Skip to content
AEFA - Standing Committee

Foreign Affairs and International Trade


THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

EVIDENCE


OTTAWA, Wednesday, February 28, 2024

The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade met with videoconference this day at 4:13 p.m. [ET] to study Bill C-57, An Act to implement the 2023 Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine.

Senator Peter M. Boehm (Chair) in the chair.

[Translation]

The Chair: Good morning, honourable senators. My name is Peter Boehm. I’m a senator from Ontario and chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

Before starting, I would like to invite the committee members participating in today’s meeting to introduce themselves, starting on my left.

Senator Gerba: Amina Gerba from Quebec.

[English]

Senator Ravalia: Mohamed Ravalia, Newfoundland and Labrador.

Senator McNair: John McNair, New Brunswick.

Senator Kutcher: Stan Kutcher, Nova Scotia.

Senator Greene: Stephen Greene, Nova Scotia.

Senator Woo: Yuen Pau Woo, British Columbia.

Senator Harder: Peter Harder, Ontario.

Senator Boniface: Gwen Boniface, Ontario.

Senator Coyle: Mary Coyle, Antigonish, Nova Scotia.

Senator Richards: David Richards, New Brunswick.

The Chair: Thank you very much, and welcome, colleagues, and also welcome to our visiting Senators Kutcher and McNair to this meeting. I would like to welcome all Canadians who may be watching us across the country today as we begin our study of Bill C-57, An Act to implement the 2023 Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine.

This afternoon we are pleased to welcome, by video conference from Toronto, Zenon Potichny, President, Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce. Welcome, Mr. Potichny.

Before we hear your remarks and proceed to questions and answers, I wish to remind members to refrain from leaning in too closely to their microphone or to remove their earpiece when doing so. This will avoid any sound feedback that could negatively impact the committee staff and our interpreters who, of course, wear earpieces to do their job.

Before we proceed to Mr. Potichny’s opening statement, I wish to advise members that Ukraine’s ambassador to Canada, Her Excellency Yuliya Kovaliv, who was scheduled to appear today could not because she is currently in Ukraine. The ambassador was eager to appear, and we were keen to welcome her, of course, but while she made every effort, connecting from Ukraine as she is travelling through the country was just not possible.

Also, I want to inform members that the committee extended invitations to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Business Council of Canada to appear on this panel, but both organizations declined.

With that, Mr. Potichny, we are now ready to hear your opening remarks, which will be followed by questions from senators. Mr. Potichny, you have the floor.

Zenon Potichny, President, Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce: Esteemed members of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, as the President of the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce, I am honoured to address you today regarding Bill C-57, which pertains to the modernization of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement, or CUFTA. This proposed modernization is a crucial step towards fostering greater economic cooperation and addressing contemporary trade challenges between our two countries.

Since coming into force in 2017, the existing CUFTA has laid a solid foundation for bilateral trade between Canada and Ukraine. However, in today’s rapidly evolving global economy, it is imperative that we adapt and enhance our trade agreements to unlock new opportunities and address emerging challenges. The modernized CUFTA achieves precisely that by introducing several key changes and enhancements that are beneficial for both Canada and Ukraine.

First and foremost, the modernized CUFTA embraces a progressive approach in the service sector, promoting greater openness and flexibility for service providers from both countries. This liberalization not only expands opportunities but also encourages innovation and growth in service industries. Furthermore, the strengthened investment protection provisions instill greater confidence and certainty for investors from both Canada and Ukraine, fostering increased investment flows and economic growth.

The inclusion of digital trade provisions is particularly significant in today’s digital economy. By facilitating digital trade between our two nations, we are nurturing innovation and unlocking new avenues for economic collaboration.

Moreover, the expansion of duty-free access for goods, coupled with simplified entry for business travellers, streamlines trade processes and reduces barriers, thus enhancing business mobility and cooperation.

