Liberals shouldn’t try to muzzle critics
Canadians deserve to know a lot more about why a senior federal official tried to control what two former diplomats could publicly say about China.
Sadly, for anyone who believes in open government, accountability and free speech, this won’t happen.
The federal Liberals on Tuesday used their majority to block opposition party calls for parliamentary hearings into what looks like a blatant attempt by a government functionary to muzzle private citizens on a matter of national interest.
That the Liberals would reject potentially embarrassing public hearings in the lead-up to this fall’s general election is no surprise. But the move is still disappointing and reflects poorly on this government.
That’s because whatever questions remain unanswered, the known facts in the case indicate at least one person in this government went farther than is acceptable in our democracy.
Canadians know that a foreign ministry official contacted two former Canadian ambassadors to China — David Mulroney and Guy Saint-Jacques — and cautioned them against making public statements about China that contradicted the government’s position. The government doesn’t deny this.
Canadians also know the name of that official: Paul Thoppil, the Department of Global Affairs’ assistant deputy minister for Asia Pacific. No one in government disagrees.
In addition, we know Mulroney says he was asked to check with the federal department before making future comments on the Liberals’ China policy. As for Saint-Jacques, he said he was told it would be good if everyone could “speak with one voice to support the strategy of the government.”
Even if this was the extent of what the public knew, alarms should be ringing. While the government may be justified in asking federal employees to “speak with one voice” on government policies, it’s wrong to try to stifle or intimidate former government officials who are now private citizens. It’s a clear abuse of power and violation of our Charter right to free speech.
Yes, it would be different if those former officials might divulge state secrets and there were legitimate national security reasons for limiting their commentary. That’s not the situation here. In fact, Mulroney says the “election environment” was cited as a reason for him towing the Liberal party line. If true, that means Liberal interests, not national interests, were really the heart of this matter.
The Liberals have been floundering for months as they seek the release of two Canadians, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, being imprisoned in deplorable conditions in China on trumped-up espionage charges. Their arrests came last December just days after Canada detained a Chinese tech executive in answer to an American extradition request.
Mulroney and Saint-Jacques have expressed disagreements with the Liberals’ response to Kovrig’s and Spavor’s incarceration. And their criticism must sting. But what makes the phone calls to them even more disturbing is that both men agree they were told the instructions on what they could say had come from the Prime Minister’s Office itself.
The Liberals deny the PMO’s involvement even though they haven’t challenged Mulroney’s account of his conversation with Thoppil. Their best defence seems to be this was all a misunderstanding.
In a better world, Canadians would learn whether Thoppil acted alone or was following instructions and, if this was the case, who gave the orders. Without a hearing, this won’t happen. Nor does it appear anyone will be held accountable for the black eye given to free speech. The Chinese government, which values neither democracy nor free speech, must be looking on in wonder and, perhaps, agreement, at our federal government.