Evidence of meeting #44 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was afghan.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Order.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This is meeting 44 of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, Tuesday, March 20.

Members will be reminded that today's meeting is televised.

We're very pleased to have with us this afternoon the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Hon. Peter MacKay. This is the minister's fifth appearance before our committee in less than a year. He testified before us four times in 2006: March 30, August 1, September 27, and November 5.

We're pleased to have you back again today.

The minister appears today because we've invited him to come and speak on four main issues and motions that have appeared before this committee: the closing of Canadian consulates; the federal government's efforts to ratify the United Nations covenant on the rights and dignity of people with disabilities; the situation in Afghanistan; and the 2007-08 main estimates.

The minister is accompanied today by his appropriate deputy minister and associate deputy minister: Mr. Edwards and Mr. Mulroney, welcome.

I can assure members that following the minister's opening statement, we can ask questions on all four of those main topics of discussion, those motions that have been brought. There is no requirement that we adhere to the agenda on the notice of meeting. The notice merely lists the topics, with no particular order of precedence.

Finally, we hope at the end of this meeting to go in camera for a very short period of time to discuss a few brief points in regard to our study on democratic development, and also to pass the report that will be brought today from our steering subcommittee. We want to be able to give our table the opportunity to go ahead and call some of those witnesses for next week and the few weeks after.

On behalf of the committee, Minister MacKay, thank you for being so responsive to the invitations to appear before our committee and to provide us with news from Canada's new government.

I will now turn the time over to you. Normally we'd have 15 or 20 minutes for a minister, but we recognize that you have those four points to address, so you just take the time. We're pleased that we have two hours with you today.

3:35 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you as well to distinguished colleagues and committee members, officials, and those from the public who are joining us.

Let me begin, Mr. Chair, by thanking this committee for being what I would describe as among the most active, if not the most active, in Parliament. I commend you for the work you do.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to celebrate with you Le jour de la Francophonie and to discuss important elements of the government's foreign policy and the contribution of my department in serving Canada and Canadians.

First, Mr. Chair, a word or two about the government's foreign policy. Our foreign policy is very clear and focused. It is aimed at restoring Canadian leadership in the world. It is focused on priorities, and responsive to the needs in emerging circumstances. And it is implemented through action, not through empty rhetoric or promises that cannot be kept.

The Prime Minister and I have spoken repeatedly about our foreign policy priorities. So have other ministers, so let me restate them. Our priorities are to play a leadership role in peace and reconstruction in Afghanistan; restore Canadian-United States relations to a respectful, businesslike relationship; rebuild our defence capabilities; promote Canada's values of freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law; and ensure Canadian competitiveness through internationally playing a stronger role within our own hemisphere, where we have shared history, substantial interests, and growing people-to-people ties.

Our actions over the past year and more are evidence of a focused foreign policy agenda. It is one that will advance our interests and our values in an increasingly complex world.

I've been asked to address four issues, you're correct, Mr. Chair, and I beg your indulgence; this perhaps will be a longer presentation because of it. The four substantive areas are Afghanistan, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the consolidation of our diplomatic representation abroad, and the department's main estimates, including our report on plans and priorities.

First, Afghanistan. At my last appearance before you, in November, I spoke of a complex, changing world, one in which Canada's interests and values were very much at stake through this mission. I said that Canadian security and prosperity depended on global, economic, and political developments, and on the quality and depth of our engagement with them. As a result, Canada needed to influence and shape the world as best we could.

Nothing has occurred in the time since then for me to change that view. In fact, the intervening months have only strengthened it. Canada's mission in Afghanistan is a central priority of my department. We are committed to it, not just for today but over the longer term.

The Government of Canada is drawing on the skills and determination and courage of the personnel of other government departments as well—most notably, National Defence, Public Safety, RCMP, CIDA, Correctional Service Canada, and Border Services—to help build an Afghanistan where human rights are respected, where development, rule of law, and good governance are taking root.

Let me remind this committee of the reason why the Government of Canada is so committed, so determined, so focused on achieving success in Canada's mission in Afghanistan.

First, a stable Afghanistan, free from extremism, strengthens international security and thus Canada's security. We are there to protect the security of Canada and Canadians by providing stability, security, and development and humanitarian assistance to the people of that country. That's a primary responsibility.

This NATO-led mission is solidly supported by the international community through a UN Security Council mandate. We are there to help the Afghan people and their government implement the Afghanistan Compact, of which we are signatories. The compact commits the international community, along with the Government of Afghanistan and the United Nations, to achieving progress in three interrelated areas: security; governance, which includes the rule of law, human rights, and tackling corruption; and economic and social development.

So how is Canada's mission in Afghanistan doing, and what is our prognosis as spring approaches?

I encourage committee members and all Canadians to read the report that ministers O'Connor, Verner and I tabled in Parliament three weeks ago. It is called “Canada's Mission in Afghanistan: Measuring Progress”.

This report measures progress and identifies what yet needs to be done. It is a frank, realistic assessment. It harbours no illusions about the difficulties that lie between where we are today and where we would like to be over the longer term.