CUFTA provides Canadian businesses national treatment when competing for public tenders. Rules on origin of goods are clarified with cumulation of origin, so countries that Canada already has free trade agreements with, like the EU, the U.K. and Israel, are also included in that.

The modernized CUFTA aligns with international standards, signalling Ukraine’s commitment to modern trade practices and potential future integration into broader trade blocs.

In conclusion, the modernization of CUFTA represents a significant advancement in deepening economic ties between Canada and Ukraine. It will unlock new opportunities, stimulate economic growth and strengthen the partnership between our two nations for years to come. It will also enable Canadian businesses to participate in the efforts to rebuild Ukraine.

The Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce has organized two Rebuild Ukraine conferences, in 2022 and 2023, both very successful, with a lot of interest from Canadian businesses. That’s why a modernized CUFTA needs to be adopted. It will definitely help in rebuilding Ukraine.

Thank you for considering the importance of this modernization effort. I am confident it will yield substantial benefits for both Canada and Ukraine. I am also calling upon the Canadian government and you, honourable senators, to continue supporting Ukraine, which is even more critical now at this juncture. Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Potichny.

Before we go to questions, I want to go back and correct an error I made earlier, and that is that Senator McNair is here as a member of the committee, replacing Senator Marty Deacon, and it is Senator Kutcher who is the visitor. I would like to acknowledge that Senator Housakos of Quebec, a member of the committee, has joined the meeting.

We will begin, senators. As always, I remind you that you have a maximum of four minutes for the first round, including both questions and answers, so please try to keep your questions as precise as possible. That will usually allow for a longer answer. We will start with the deputy chair of the committee and the sponsor of the bill.

Senator Harder: Welcome to our committee. I very much welcome your support for this legislation.

I wonder if you could expand with respect to the Rebuild Ukraine work that the Chamber of Commerce is undertaking. Could you give us a bit more flavour of the mood among potential Canadian investors in Ukraine, given the situation, and how we can expect a strengthened economic relationship, even in the circumstances that Ukraine faces?

Mr. Potichny: Thank you very much for your question.

As I mentioned, we organized two Rebuild Ukraine conferences, one of them in November 2022, which was the year of the start of the war, and the last one was in November 2023. When we thought about it, we had a lot of discussion on our board, and even our board members were saying, “How can you talk about rebuilding Ukraine when there is still a war going on in Ukraine?” But if you look at it, organizing and thinking of investing in and trading with Ukraine will take much more than just a few months or weeks. That’s why we wanted to make sure we get Canadian businesses, Ukrainian businesses, and Ukrainian and Canadian politicians all into the room to start discussing some of the ideas, the issues and the problems are. That is why we have done it. It was very successful. We had 350 companies and participants from government in 2022, and we actually had 400 participating in 2023.

In 2023, we did it for a day and a half, and for the second part of the conference — that half a day — was all on the digital economy and services, which is all the stuff that you actually have in this modernized CUFTA, which is so crucial for the new and modern economy. Ukraine is extremely well digitized and is doing well in IT and digitization sectors. Some of the Canadian businesses that met with them were surprised and said that Ukraine is further in some of these areas than Canada is.

Again, we already have a few companies signing memoranda of understanding. Now we have a few companies that are looking seriously at some projects. I don’t want to really throw the names yet on the table, because it is up to them to do it, but we have connected them and brought them together. There is a project — a very large hydroelectric project — that could be happening in Ukraine with a large company from Canada, in the range of probably a billion and a half U.S. dollars. Again, Canada is very successful in this area of business. There are companies here that have done it all over the world. As the company told us, they’re not afraid to go into areas that are a little bit complicated, such as areas in Ukraine under the war. But you have to remember that not all of Ukraine is being attacked and bombarded every day. A majority of the clashes and the war is happening in eastern Ukraine, so even in the west, you already have some rebuilding.

We have companies from Prince Edward Island that connected at the conference in 2022 and then have gone to Ukraine and started a Canadian potato-growing business. They have already harvested one year of potatoes, and they have expanded now with special equipment for storing, because that’s one of the big problems when you have a lot of potatoes but not the proper storage facilities or logistics. That business is now going into the second year.

