Foreign Affairs Committee on Dec. 13th, 2006

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Reference number 2564606. It relates to line 31 on page 2.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Go ahead, Mr. Martin. You move your amendment; it's clause 4.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

I am moving the amendment to clause 4, adding the following after line 31 on page 2:

(3) In calculating Canada's official development assistance contribution in Government of Canada publications, the competent minister or the Governor in Council shall consider only development assistance as defined by this Act that meets the criteria in subsection (1), and humanitarian assistance. (4) Nothing in this Act shall be construed so as to limit or restrict the activities of the International Development Research Centre.

Subclause (3) is self-explanatory and relates to what we've already defined within the content of this bill.

Subclause (4) deals with IDRC. IDRC has its own act, and to restrict the activities of IDRC would be extremely not in the interests of our country and the great work IDRC does. With respect to accountability and oversight, this already exists within its own act. So to allay any of this committee's concerns with respect to the oversight of IDRC, that already exists, because IDRC functions under its own act and is subject to the normal accounting and accountability procedures of entities such as IDRC.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right.

So this would add to clause 4, entitled “Development assistance”, as an addition to what we have there now, subclauses (3) and (4).

Mr. McKay, did you want to speak to that amendment?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

No. I think it's reflective of the testimony we heard and it's far more precise, given our previous changes in the amendments. I see this as particularly responsive to the IDRC folks, who were quite concerned. But when you look at the overall scheme of what we're trying to accomplish here, this is exactly what we want to do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Patry.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

There is a difference between the French and the English. In the English they say “to limit or restrict”; in French, it's

only “de restreindre“.

I would just like to be sure, because this is going to become law, that “Nothing in this Act shall be construed so as to limit or restrict the activities” or the financing. I want to be sure that they are also going to get their money.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

So there's something missing there in the French?

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Yes, something is missing in the French.

(4) La présente loi n'a pas pour effet de restreindre [...]

What I would like is to be sure that they are going to get their funding. I just want to be on the safe side with that. So it would read,

Nothing in this Act shall be construed so as to limit the funding or restrict the activities of the International Development Research Centre.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Menzies.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

I guess I'm concerned that once again this appears to me to be what we just discounted in the last amendment, by not accepting the last amendment: “shall consider only development assistance as defined by this Act”. I still argue that we got our definitions wrong yesterday, and I opposed those, but I think this will restrict us once again in disbursements and reporting of those disbursements and being actually recognized for what those disbursements are.

Once again, we may actually be at 0.7%, but we can't tell the world we are, because we've restricted it in this amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right. We'll keep that in mind.

I want to go back to Mr. Patry's comment and just see if our table has the addition that we should insert there.

[Gerald Schmitz]

“[...] de limiter ou de restreindre [...]“.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

“[...] de limiter le financement ou de restreindre les activités [...]“

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

If that's a friendly amendment, then I accept the correction.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, it's the difference between the French and the English.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Pas de problème. I accept Dr. Patry's amendment.

[James Lee, Committee Researcher]

But then you'd have to change the English as well. He said “limit the financing”.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

It's “to limit the funding or restrict the activities”—the funding, le financement.

I don't want to limit the funding, just to be sure that—

[Gerald Schmitz]

So it's just adding “the funding” and—

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

It's “the funding or restrict the activities”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Do you want to write that down, Mr. Patry?

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

We're just adding two words in English, because there's something missing in French. In English, it would read:

Nothing in this Act shall be construed so as to limit the funding or restrict the activities of the International Development Research Centre.

Okay?

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

So it's just adding those two words.

[Marc Toupin, Procedural Clerk]

And in French?