There is real progress that can be measured. It is occurring in expanding security, in building democratic institutions and public infrastructure, and in providing development assistance. There has been Canadian assistance in providing food, water, and basic necessities. The assistance has also gone to schools, to villages, to communities, and to microcredit for individuals, especially women, so that they can start small enterprises and businesses of their own.

I've seen this progress myself. I've taken two trips to Afghanistan, most recently in January, and I've seen the difference Canadian-financed microcredit loans are making for women, allowing them to take their rightful place in Afghan society. I've seen it in the faces of young boys who are learning to be carpenters and tinsmiths thanks to a Canadian project that gives them a trade and a stake in their own future, plus the tools to go out into their communities and begin to work and train others. I've seen it in the eyes of young girls who are going to school for the first time, who display enthusiasm about learning to read, who dream about being teachers themselves. I've seen it in the pride displayed by graduates of a police studies program, graduates who swore to uphold the law, who celebrated and supported and saluted their own country.

This is the progress we are seeing there, Mr. Chair. It gives us cause for optimism and encourages us to continue our efforts. The tough questions we ask in the report should, and do, keep us focused on what works, what challenges are yet to be addressed, and what lessons have been learned thus far.

As you know, the Prime Minister recently announced that Canada is providing an additional $200 million for reconstruction and development in Afghanistan. This is in addition to our annual allocation of $100 million to development activities. That now places Canada among the leading donor nations in Afghanistan. Indeed, Afghanistan is already our number one recipient of Canadian foreign aid.

We're continuing to look for partnership programs with countries like Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands. New money will go to proven Afghanistan-designed and UN-supported programs throughout the country. Performance-based success criteria are part of that decision-making.

What's more, Canadian assistance is helping to kick-start the local economy. Not only does it have the effect of raising people's confidence and hope, but it also gives them a real stake in the continuity and success of Canada-funded initiatives and projects.

Here I'm thinking of our funding for the supply of police uniforms, for example, which were made by the people in the community. I'm thinking of water projects, roads, bridges, and one very unique project that I'll describe for you. A boxcar or a large container—filled with such agricultural implements as hoes and rakes and seeds and rain clothing and boots and the other types of necessities that farmers need—is taken out into a community and locked. The keys are given to a member of that community, an elder or other representative, who decides how they would use it. That aid in a box is instant aid, and it immediately makes a tangible, touchable impression in a community.

One of the additional $200 million to $120 million will go to the Afghanistan reconstruction trust fund administered by the World Bank. Portions of this will go to three successful development programs: the national solidarity program, the Government of Afghanistan's primary program for community development; a program to provide operational support to the Government of Afghanistan; and the national microcredit program, to which Canada has already committed $40 million.

When I was in Kabul to meet with the community development minister for the Karzai government, I saw a map that showed the various areas of concentration that the Afghan government itself was making in disbursing development aid and programs throughout their country; $20 million will go to the UN office on crime and drugs to combat illicit drugs and international crime—another high priority—and $10 million will go to the counter-narcotics trust fund, to improvements of Afghanistan law enforcement and criminal justice institutions in support of the Afghan national drug control strategy.

Also, $20 million will go to the law and order trust fund in Afghanistan, which allows police officers to draw their full salaries directly from the banks, thus furthering the creation of a more professional police force and ensuring security for Afghans. This amount builds on the previous Canadian contribution of $20 million. I can tell you that this is very much a necessity in an area where the Taliban are, in some cases, trying to recruit these same said officers.

If we are able to enhance the ability of the Afghan government to ensure that the officers' salaries are paid, allowing them to earn a decent living for their families, this will make an enormous difference in recruitment and training, in the building of a professional police force.

Finally, another $20 million will support the UN Mine Action Centre for Afghanistan, which will take us further towards our goal of making Afghanistan free of mines and unexploded ordinance. An average of 60 Afghans are killed or injured every month by mines. Half of those victims are under the age of 18. Again, that's a clearly identified need.

Mr. Chair, $10 million will go to the Asian Development Bank, which is supporting the construction of a vital transport link for Kandahar city, a priority of the Afghan national development strategy. Not only will this help farmers get their products to market, but the road's construction will provide much-needed local employment.

Canada maintains such key bilateral programs as vocational training and food aid for war widows. In Kandahar, 16 vocational courses are currently funded by the national solidarity program, and we hope to replicate these types of successful programs further, throughout Kandahar.

Canada is also assisting in the immunization of more than 7 million Afghan children as part of a polio eradication initiative. A $5 million contribution made last October is currently supporting the immunization of 350,000 children in Kandahar province. We've distributed women's wellness diagnostic kits to Kandahar University's medical program. The provincial reconstruction team has donated medical supplies and linens to the Afghan National Police hospital in Kandahar.

Mr. Chair, this is by no means the whole list of what Canada is doing for development, reconstruction, and education. But it serves to illustrate, I hope, a fundamental point: there is huge and measurable progress, and impacts are being felt all over that country. The Prime Minister has made the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade the lead department in coordinating, focusing, and implementing the Government of Canada's policies in Afghanistan. His former foreign and defence policy adviser, David Mulroney, has become associate deputy minister for foreign affairs, responsible for interdepartmental coordination and for ensuring foreign policy coherence for Afghanistan.

