviewing them with my conservative colleagues and offering our own counter proposals that meets the needs of working parents without breaking the budgets of provincial governments. Canada and the provinces are facing unprecedented fiscal headwinds with large deficits and a total national debt approaching $2 trillion within a decade.
Check out the Cardus report on the childcare proposal from the federal government in Budget 2021 as well as overall benefits and drawbacks of universal systems at the link below.