These are just some examples of —

The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Potichny. We are out of time on that segment.

Senator Ravalia: Thank you very much for being here today.

Recognizing that the modernization of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement holds a unique potential to engage Canadian companies in the reconstruction of Ukraine, I was wondering what you see as the largest barriers with respect to this engagement, and how would the modernization agreement reduce or eliminate them?

Mr. Potichny: Thank you for your question.

Just looking at the two conferences we have done on rebuilding Ukraine, the areas of largest interest are definitely agriculture, energy and infrastructure. Those are huge areas that will need rebuilding. Infrastructure in Ukraine is being attacked — specifically, energy infrastructure — by the Russians. As we know, Canada is top in the world when it comes to infrastructure, construction and rebuilding. It is the same with ag businesses in Canada.

The IT sector is another very possible business between the two countries. As I mentioned before, it will not only help Ukraine in rebuilding areas but will also strengthen some of the IT business in Canada. I see companies already forming joint ventures and companies, and some of the Ukrainian companies are even starting to open offices in Canada. I know that because they are becoming members of the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce, for which we are happy. I see that cooperation is really growing in that area.

How will a modernized CUFTA help with this? Again, these new chapters in the modernized CUFTA have never been there before. If we look at services and the rebuilding of Ukraine, which will require a lot of contracts and rebuilding, that is the sector that has not been covered in the old CUFTA. It was a good free trade agreement, but it was mainly related to trade tariffs. That was the main focus at that time. Now, at the end of February of this year, most of those tariffs will be gone, so we have to focus now on services, the digital economy and all those other areas that the new modernized CUFTA is covering.

Senator Ravalia: Thank you.

Very quickly, the third Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment, RDNA3, which was a document jointly prepared by the Ukrainian government, the World Bank, the European Commission and the United Nations, set out a base foundational element for rebuilding. Have you partnered with other international agencies or other countries with respect to expanding this?

Mr. Potichny: We are working very closely with a lot of Ukrainian institutions. There is a special institution that has been set up for investment, basically assistance in investment in the country, UkraineInvest, which basically takes the investor by the hand and helps them with all the things they have to do in Ukraine.

Major investors — big investors — are basically helped along the way to ensure there is no corruption involved and no funny business, because we hear complaints all the time about corruption. I’m not saying corruption is gone, but what I see is that, from the 1990s when we started the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce and started some of the business there until now, there is an absolutely huge difference. There are a lot of institutions that are looking after that and making sure that there is no corruption in the government and the institutions.

I think you may be talking about this foundation that is working with the European Union on rebuilding Ukraine. I know that they are working closely on setting up the main sort of chapters of what needs to go first — what expenses, budgeting and all of that.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Potichny. I’m sorry to interrupt you again. We will be moving on. I want to acknowledge that Senator Gold of Quebec has joined the committee meeting.

Senator Gerba: Thank you, Mr. Potichny, for being here. I will ask my question in French, so I hope you have translation ready.

Mr. Potichny: I think so, yes.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: The Canadian government has introduced new chapters regarding people, small and medium-sized enterprises and Indigenous peoples that it believes could:

[…] improve the level of business participation and employment conditions for women, Indigenous peoples and other traditionally under-represented groups.

Could you outline how, in concrete terms, this agreement will also benefit underrepresented groups in Canada and, furthermore, how Canadian small and medium-sized enterprises will be able to take advantage of new business opportunities through this agreement, particularly for the reconstruction of Ukraine?

[English]

Mr. Potichny: Thank you very much for your question. Yes, definitely, again, these are new chapters in the modernized free trade agreement.