I believe Canadians are gaining a better understanding of this international mission, the mission of the Afghan people, the challenges, and what's at stake in the region. They are hearing more about how Canada is helping the Afghan government and the people reach and achieve their objectives. They understand that Canada's efforts include development and humanitarian assistance, diplomatic and governance support, and the much-needed presence of our troops to provide security in difficult and dangerous circumstances.

I underscore that point, Mr. Chair. None of the previous programs—the aid, the humanitarian work—can happen without the security perimeter provided by the NATO forces, which include our troops.

From coast to coast, Canadians have shown their appreciation for these troops serving on this mission. Whether by wearing red shirts on supportive red Friday, attending rallies, or writing to the troops, Canadians are showing how proud they are of our forces. I extend my condolences to the families and friends of those who have suffered, from those soldiers who have sacrificed their lives—most recently Corporal Kevin Megeney, a young man from my hometown in Stellarton, who lost his life just a few short weeks ago.

Our support for those who have sustained injury on this mission in the name of Canada can never be expressed often enough or loudly enough. But only if there is security in Afghanistan can development workers and humanitarian assistance specialists get on with their task of helping Afghanistan through these economic development, education, and reconstruction projects. Only if there is security can the fledgling steps in democracy and democratic governance and rule of law be consolidated and extended throughout the country. Only if there is security can human rights in Afghanistan be grounded and protected, in law and enforcement, in public.

Thanks to the skills and professionalism and courage of our soldiers, the nascent peace stretching over the country has now been extended to large parts of Kandahar province. We are now consolidating these security gains, and using this opportunity to increase our focus on bettering the lives of civilians, pushing ahead with reconstruction, building schools and roads, encouraging small businesses, implementing governance programs.

Measuring progress in Afghanistan's difficult environment is also a challenge. Nevertheless it's encouraging to see the people themselves in Afghanistan, with their government, starting to take ownership over their development agenda and priorities, building a professional army and police force.

Mr. Chair, again, to give you a personal observation, when these roads, bridges, and projects are built by local citizens, they fiercely defend them from the Taliban. They take ownership over those projects. There is an intrinsic pride that takes hold in the way in which they defend those projects.

Mr. Chair, this will continue. We'll continue to keep all development projects under constant review to ensure that our efforts align closely with the intent and purposes that have been set out in the annual UN Security Council resolutions and the benchmarks established by the Afghanistan Compact.

True, Canada's mission in Afghanistan is demanding, but the costs of failure and abandonment would be very high. Afghanistan's poverty, their narcotics trade, and the Taliban insurgency in the south, combined with Afghanistan's complex political situations, pose a huge challenge for the Afghan people.

You will recall the words of Chris Alexander, who appeared before this committee. He stated:

The billions of dollars spent in the last five years assisting Afghanistan would go up in smoke, while the very existence of NATO and the UN would be threatened if the west withdrew. And most tragically, none of us around this table would be able to explain to the families of the 44 Canadians who have lost their lives in Afghanistan what the purpose of that sacrifice was.

James Appathurai, a spokesman for the international defence committee staff, also gave testimony, I believe. He spoke about the disastrous and devastating impact that Afghanistan would feel should the NATO mission be withdrawn.

Mr. Chair, it poses a grave and continuing risk to stability and safety in the region, and as we saw five years ago and more, it can spill out into the world and into our own continent.

Canada is taking action to ensure that Afghanistan is not becoming a haven again for those who would threaten international peace and security, including Canada's security. Canada is also delivering on its promise to support the people of Afghanistan. Canadians can be rightly proud of our role and our accomplishments.

The Government of Canada will stay on track, and I can assure you my department will lead the way in this regard. It is our government's highest foreign policy priority.

Now, Mr. Chair, if I might, I'll turn to another issue on which I have been invited to speak today. It concerns the important recent developments in the field of international human rights, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 13, 2006. The convention will be opened for signature in 10 days' time, on March 30, at a special signing ceremony at the United Nations in New York.

The UN convention is a significant development in international human rights law. It is a specific application of existing human rights to respond to the situations and realities of persons with disabilities. As such, it promises to be an important tool in the protection and the promotion of these rights. For this reason, we believe the development of the convention was long overdue. At its core, the convention is a legal instrument aimed at preventing discrimination. Canada thus welcomes the strong equality rights provisions contained therein and the significant contribution this convention makes to development of the concept of reasonable accommodation so crucial to ensuring the full participation in society of persons with disabilities.

Mr. Chair, Canada is proud to have contributed to the new convention through our active participation in its negotiations and fully supports the principles reflected therein. Throughout this process the federal government has worked closely with the provinces and territories in connection with this convention and with respect to any agreement that may affect their areas of jurisdiction. This is an example of what the Prime Minister calls flexible federalism, Mr. Chair. We have conferred frequently with the members of civil society throughout the negotiation of this instrument and have recognized the particular importance of this agreement to them, both in practical terms and symbolically.

We are now engaged in the provincial and territorial consultation process required prior to signature, and I personally reached out to every single province and territory over the past two weeks with a view to moving this file forward expeditiously. I understand and I share your strong interest that Canada proceed with the signing of the convention at the earliest possible opportunity. Therefore, I wish to assure you of my commitment to remain actively engaged in this matter and I certainly hope to see a positive conclusion to this matter in the near future.

