Foreign Affairs Committee on April 29th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Mr. Goldring, go ahead. You have a minute.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

You mentioned earlier moderate Tamils, which would obviously distinguish them from hard-line Tamils. One of the difficulties here seems to be the intractability of the hard-line Tamils, I believe, in their request for self-determination. That self-determination has been given several different descriptions, but in reality it seems to be that they want a separate country as opposed to having some autonomy in their regions.

We were discussing the difference between a humanitarian pause and a ceasefire. In the past agreements that created somewhat of a ceasefire, were they also given any kind of unrealistic expectations that perhaps self-determination was going to be one point of the consultations and then that was not going to happen? Is that not one of the major reasons that now the Government of Sri Lanka is really taking a pretty firm line on it? If that is the one request they cannot go without, they really have no other choice because they will not allow that separation or self-determination.

[Ken Sunquist]

I'm not aware that previous pauses, ceasefires, whatever term you want to use.... The word “ceasefire” has been utilized by the LTTE. The word humanitarian “pause” is the one the UN has used because it got away from one side or the other.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

What's the difference?

[Ken Sunquist]

I'm not sure there's a big difference except that one side uses one word and nobody else wants to use it.

The issue was that the government saw a “ceasefire” as a chance for the LTTE to re-arm and re-equip. A humanitarian pause was all around the issue of what's happening to the civilians, and if our primary issue is civilians, that's what we're into.

On your question on self-determination, I'm not aware that even in the long-running ceasefire for six years, brokered by the Norwegians, there was ever any offer on the table for self-determination. I think what happened was there was a gentlemen's agreement that neither side was going to move forward and do anything to upset the apple cart. So in fact it was a self-determination issue at that point. But I don't think there was ever anything in writing on that. Somebody could prove me wrong on that one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We'll come back to you.

Madame Deschamps.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. If I may, I would like to put my questions to the CIDA people.

In your presentation, you said that humanitarian support to NGOs currently on the ground increased significantly this year. A number of witnesses have told the committee that Canada, among others, should increase its aid. Others have even said that the government should simplify CIDA procedures to get the money to its destination quicker and to kick-start small-scale projects.

If CIDA has only two people on the ground, how are the projects to help those most in need being coordinated in the short term? In the medium term, what can CIDA do to help resolve the deeper causes of the current conflict?

I also have a question for Mr. Sunquist. In a media release, the Minister of Foreign Affairsrefers to our High Commissioner in Colombo, Angela Bogdan, whom he reportedly instructed to continue Canada's engagement with the Sri Lankan government on the need for assistance to displaced persons. Could you provide more details on Ms. Bogdan's role and on the instructions she has been given, and relate them to what CIDA has done on the ground?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Madam Deschamps.

Dr. Rahman.

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

On the question of delivery of the program, the two people who are on the ground facilitate delivery, but the major delivery of humanitarian assistance programs is done by our partners, by organizations like the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Oxfam Canada, World Vision, CARE Canada, or Médecins Sans Frontières. They're the ones who actually deliver the programs for us on the ground.

In terms of procedures, we have considerably simplified the procedures in terms of providing humanitarian assistance. I am going to ask my colleague, Stephen, to just mention what these processes are.

[Stephen Salewicz]

Thank you.

Indeed, on the humanitarian side, our program is set up specifically to allow for rapid response. We can respond within 12 to 24 hours to provide funding to our partners. However, the procedures are put in place to ensure that we are funding our trusted partners, those that are adhering to the humanitarian principles so key to responding impartially and neutrally to the challenges of a conflict zone and that also have the proper security background so that they ensure the security of their workers.

Our procedures are very streamlined and allow for a very rapid response. We continue to monitor the situation and assess needs. The people on the ground assist us with that. They are part of the coordination meetings that are going on with the UN and with NGOs. We are also in contact with our partners, our donors, and are continually in contact with NGOs on the ground to ensure the needs are continuously being met and continuously understood.

I should emphasize that the response we did in February was in anticipation of the current crisis. The contingency planning in place at that time was suggesting that such an event would happen. We put the funding in place to allow the international actors on the ground there to respond quickly. They've been able to stockpile and to develop a response plan as a result.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Dorion.

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to finish what I was saying on the subject a little earlier.

Susan Johnson, the Director General of the Red Cross, who appeared before this committee on March 23, said that the Canadian government had responded to the request from the International Committee of the Red Cross by contributing $1.75 million to date.