I will start with the fact that we had a project called the Canada-Ukraine Trade and Investment Support Project, or CUTIS. It was a project supported by the Canadian government. The Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce and the Conference Board of Canada from Ottawa were managing this project. The project was actually specifically designed to help small and medium companies from Ukraine be able to trade in Canada. In that project, as I remember it today, there was a huge part on the assistance and help to women and girls. I remember that, for every part of the project we went through, we had to record and later present the involvement of women and girls in the business, including how many in management, ownership and working. Therefore, gender and gender equality was also involved in that part.

We have a lot of involvement with small and medium companies coming from Canada to Ukraine. If you look at the membership of the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce, it has about 100 companies from Canada registered and 100 companies from Ukraine. The majority of these companies are small and medium companies, or SMEs. We work very closely with SMEs, and we have a special committee in the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce that handles the work of SMEs. With the new chapters in there explaining some of the ways and things that can be done to improve that area, I am 100% sure we will do much more work with small and medium businesses and definitely work on gender equality, women and Indigenous people.

We have some Indigenous Ukrainian people, as we call them in Ukraine. Some are called Lemkos. They are people from the mountains. As you know, we have Crimean Tatars, who are the original people in Crimea. These people are also always open, so we will try to connect the Indigenous people from Canada with these special groups in Ukraine.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Senator McNair: Thank you, Mr. Potichny, for appearing before the committee today.

Despite the political rhetoric about carbon pricing in the agreement, Ukraine, as I understand it, has had its own carbon price in place since 2011, long before this free trade agreement was ever negotiated and also long before Canada had introduced carbon pricing domestically in 2018. My understanding is that part of the reason Ukraine implemented its own carbon price is because it is actively seeking membership in the European Union, which has had its own cap-and-trade system since at least 2005.

I have two questions: If Ukraine had disagreed to the carbon pricing provision during free trade agreement negotiations, what message would that have sent to the EU? How important is this provision to Ukraine’s EU membership aspirations?

Mr. Potichny: Thank you for the question. It is an important question.

Obviously, I’ve seen the discussions, and we — the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce — are even on record saying that we were disappointed that the modernized free trade agreement was not voted in unanimously.

Yes, Ukraine does have a carbon tax. I don’t remember exactly when they implemented it, but in 2022, I believe, they actually increased it from 30 cents per tonne of CO2 to US$1 per tonne of CO2. It is very small compared to everyone else in the world, including Canada and the European countries. In order to move forward with membership in the European Union, they will definitely have to have the carbon tax applied, and when they join, they will definitely have to increase it. When Canada put that in there, I don’t think it was making anything new. It’s not pushing Ukrainians to the brink of collapse because of the fee. They will have to join on European terms.

To respond to your question, I think that it is very serious and important to Europe to show that Ukraine is ready to move to the European Union and will join on some of these terms and other stuff that we have to do. Therefore, I think it’s only very positive.

Senator McNair: Thank you.

Senator Housakos: Actually, Canadians in 2024 would love to be paying a percentage of carbon tax compared to what Ukrainians are paying, sir, because Canadians right now are being pummelled by carbon tax compared to our Ukrainian friends.

My question has more to do with specific trade. In my humble opinion, I don’t see this agreement being more than navel-gazing, and I honestly don’t see that many changes in the agreement as opposed to what we have had for a number of years.

One thing that does concern me is that Canada has put into place sanctions against Russia — as has the United States and most European nations — in a serious fashion, as we should have in order to support the Ukrainian war effort against Russia. However, simultaneously, I see a country like Russia doing business with other nations who have not taken the defence of Ukraine in this particular war and who have taken advantage of the fact of our sanctions by enhancing their trade — countries like Turkey and China. It’s concerning for a legislator like myself when those same countries are doing business with Ukraine and enhancing their business with Ukraine — these countries who are indirectly supporting Russia, which is at war with our Ukrainian friends. Don’t you see there is a little bit of a double standard here on the part of Canada when we sanction the Russians on the premise of engaging in war with Ukraine, yet we don’t sanction some of the nations that are ramping up their trade with Russia, like China and Turkey? If we’re serious about defending Ukraine at the expense of the Russian war effort, shouldn’t we also be collectively taking economic sanctions against those partners that are supporting Putin and Russia?