I would like to address the next item, Mr. Chair, which is the consolidation of our diplomatic representation abroad. The Government of Canada is strongly committed to the responsible and effective spending of tax dollars in pursuit of our foreign and international trade objectives. Following an extensive departmental review, a review process that examined how to best allocate and reallocate our resources, the decision was taken to close the consulate general in Milan, Italy; the consulate general in St. Petersburg, Russia; and the consulates in Osaka and in Fukuoka, Japan. The review found that the embassies in Rome, Moscow, and Tokyo were able to provide at reduced cost a wide array of programs and services to promote Canadian interest in these countries.

These mission consolidations are part of the spending restraint exercise announced by Canada's new government on September 25, 2006. The closing of missions reflects the government's readiness to reduce costs, set priorities, review existing expenditures and make choices, hard choices at times, in the interest of Canadian taxpayers.

Just to give you an idea, Mr. Chair, of the ebb and flow that come with shifting resources to priority areas, during the period of 1993 to 2006, Canada closed 31 missions while opening another 43 missions in new locations. The new Canadian embassy in Kabul is but one example, a prominent example, of a new embassy.

The countries in which we have consolidated services currently have excellent transportation and communication infrastructure with which to facilitate continuing client service. As another example, our consul in Osaka is developing a strategy and a handbook for the trade program in the Kansai region. He will be reassigned to another post in Japan, so he's not leaving. Meanwhile, the embassy in Tokyo and our consulates in Nagoya and Hiroshima will take over the strategy and the handbook and will continue to develop it.

The mission consolidations are thus in no way a reflection of a downgrading of the importance to Canada of the countries that are concerned. Our relations with Italy, Russia, and Japan remain strong, excellent. They are key G-8 countries and important partners. We have strong people-to-people contacts currently, and we will facilitate our continuing partnerships with these countries in the future.

Countries affected also understand our position very well. They are facing similar challenges; namely, how to maintain diplomatic contacts and deliver a range of services at a time of rapid globalization and major security challenges. So are our allies and our friends. No one is escaping the need to stay flexible, to shift resources, to strengthen representation in some areas, while consolidating in others, to reduce costs where possible.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is a department that has, for nearly 100 years, had a strong tradition of engagement in the world, of defending and pursuing Canada's interests in the world, and of ensuring that the voice of Canadians is heard internationally. The Prime Minister has been very clear in recent public statements that standing up for Canada's interests and values internationally is one of the government's top priorities. Indeed, international issues have increasingly been at the forefront of Canadians' concerns. Recent high-profile consular cases underline the need to protect Canadians abroad. We have, in fact, Mr. Chair, approximately 2.3 million Canadians living, working, or travelling abroad.

Let me sketch out briefly how the department's budget is to be apportioned. Maintaining Canada's network abroad takes up just half of our total budget, but this network isn't the sole preserve of DFAIT. What few people realize is that my department supports 20 partner departments and agencies, as well as three provinces, through mission networks or platforms.

Let me emphasize this point. When we speak of Canada's representation abroad, we are not simply speaking of DFAIT alone; we are speaking of Canada abroad, that is, a Canada-wide service for the whole of government. And when we speak of Canada's diplomatic missions, you may not find only foreign service officers working at them; you will find people from Citizenship and Immigration, RCMP officers, people from provincial governments, and specialists from Health Canada or Agriculture Canada. DFAIT's support of other departments and partnerships is not always well understood, and I believe it needs to be more widely recognized.

Another quarter of DFAIT's budget covers the cost of Canadian participation in international organizations, again on behalf of the whole of government. The remaining 25% of our total budget, which is about $500 million, is devoted to operational and program sectors.

At the same time, we, like other departments, are experiencing expenditure restraints. This is part and parcel of the government's economic agenda for controlling program spending and getting value for our money. I can assure you that DFAIT will do, as it is doing, its part in managing budgetary reductions, while remaining committed to providing the best service that we can to Canadians.

All good organizations are faced with challenges, and DFAIT is no exception. Good organizations respond by seeking challenges and seeing them as opportunities. Good management is all about identifying and seizing such opportunities, even as one is going through a belt-tightening exercise. We need to be flexible to respond to the important world events as they occur. We need to be in places where there are emerging opportunities and the interests of Canadians and Canada remain strong and where our presence can have a multiplier effect.

Take, for example, our office in Philadelphia. It reaps more than the usual consular office rewards. That is because Philadelphia is also the site of Pharm Expo, one of the largest biotechnology exhibitions around. That's where so many of the start-ups in biotech go for exposure. It's where Canadian companies go for market opportunities, and where we can help them through our department's commercial services.

This is what the department has been doing and will continue to do. We will continue to reallocate and shift resources from lesser priorities to higher-priority areas, such as the government's foreign policy priorities, which I cited at the beginning of my remarks. We will continue to do our level best to meet high standards, and wherever possible, to continue to improve services. To this end, we have taken important steps to improve DFAIT's management practices, to provide a more results-based diplomacy, clearer strategic alignment with the government's overall policy priorities, and better reporting and communication with the rest of government.

For example, the country strategies developed for each mission and the mandate letters that accompany them ensure that each head of mission has clear direction on priorities and expected results, and each is accountable for delivering on them.

