Canada’s leading research universities, represented by the U15 Canada group, are raising concerns about a proposed foreign influence transparency registry that is part of sweeping anti-foreign interference legislation in the country. The U15 Canada group is urging Members of Parliament to adopt changes to the registry, warning that the current reporting requirements could have a “chilling effect” on international partnerships in research, potentially causing Canada to miss out on cutting-edge opportunities. The proposed transparency registry would require certain individuals to register with the federal government to guard against deceptive or surreptitious acts by foreign entities. Failure to register could result in financial penalties or criminal sanctions.
The U15 Canada group is particularly concerned about the reporting requirements under the transparency registry, given the extensive international networks of research cooperation at research-intensive universities. They argue that it is impossible for these universities to track and report on individual research collaborations within the required 14-day timeframe. The group is calling for greater clarity on how arrangements will be defined under the registry and whether research partnerships, funding agreements, or other international research activities with publicly funded entities or foreign research funding agencies would be captured. They warn that a chilling effect on international research partnerships could harm relationships with international peers and hinder Canada’s ability to cooperate on cutting-edge research.
Universities Canada, representing 96 universities across the country, also submitted concerns about the transparency registry to the committee. They warn that the registry could capture information related to political or governmental processes, including research publications seeking to engage on issues such as foreign policy, governance, economics, climate, and technologies subject to political debate. The organization notes that research publications already have transparency requirements in place, such as disclosure of university affiliation and financial conflicts of interest, and adding further registration requirements could stifle Canadian research and academic freedom.
The Centre for International Governance Innovation submitted a policy brief to the committee, highlighting the country-agnostic nature of the Canadian influence registry, meaning it will not target specific state adversaries like China. The brief points out that the UK has a two-tier system for its influence registry, allowing for more accurate restrictions on selected entities when necessary. Benjamin Fung, a professor at McGill University, supports implementing a similar two-tier model in Canada to provide more accurate restrictions on entities. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association also raised concerns about the broad language in the bill creating the influence registry, warning of potential democratic accountability issues and the possibility of the registry being used to monitor the international engagement of various actors.
Overall, there are widespread concerns from various stakeholders about the potential impact of the proposed foreign influence transparency registry in Canada. While the intention behind the registry is to guard against foreign interference, there are fears that the reporting requirements could harm international research partnerships, stifle academic freedom, and create duplicative administrative processes. Stakeholders are calling for clarity on how arrangements will be defined under the registry, as well as a more targeted approach similar to the UK’s two-tier model. It remains to be seen how these concerns will be addressed as MPs begin reviewing the legislation and potential amendments to the registry.