Mr. Potichny: I’ll be very frank. You can probably hear in my accent that I am actually a Canadian Ukrainian. To me, to tell you honestly, yes, I would love to see sanctions against all of these countries, including China, Turkey, India and others. They’re not playing the game the way Canada is playing. Now, this is very much a political issue, global politics, where politicians like you and others need to force them to do the right thing. Absolutely, it’s not fair that this is happening.

At the same time, I don’t think we can sit on the sidelines and basically just say, “Well, because we’re not sanctioning other countries, we will let Ukraine just fall apart.” I think we all have to stand behind Ukraine and help them as long as we can and as much as we can. We need to keep on reminding the other countries, and we need to think of other ways — we don’t want to totally sanction them — of making sure that they see and understand that Canada is playing the right game.

A lot of other countries, obviously, are playing the right game. I would say if you compare how many are against and how many are for, still the majority is probably for Ukraine, and they know what is important for Europe in general, the democratic world, the free world and so on. At the end of the day, the result will be shown.

Senator Boniface: Thank you very much for joining us.

I wanted to follow up on your earlier comments around corruption. I’m grateful that you put it on the table. I wondered if you wanted to elaborate a little more in terms of what you’re hearing from Canadian companies in terms of what changes they’re seeing on that issue and if you are seeing any hesitancy on that issue for people to be prepared to invest, as Canadians, into Ukraine.

Mr. Potichny: Thank you for your question.

As I said before, Ukraine has changed tremendously when it comes to fighting corruption. Besides being president of the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce, I have done business in Ukraine for many years, and I see myself how Ukraine has changed. Yes, at the beginning, it was a “Wild East” and things were very different and very corrupt, but I will say again, things have changed. The Ukrainian government, the Ukrainian president, everybody, is really trying to curb that as much as we can.

There are still cases of certain leadership attacks, especially during the war, where some of the committees were basically closed because there’s no time to have all the committees running in the Parliament or even in the government. Yes, there’s less and less control, but there are other institutions that have been set up — and there are many of them — to watch for that and to have their ears open. In the old days, in the 1990s, you really didn’t have anybody to go to. Now you have specific institutions, specific places you can go and put your claim in, put your complaint in. There’s no way that your claim or complaint has disappeared. They have to answer that, and they have to study that.

The business ombudsman, as you probably know, former Canadian ambassador Roman Waschuk is now the business ombudsman in Ukraine. He has been there for many years, and I have discussions very often with him on certain cases, and he will tell you the same thing, that things have changed. Even for them, as an institution, as the office of the business ombudsman, the doors are always open to listen, to discuss and resolve the issues.

I don’t think it’s a major issue in Ukraine now. But, yes, maybe because everybody got used to this complaint about corruption, that question is always thrown around and always asked. If there is some issue, we just have to tell them where they can go and how we can help them to get these things resolved. There are many cases of some issues that have been resolved, which is a positive sign.

Senator Boniface: Thank you very much.

Senator Kutcher: Thank you, Mr. Potichny, for being with us. I’d like to acknowledge the good work being done by the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Potichny: Thank you.

Senator Kutcher: For this question, I would ask you to consider economic activities that are not necessarily being driven primarily by a reconstruction focus. What specific sectors that Canadian companies are currently active in Ukraine do you think may have an opportunity to substantively grow as a result of CUFTA? The opposite side of that coin is, what are the specific sectors that Canadian companies are not currently very active in but might be invigorated to increase their activities and thus grow because of this agreement?

Mr. Potichny: Thank you for your question.

For areas not involved as much in rebuilding, one example that I mentioned before is agriculture. Ukraine is still growing grain and is one of the top growers of grain. Vegetable oil is produced in Ukraine. In the agricultural area, even though in the eastern part it is very difficult because some of these agricultural lands are not possible to develop right now because of the mines and everything else, the rest of the country still produces a lot of agricultural products.