We're also improving innovative new ways and implementing new ways of delivering Government of Canada services abroad to supplement its traditional bricks and mortar operations. One such initiative is the virtual trade commissioner, or the VTC service. This interactive tool enables our trade commissioners to distribute up-to-date, relevant information to all our clients and partners on a 24-hour basis, regardless of their location. Recently, the VTC won a Treasury Board Secretariat award of excellence. So did our public diplomacy online services and our consular affairs bureau electronic resource. These awards were for outstanding leadership and improving service for Canadians, Canadian businesses, and international clients.

DFAIT remains committed to ensuring that our resources are invested in ways that will allow us to effectively pursue the government's international agenda. The department's report on plans and priorities describes this in detail. Against this fiscal backdrop, my department is tabling its 2007-2008 main estimates and report on plans and priorities for the same year.

The main estimates for the department are $2.6 billion, $2 billion for budgetary items and a $670 million non-budgetary item for Canada's Export Development Corporation. If we exclude the EDC non-budgetary item, the department's main estimates show a net decrease of $142.8 million. The main estimates contain a considerable amount of detail on programs, activities, operations, and expenditures as well as our plans and priorities for the fiscal year.

I'm happy, of course, to respond to any questions committee members may have, either in our discussions or by subsequent written answers.

Mr. Chair, I'll conclude my remarks and I look forward to receiving your questions.

Merci beaucoup.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Merci, Mr. Minister.

We'll go into the first round of questioning, and I remind all members that the first round is ten minutes.

We will have a split: Mr. Wilfert and Mr. Patry. Mr. Wilfert, please.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Bryon Wilfert Liberal Richmond Hill, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank the minister for coming, and I want to congratulate Len Edwards and David Mulroney.

You have two excellent officials with you. I have known both of them over the years, particularly because of their expertise in Asia. I'm glad to see we finally have an Asian perspective to foreign affairs, which I think we have lacked for some time.

Minister, you said that our diplomatic presence abroad is constantly reviewed to reflect this government's needs and priorities. That's very admirable, except when it comes to the closing of the consulates. I'll deal with the two in Japan.

The Canada-Japan Society of British Columbia notes:

Japan is Canada's largest offshore export market, second only to the United States as a destination for Canadian goods and services. Japan is the world's second largest economy and is bigger than all of the other economies in Asia combined.

Even prior to our announced closings of the consulates in Osaka and Fukuoka, Canadian interests were under-represented in Japan relative to Japan's importance to Canada as a market for our goods, a source of tourists and students, and a major source of investment in Canadian resources in the automotive sector.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce in Japan notes that the consulates also serve as a focal point for the collection and dissemination of information to Japanese and Canadian companies, organizations, and individuals. The information, contacts, and goodwill developed over years will be lost in these closures. In a relation-based culture such as Japan, the cost of this loss is beyond calculation, and it will be felt for many years to come.

These two letters I quote from, one dated January 25 and one dated January 30, were written to the Prime Minister. I did an access-to-information request on January 31. The 30-day statutory period has come and gone, and they've told me they can't provide everything and that they need a 60-day extension.

Minister, a handbook doesn't cut it. Given the importance of priorities, I'm assuming you're saying that Japan, with the second-largest economy in Asia, which is greater than all of Asia combined, including China, is not a priority for Canada.

The former ambassador to Canada, Ambassador Numata, was less than pleased. I have all sorts of correspondence that clearly indicates we have made the wrong decision.

I also understand, Minister, that we may close another 14 or more consultates around the world. I'd like you to comment on that as well.

In my view, this sends the wrong message. You cannot do it from Tokyo. You may know, Minister, I know a little bit about Japan; I've been there enough times. I can tell you that in my view this has really damaged a very important and strategic relationship.

Could you comment?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. Wilfert.

Maybe it would be better if we take Mr. Patry's question as well, and then you could answer both.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Okay. There were about 15 questions there, but if you'd like to add another 12, go ahead.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Bernard Patry Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

We have many questions. That's fine, they'll be short.

Monsieur le ministre, in your remarks you say that “Our actions over the past year are evidence of a focused foreign policy agenda for Canada”.

In the budget highlights it says that “Budget 2007 significantly enhances Canadians...and ensures Canada plays an even more effective leadership role in world affairs in three key strategic areas”.

Apart from Afghanistan and international assistance, the budget is totally silent about the effective role. There is no mention at all about foreign affairs. We didn't even mention the two words “foreign affairs” in 470 pages in the budget. Why is that, Mr. Minister? Why that silence? We try to understand, but we don't even know if the department is focusing—or is the department now just a desk for the Prime Minister's Office?

Secondly, Canada has always been recognized as a major leader in the international field. I think about Canada's leadership role in land mines in 1995, and also our role in the responsibility to protect, which was accepted by the United Nations after an extensive study and intensive lobby by Canada with the members of the United Nations. My question is about cluster bombs. Where was Canada in the beginning? Why did you wait until after opposition questions in the House of Commons before you decided to send someone to represent Canada and sign the Oslo agreement? Also, can you name just one file where Canada is a leader in the international community in this field?

Thank you.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you.

Minister, now you have your 17 questions.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Let me work back to front.