She also said:What I was saying in my remarks was that, given the gravity of the situation, and given that the International Committee [of the Red Cross] is the only humanitarian organization with access to the conflict area, it would be appropriate for the Canadian government to consider doubling its contribution to the International Red Cross at this time.

This is the request from the Red Cross that I was referring to earlier.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Dorion.

Is there a response?

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

The only thing we can say is that we have provided humanitarian assistance beyond that going to the International Red Cross. As we said, in February 2009, Minister Oda announced $4.5 million, which went through various other partners, all of whom are trusted and, we believe, fully capable of delivering humanitarian assistance programs on the ground.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Mr. Sunquist.

[Ken Sunquist]

I have a very quick comment.

Mr. Dorion, I'm sorry I didn't get a chance to respond to your question. I believe the IDRC is the only NGO currently in the conflict zone, and several of our partners are in the IDP camps. So in working with the partners, you are absolutely right in who we can deal with.

I thought I should just add two quick comments. You asked about Angela Bogdan's role as our ambassador or high commissioner. She is chairing the donors group of all the countries who have development programs there. She is working with the UN to make sure that the partners can get into the camps and that we know what's needed. She's meeting with the Government of Sri Lanka on a daily basis to promote visas for our people so they're able to get in. She's meeting with them to try to develop the programs moving forward. Angela is doing a very good job.

I couldn't respond to Mr. Goldring quickly enough. There's one other thing. We are doing a lot of things on the ground there. In fact, on March 31, before it all fell apart, we held a conference on pluralism in Colombo. We're trying to bring civil society together and we're trying to bring non-governmental actors together to look beyond the set pieces of government and to where we can move for the future.

Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Sunquist.

I have one other question before I go back to Mr. Goldring here and then to Mr. Dewar.

Although CIDA has two people on the ground, do we have any idea as to how many Canadians are helping deliver that? I know that Oxfam Canada, and certainly the International Red Cross, are there, but I'm talking specifically about Canadian NGOs or delivery agents for Canadian aid. How many Canadians are there cooperating with CIDA or the foreign affairs department in delivering this aid?

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

Mr. Chair, do you mean in terms of the actual number of Canadians?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, right, approximately. Would there be an estimate?

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

We don't have an estimate of how many Canadians are on the ground. We know the organizations that are there, but we would be happy to find that out for you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Sometimes we can leave here.... I know the foreign affairs department must know how many Canadians are there, but we get this idea of only having two CIDA agents. We have all these groups that we work with, and I guess that's my question. Is there an estimate of the number of Canadians delivering aid?

Ms. Norton.

[Leslie E. Norton]

I just want to say that it's our understanding that there are no Canadians caught in the conflict zone, if you're asking about--you're not asking on the consular. There are Canadian NGOs there, but we have to remember that in the UN there are many Canadians, but they are carrying UN passports; they don't identify themselves as being Canadian.

As well, in the ICRC, because they are an impartial, independent, neutral organization, people will say they are with the ICRC, not Canadian. Or they might be carrying dual passports. Again, it's very difficult for us to tell. It would be a real challenge to get a number, but we can try.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Even with Oxfam Canada, if they're one of the delivery agents, they must know if they have 20 or 10 or whatever. If we can get that information, that would be appreciated.

I think Mr. Goldring has a quick question. We'll then go to Mr. Dewar.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

One of the studies we were recently working on was a democratic development study and what types of initiatives the Canadian government might possibly be in, and it certainly sounds like there'd be a lot of follow-up work here on the encouragement of human rights, democratic values, and good governance.

I have a quick question on the conflict zone area. I know your guesstimation of how many captives are in there was 50,000 to 100,000. That's a pretty broad guesstimation. But would you have some kind of a guesstimation of the number of combatants who would be in the area the government is facing? Is that guesstimation varying, improving, or decreasing? Could you give us some kind of idea?

[Ken Sunquist]

The short answer is that we do not have that.

It's like the question of how many people are in there. The UN claims it could be towards 100,000. The Government of Sri Lanka says it might be down to 50,000 because people are managing to escape. That's why we use the range of 50,000 to 100,000. The military have said in the past what they thought the size of the Tiger army—if you want to call it that—was, and presumably it's been decimated in the last few weeks. As for what they're down to, I haven't seen anything in our intelligence or any other efforts. Sorry.