I mentioned one Canadian company, and there are actually a few. There’s a company from British Columbia that has been working there for many years now. Canadian companies can actually move into the agricultural area, helping Ukrainians develop and produce products from this raw agricultural material. Rather than sending wheat and sunflower seeds away, they can produce value-added products. That’s what Ukraine is very much open to and very much interested in. Right now, yes, they produce a lot of agricultural production, but a lot of raw materials are basically shipped around and don’t give Ukraine as much return as possible. Canadians are very good in producing products in Canada, the final products, goods, and I think they can get involved in this much more. There is interest, and they’re getting involved.

In the energy sector, I’m a bit surprised because I always thought that Canadian companies would get more involved in the energy sector. Besides atomic energy, oil and gas was an area that started to develop. I know there were many approaches to Canadian companies to go and work in Ukraine, but somehow, it did not catch on. I think Canada can help a lot. Again, we’re moving away from oil and gas, and everybody is looking more to solar and hydroelectric, but I think Canada, with their expertise, can still get more involved in that area.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Mr. Potichny, I have a question for you. It relates to ISDS, investor-state dispute settlements. That is a feature of more modern free trade agreements, and it was an issue of some contention in the negotiations for the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, which is the Canada-Europe trade agreement. Have you received any concerns from your membership or others about those particular provisions?

Mr. Potichny: All I heard were actually positive things about the protection of investment. I think the old agreement was called FIPA and was signed in 1994 or sometime around then. Even right now, with some of the things that are happening between Ukraine and Russia, a lot of the losses happening between Ukraine and Russia are based on a lack of protection under these investment-protection agreements.

For example, in oil and gas, especially in Crimea, the Black Sea and Sea of Azov, Ukrainian projects were basically taken away by Russians, Naftogaz of Ukraine. These things were still happening when Russia took over Crimea in 2014. Some of these cases just came to a conclusion in The Hague, and Ukraine has won a majority of them in that court based on these investment-protection agreements. The collection of funds from Russia is another problem and another step, but I think eventually it will be collected as well. Everybody was watching this Ukrainian-Russian investment-protection agreement, and it eventually did work and help Ukrainians recover something, or at least win the judgment on these things.

The protection of investment between Canada and Ukraine is also very important. If it got improved — I don’t know the exact details of what the European Union and Canada were talking about — Ukrainians are very happy that there is an additional protection under the new modernized CUFTA.

The Chair: Thank you very much. We will move to round two.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: Mr. Potichny, when watching the news, we realize that poultry products from Ukraine are often discussed, particularly in France, where chicken from Ukraine seems to pose a threat for farmers. At first glance, I believe that Bill C-57 protects this sector, namely supply management, which includes dairy products, eggs and poultry, of course. Can you tell us whether this exclusion has created any significant challenges or threats to finalizing this new agreement?

[English]

Mr. Potichny: Thank you very much.

To tell you the truth, I’m not totally familiar with that part of the agreement, but I know that, even within our members, there are companies that are working on dairy products and poultry. I know they’re bringing that from Ukraine to Canada, but I’m not familiar with the details. I thought the quotas they were allowed in the first free trade agreement were somehow increased, but I’m not quite sure. We definitely see a bit more poultry and cheese — dairy products — moving from Ukraine to Canada.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: Actually, I believe that sector was spared in the bill before us, so I gather you were unaware of that.

In fact, I’d like to know if there’s any danger that poultry products from Ukraine will be… Actually, that’s not included in this agreement. Is there any risk that this could jeopardize the agreement?

[English]

Mr. Potichny: A threat to Canada?

Senator Gerba: To Ukrainian farmers.

Mr. Potichny: I know, for example, that there’s a lot of trade between the European Union and Ukraine. Again, I don’t know the details of their free trade agreement, but I think there is actually even more trade in poultry and dairy between the European Union and Ukraine. For some reason, as I remember, I thought the quotas were also increased in the modernized Canada-Ukraine agreement. I don’t think there’s a threat to Canada that Ukraine is going to flood the Canadian market. For some reason, I thought it did increase the quotas.