Where is Canada a leader on foreign affairs files? In Afghanistan, Haiti, and Africa, in many files throughout Europe, in many files when it comes to trade, and in many files when it comes to humanitarian relief Canada is a leader. I'm surprised that a member of this committee, who purports to know about Canada's reputation abroad, would even suggest somehow that Canada wasn't a leader.

As far as Canada's decisions go, we have to make tough decisions when it comes to closures of consular offices and embassies due to the necessity—as the previous government, as the government before it, as all governments I would suggest have done to adapt to changing circumstances—to adapt to realistic budgetary limitations from time to time.

I would also suggest that what Canada has done is not limited to just what the previous government did on subjects such as responsibility to protect or land mines. We have a storied reputation for standing up for human rights in places like South Africa. We have a storied reputation for being innovative, outward-looking, and compassionate, and for being a country that has always been there in times of need, in times of crisis. Canada's most recent intervention to remove Canadian citizens at a time of conflict in Lebanon is another reflection of the current administration's understanding of the traditions that exist for Canada and the world.

With respect to Mr. Wilfert's specific questions about closures in Japan, I acknowledge his interest and his expertise in the area of Asia, and particularly in Japan. This was a very difficult decision. Yet I would suggest to him that the Japanese understand fully the types of constraints countries are under with respect to consular services, with respect to trade relations. Our consolidation effort has in no way been interpreted as a slight or a withdrawal or a downgrading of importance of Canada-Japan relations.

I spoke with the Japanese foreign minister, Taro Aso, yesterday morning, and there was no diminishing whatsoever on the part of Mr. Aso or his government of the importance of the relationship between Canada and Japan. To carry out these closures, as I said, was a difficult decision, and yet the level of service will remain high. There was no loss of employment, except in some cases for locally engaged staff. Anyone who was working in the public service abroad at those missions will be reassigned, in most cases in-country. That is to say that the consolidation will absorb those employees into existing missions.

They reflect, as I said, a realistic approach, a practical approach that requires from time to time a reassigning and a realigning of our resources in various countries. The service remains, as I said, at a high standard. We will continue to monitor these particular consular services and embassies to ensure that those standards are met, and we will adapt to the changing circumstances as we continue through this exercise.

As far as any further closures or further reassignments go, I can only say that there has been no final decision made in that regard, but it is part of this government's agenda, just as it was part of the previous government's agenda, to examine the circumstances in each and every country, to look at the priorities of the various countries where we're engaged, to look at the need, to look at the trade potential, and to look at the level of service that is required from time to time.

I can tell you something that brought to mind very recently the need to elevate consular services in parts of the world, and that was our experience in Lebanon, at the Beirut office, where we saw evolve in a very short time a situation that demonstrated an immediate need. What did we do? We deployed consular officials. We deployed people from various government departments directly to have an immediate influx of person power on the ground in that country to respond to that very pressing need.

Decisions continue to be made in the Department of Foreign Affairs, as they are in every department, which reflect a very volatile world, very rolling circumstances that we have to respond to. I also acknowledge your commentary with respect to Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Edwards as being very capable officials. We are, in fact, blessed at the Department of Foreign Affairs with very capable officials and very dedicated public servants.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. Wilfert. You're out of time.

We'll go to Madame Lalonde, for ten minutes, please.

4:20 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Welcome, Minister and gentlemen.

I have several questions and I will try to be brief. There's a large difference between Canada's actions in Afghanistan and the needs as we know them, which we are reminded of on a regular basis in studies such as that published recently by the Senlis Council.

The study recommended a better balance between spending related to development and poverty alleviation, and military spending. It also recommended firm action on the poppy issue, that these crops be purchased for the purpose of the manufacturing of medical drugs, for example. There were several other recommendations which I will refrain from sharing with you as you have easy access to them.

Even if you are committed to this, and even if we support you, how can we be sure that sufficient assistance is being provided to Afghanistan to get people out of poverty and to win at this battle? The news we hear is discouraging.

My second question has not been raised. Does the budget or do the votes—I have looked everywhere—contain any funds to modernize the passport system? When one inquires into this, one can only note how inadequately needs are being met—this is extremely discouraging.

Another issue was raised recently. When I was in Haiti the Prime Minister of that country, Jacques Edouard Alexis, told us that he could not come to Canada because a visa could not be issued to him. The issue was about to be resolved—has it? Will the Prime Minister of Haiti be able to come to Canada?

Lastly, $679 million have been allocated to Canada's Export Development Corporation and that comes out of the department's expenditures. I looked at the cuts you have made and they include $600,000 for mine and explosives clearing, as well as $300,000 from the Canadian Landmine Fund. Many other cuts have been made, including approximately $542,000 for the Francophonie internationale, and $925,000 from the United Nations Voluntary Fund for the Environment.

These cuts have been made to humanitarian and assistance sectors and the funds allocated to Canada's Export Development Corporation are for exports. I need some explanations.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Ms. Lalonde.

Mr. Minister.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, in answer to your question on the Prime Minister of Haiti, I spoke today to the Minister of Public Security and he told me that a temporary solution has been found. Therefore, yes, he will be able to come to Canada.

