The silence is deafening from a Canadian government paralyzed and unwilling to say anything that might offend China, whether it’s the genocide of Uyghur people or a new Hong Kong law that could bar people, including foreigners, from leaving the territory.

Of course, there are the “Two Michaels” — Canadians Kovrig and Spavor, arbitrarily detained in retaliation for the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou — who have been in jail for 872 days. It is horrific for them and their families.

By all appearances, China is winning this hostage-diplomacy war.

Come Aug. 1, the more than 300,000 Canadians living in Hong Kong will no longer be assured that they will be able to leave, especially if they were among the more than a million people who participated in the many peaceful pro-democracy marches and rallies in 2019.

Hong Kong’s puppet government passed legislation earlier this week giving its immigration department broad powers to forbid people from leaving, including tourists or other foreign nationals. For those whose exit is barred, there will be no independent review process of the decisions.

Intentionally vague, the legislation is an extension of the draconian National Security Law imposed last summer. Under it, there have already been high-profile convictions of democracy activists, including Martin Lee, publisher Jimmy Lai, Albert Ho and Yeung Sum on a variety of charges from unlawful assembly to subversion, separatism, and colluding with foreign forces.

Canada’s silence isn’t because passage of the immigration law was unexpected. If there is a surprise, it’s the muted response from Chinese-Canadian activists, who warned of this months ago. There is a weariness brought on by the federal government’s reticence.

Activists recently tried and failed to get Liberal support for a motion condemning the Uyghur genocide — it was passed unanimously with Liberals abstaining.

Ongoing efforts to get Canada to follow other countries’ lead by blacklisting companies linked to the Chinese government and its military have so far resulted in nothing.

It is worth noting that the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board has a $57-million stake in the state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corporation, a company on the U.S. list of companies that institutional investors are forbidden to invest in.

Also to no effect has been the lobby to get Canada to use its existing laws that allow it to sanction Chinese individuals who have committed human rights abuses or been involved in significant corruption.

“We’re just tired, that’s all,” said Jody Chan, the advocacy and governmental affairs director for Alliance Canada Hong Kong. “We’re currently preparing our testimony for the foreign affair’s subcommittee on international human rights, so we’re taxed. We’re also super-drained from the onslaught of attacks from trolls and United Front (Chinese government) actors.”

In a February

brief

to the parliamentary standing committee on citizenship and immigration, the alliance urged the government to prepare for Hong Kong’s immigration law by creating a dedicated asylum pathway for those fleeing prosecution or persecution, modifying private sponsorship and family reunification allowing extended family to resettle here, expediting the backlog of new and pending claims, and devising a plan to support Canadians and their families who need to renew permanent residence status or make applications.

Those measures were echoed by Canadian Labour Congress president Hassan Yussuff, and Winnie Ng, chair of the Toronto Association for Democracy in China, in an opinion piece published this week.

Nothing has been done.

It has left many Hongkongers — Canadian passport holders, permanent residency card holders, and others — in a fearful quandary.

If immigration lawyer Richard Kurland is asked by Hong Kong-Canadians for advice, he tells them to apply now to extend their passports while they can, have all of their Hong Kong-issued documents in hand (birth certificates, school records, etc.), and open Canadian bank accounts.

Contrast this with Britain. In January, it opened its doors to the estimated five million Hongkongers with British National Overseas cards, who account for 70 per cent of Hong Kong’s population. They can now live and work there, and after five years apply for citizenship.

Britain budgeted $102 million to create a dozen "Welcome Hubs" across the country to help new arrivals find homes, schools, jobs, or to set up a business.

Sounds a bit like what Canada did in 2016 in response to the Syrian refugee crisis, doesn’t it?

Aside from it being the right thing to do from a humanitarian perspective, Britain’s government figures it will mean a much-needed $68.5-billion boost to its economy.

So, here’s a thought: If the Liberal government can’t get onboard with the purely humanitarian response of ensuring Hong Kong-Canadians make it safely home or take a principled human rights response to persecution of democracy activists, maybe a crass economic argument might hold some sway.

Already, Canada has benefitted from turmoil in the once-vibrant global financial centre. Last summer, after the National Security Law was passed, there was a surge in capital flowing out of Hong Kong. Last year, Reuters reported that electronic money transfers from Hong Kong to Canada hit a record high, at nearly $43.6 billion, according to FINTRAC, Canada’s anti-money laundering agency.

The target for the Liberal government’s recently announced immigration plan is 400,000 newcomers every year for the next three years.

It seems obvious that Canada should be making every self-interested effort to bring Hong Kong-Canadians back, as well as encouraging any other young, skilled and entrepreneurial Hongkongers to comes here.

Of course, there are the Two Michaels. But kowtowing to China’s hostage diplomacy hasn’t done anything to get them home, or even gained them regular consular visits.

No wonder the activists are weary.

dbramham@postmedia.com

Twitter:

@bramham_daphne