Senator Harder: Before I get to my question, I just want to confirm that goods were not part of the refurbishment or modernization of this agreement, so the questions that were addressed are frankly not relevant to this discussion.

I want to ask you to comment on how the rebuilding of Ukraine is being regionalized. Under the broad direction of the president, the Deputy Prime Minister for Restoration of Ukraine, Oleksandr Kubrakov, is establishing centres within the regions for promoting business activity directly as opposed to having it all go through Kyiv. Is that something that your companies are experiencing and are therefore having to adjust a more regional strategy to their own approach to economic development in Ukraine?

Mr. Potichny: Thank you for your question.

Yes, definitely there’s a move to have regions directly involved in rebuilding. I think it’s positive. It avoids a lot of bureaucracy going to a central place and them deciding what to do, where to allocate the funds and where to rebuild. The way they’re moving in the idea of the rebuilding of Ukraine is to actually decentralize the decisions. A lot of the projects are being discussed on a regional basis, directly with either the oblasts, or provinces, as you know, them here, or even cities and towns with regard to building in certain areas.

I notice that some of the countries helping Ukraine have taken this regional approach. One country takes Odessa as the area to work with and rebuild, and some countries will take, for example, the Kyiv oblast and work with that province. Even countries outside of Ukraine are coming in — not just businesses — and working on this kind of regional division, which I think is positive.

Senator Housakos: My colleague Senator Harder is interested in rebuilding Ukraine. I’m interested in making sure the Russians don’t continue to destroy and occupy Ukraine. What I’d like from my government is to make sure you’re militarily armed in order to beat them back.

Second, Canada has the capacity to be a world leader in energy, in LNG. We have a government that ideologically refuses to develop that. Given the fact that we’re sitting on huge deposits of natural gas — we have coal; we have the technology — how valuable would LNG be right now if Canada were able to ship tonnes and tonnes of it to Ukraine and, more importantly, tonnes to Western Europe, the Balkans, all these regions that are beholden for energy to Russia?

Mr. Potichny: Thank you very much.

It is an important question and an important situation. Rebuilding will happen, and it will start happening in some areas, but the real rebuilding of Ukraine is after Ukraine wins the war. Definitely, all countries, including Canada, have to give them as much military and financial assistance as possible to make sure that Russia does not occupy Ukraine. As we all know, Putin is not going to stop with Ukraine; he will go after Poland, the Baltic States and other countries. These are NATO countries. Eventually, you will have to put boots on the ground, which is worse than putting in some equipment.

On LNG, I absolutely agree with you. In Canada, we have missed that opportunity. Over the last couple of years, during the war, Americans have sold a lot of LNG to Ukraine and other European countries. European countries are obviously trying not to buy from Russia. They have agreed to lower their purchasing. Many countries totally refuse to buy gas from Russia, but they have to replace it with something. LNG was one of the huge opportunities, and the U.S. has really taken advantage of that. Unfortunately, in Canada, we were not ready. If we wait another few years, we might totally miss the opportunity; I agree.

The Chair: There are no other senators who wish to ask questions, so I would like to thank Mr. Potichny for being with us today. Thank you very much for your testimony. I think we learned a lot from your comments.

Colleagues, tomorrow at 11:30, we will hear from the sponsor of the bill — other than Senator Harder, of course — the Honourable Mary Ng, Minister of Export Promotion, International Trade and Economic Development, who will be appearing virtually from Abu Dhabi, where she is attending a World Trade Organization meeting.

Following the minister’s appearance, the committee will move to clause-by-clause consideration of the bill. On that note, since this is a bill to implement a free trade agreement, I would encourage members to reserve any observations they might have for debate at third reading rather than appending them to our report.

(The committee adjourned.)

Back to top