To be honest, we are looking for a more permanent solution to this. It is a situation that we inherited. He was wrongly placed on a list as a result of a misinterpretation of a response he gave surrounding an incident that took place in Haiti that was observed and reported by Brazilian officials. In an interview, he gave the misinterpreted impression that he was somehow personally responsible or involved, as opposed to what I think was a reflection of him taking ministerial responsibility, which he should be commended for.

We are trying to extract this reference out of the system so it will not continually come up and act as some sort of black mark on his visa documents, or something that will prevent his permanent visits. He has family here, as you know. I've spoken to him personally about this, and I assure you we will find a solution.

Madam Lalonde, you raised questions about Afghanistan, how we can be confident that there will be sufficient practical relief provided to those in need, and how we can gauge the significant humanitarian impact that occurs on the ground.

We can look at the sheer numbers of Afghans who have returned to that country, and the number of children who have been vaccinated for serious illnesses. We can start to calculate the number of young women who are now able to get an education, which was completely prohibited under the Taliban. We can calculate the amount of infrastructure that is appearing throughout the country—roads, bridges, schools, clinics, hospitals, and places of commerce. We can start to look at the number of landmines that have been removed from the terrain. We can start to add up the programs for vocational training for young men, who are now able to have vocations and go out to earn a living and support their families. Micro-finance has been enormously successful. We had a very wonderful world summit in Halifax, where Nobel Prize winner Professor Yunus talked about the benefits of micro-finance. All of these things surely demonstrate the degree of progress that has been made in a relatively short time.

The mission began five weeks ago and the results are now tangible and visible in the field. There has been an important change in the Afghan government's profile. Many of the government members are now women who have responsibilities and the ability to represent their country.

This is a sea of change to not only have a democratic government making decisions on behalf of the people who elected them, but to have women who were prohibited from voting now sitting as elected officials in that government. That's not a complete list.

However, those are examples of change that are giving us a positive impression of what is happening in the country.

4:25 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Nevertheless, several recent reports have stated the opposite with respect to the situation for women, the ability of children to undertake studies, security, poverty, the ability to find food, obtain medical care, etc.

Regardless, have you considered the issue of passports?

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

You are right. More remains to be done in this country and I agree with your assessment. But each program must be developed and that is exactly what this government has done.

On the passports, I'm very aware, believe me, of the challenges that exist. This is again an example of a branch of government that has been stretched to the max, given the circumstances. The influx of daily applications for passports has increased from an average of 10,000 to 13,000 a day, to 20,000 to 21,000 applications a day. So it has nearly doubled. With the existing infrastructure that was in place over a year ago, we are now attempting to alleviate the pressures and the bottlenecks by increasing the number of receiving agents, but that's not going to deal with the immediate problem. We obviously need to have more personnel able to receive and process these passports.

We recognize the challenge and inconvenience this poses for many who are waiting to make decisions on travel, business plans, and personal plans, yet we cannot sacrifice the integrity of the passport and the security aspects to simply expedite this problem in the short term. We need to have new infrastructure and improve the receiving capacity, which means eventually having the technology in the field and in different regions to do so.

4:30 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

But have any funds been provided for this? I looked but I did not find any. Increasing staff numbers or improving technology requires money.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

In this particular budget, there is not a specific allotment for passports. I can assure you that there is the ability to make Treasury Board submissions, and we will do so when the time is right. We have 500 new employees coming on stream. We are making arrangements to deal with this in the short term. We've had blitzes on the weekends, and they have allowed us to produce a tremendous number of passports.

There are rolling circumstances with the western hemisphere travel initiative, as you know, and the possibility of changing technology that we need to adapt to. Having said that, we are doing everything humanly possible. Passport officials have been working extremely hard and are putting in overtime. We also have a plan—and I spoke yesterday with Monsieur Cossette, the president of Passport Canada—to have other departments with security clearance and the necessary skills to help us, so that they can come on stream immediately and we can get these passports out the door and get the wait times down.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. MacKay. We certainly wish you all the best on that. I know that for most members of Parliament, a lot of our office time and our staffs' time is taken up by passport issues.

We'll go to Mr. Obhrai, for ten minutes.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank the minister for coming. As the chairman said, this is your fifth visit to the committee, and when you come to the committee and share your thoughts and vision about Canada's foreign policy, it makes our job very easy.

I also want to congratulate Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Edwards for their new positions.

I have two short questions. Under your direction, I went to New Delhi in November, on the reconstruction of Afghanistan project. Countries like China, Iran, and Pakistan were all there, all committed to assist in the development of Afghanistan. We keep talking about the fact that we are under the UN mandate and how all the NATO forces are there, but we don't talk about how other countries are also involved in the total development of Afghanistan, not just us.

I was just wondering if you could tell the committee, if you do know—or you can send it later on—the total amount of money given by other countries, including Canada, toward the total development of or toward the reconstruction of Afghanistan. It shows that the whole international community is in Afghanistan, not just us. I understand that the next conference will be in Pakistan.

Following on that, we have a large diaspora of Afghan refugees in our country. I was just wondering if you have figures to say how many of them are involved with us in the development of Afghanistan.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Thank you, Mr. Obhrai. I know you have a particular interest in this file, and you have ably assisted us in your capacity as parliamentary secretary and as a participant in this committee.

You're certainly right to point to the fact that this is very much a multinational effort. We have working inside Afghanistan currently, alongside Canada, in the UN capacity—that is, not under the NATO flag with the security provisions but on the UN capacity-building side—in excess of 60 countries, most of which were signatories of the Afghanistan Compact, which was signed in London in January of 2006.

This list of participating countries continues to grow. And as I mentioned in my opening remarks, we are constantly looking for ways to partner with a number of those countries and participants. A number of those countries have already expressed a willingness to take us up on that effort, to join us, potentially, at the provincial reconstruction site in Kandahar at Camp Nathan Smith.

The work there is what I would describe as the most important for us. It's where so much of the humanitarian aid work, projects, and the quarterbacking, if you will, of our capacity-building, our development, and our exercises that make a real and tangible difference in the lives of Afghan people is done.

On the total support that you have inquired about, the support, as I understand it, expressed by the delegations of the various countries that make up this UN mission is in excess of $10.5 billion. That is an impressive amount of money by any measure.

Canada, as I mentioned in my remarks as well, is among the top three donors in that country. We have committed now in excess of $1 billion over a 10-year span on the development side. We hope to see more fruits of our labours when we start to expand that security perimeter. That, in effect, gives the partners we will be working with, the aid workers themselves, and the diplomats the ability to go further afield to reach into the communities and the lives of more Afghan people to deliver the types of programs and actual physical assets and infrastructure I spoke of in my remarks.

All of this, to me, points to the fact that we are winning. We're winning every day, with every child who's educated, every school that's built, every physical piece of infrastructure that takes hold in that country, and every program that reaches out to people to improve their lives. That's winning. That's making a difference. That's building that country. That's preventing the return of the Taliban. All of those important contributions that are made by Canada and by our NATO and UN partners are proof that, yes, we are providing hope, leadership, and a brighter future for Afghanistan.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Mr. Goldring.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB

I want to comment, Mr. Minister, on your accessibility and availability for the committee meetings here. It's greatly appreciated.

I'm looking at some of the numbers, and I find it rather astounding that 5.5 million children now go to school, compared with 700,000 before. Of course, based on our study on democracy, and I think in general, it is agreed that to create real hope for the future and to be able to capture and be involved in the full democratic governance for the future, you have to begin with the school children and go through the next generation.

One other issue that you mentioned is that you qualify everything by noting the need for security with it. Of course, our soldiers are doing a great job there. You made a comment about the police. We saw before that if the police aren't paid, then corruption gets into the policing system. So it's absolutely essential for the police to be paid.

Perhaps you could tell us what other things were involved in the policing and what positive things are happening with the policing, given that ultimately they're going to be the organization that will take over the security of the country.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. Goldring.

Mr. Minister.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Goldring, you're absolutely right. A basic responsibility of any government, any country, including our own, has to be to provide security for their own people. Clearly there's an enormous responsibility within Afghanistan for them to build their own policing and security ability. We have been assisting in that regard, not only in the provision of uniforms and equipment—belts, utility belts, and other implements that go with policing—but also a lot on the training side. That includes first aid training. During my visit, we went to a graduation ceremony that came on the heels of this type of training for these young officers—men, in most cases, although there were a few women present. That's what eventually, we hope, will lead to a nationwide, capable, professional Afghanistan national police.

Because we are in this frenetic pace to try to speed up the development of policing and an Afghan army, in addition to our development work, we've tried to urge some of our other NATO partners to pick up the slack, to invest more of their own resources into those subject areas, policing most notably. But Canada has adopted the approach that one of the fundamental things we have to do, and we have done, is to make salaries available, and to make that money readily available to those police officers so that they see in that profession a reward, and see that by virtue of their choosing to join the Afghan police, they can feed their families and live a basic quality of life that is rewarding.

We have deployed a number of Canadian civilian police, RCMP officers, to Afghanistan, and they have participated in the training. They're doing commendable work there, trying to instill the strong traditions that exist within our own policing community here in Canada. Our effort is on police reform, to ensure that they're not corrupted, to ensure that the training that goes into these police is not lost by a conversion to the Taliban. We need to instill some of the same traditions, a sense of loyalty and commitment to country, that we have seen within our own police force in this country. So Canada has and is playing a significant role in that regard.

You were right in your earlier remarks about the numbers, numbers that are starting to grow in terms of vaccinations for children, in terms of those who are able to access education now, in terms of those who are accessing basic health services. For example, in terms of children being inoculated at medical facilities and being given vaccinations against childhood diseases, those numbers are incredible. We take so much of this for granted in Canada, that children will have those vaccinations through our schooling programs. That literally did not exist in Afghanistan a few short years ago. So there has been a sea of change in terms of people's access to basic social services in Afghanistan.

While much more has to be accomplished, and certainly we want to project the progress into the future, I would say that when you start looking at these figures in their totality, and look at the starting point and then where we are today, these are impressive numbers by any stretch—the number of teachers in the field, the number of health care workers. Of course we want to have Afghans themselves filling those positions. The object, the exit strategy, I would suggest, is to eventually have Afghans doing the policing, the security, the health provisions, the education. All of those things have to be assumed by the Afghan government and the people themselves so they can be self-sustainable and are able to walk on their own.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

Madam McDonough, you have ten minutes, please.