Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 18th, 2011

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Let me say, Mr. Armstrong, as you know, that I was also a school teacher, so I was faced with those same kinds of situations that you may have encountered as a principal. That's quite correct; I would agree with you that not everyone can be responded to positively. I would also suggest to you that because of understanding that decisions have to be made, these are very hard decisions that have to be made. This is also in light of the responsibility to have best use of public funds.

Again, development is a very complex world. It takes many factors, depending on what initiatives you're looking at, what sectors you're looking at. Things vary, and they vary from country to country. As I said, these are very difficult decisions; they're hard decisions. I don't make these decisions lightly, and I particularly don't take decisions lightly when I am not agreeing with a recommendation from CIDA officials. They are experienced; they give good advice. However, the buck stops here. I'm responsible for making the decisions on how to get the best value for public funds in developing countries to help reduce poverty.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Right, and the rationale behind this is that as the minister--it's the very highest level of the department--you are almost solely aware of the pressures and resources that are being asked of all components of your department, whereas people underneath may not be. So when a recommendation comes up through the department and you have to choose to reject that, do you take more time?

I know that as a principal, when the staff or parents came to the school and asked me for money, for budgetary...or to make a decision and I was going to disagree with them, I took more time; I tended to spend a lot more time making that decision than if I was going to agree with them. Is that accurate?

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Durham, ON]

As I just answered, these are difficult decisions, particularly when you cannot respond positively. As I say, my responsibility is the best use of tax dollars. I have to be responsible and accountable to taxpayers on how CIDA is utilizing the money, to meet their expectations, to see a difference for the millions who are living in poverty and for the millions who are facing a food crisis, so consequently I would agree with you.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

With instances happening worldwide, like what happened in Haiti, which your department was very involved in--and I think there has been resounding approval for the way your department handled that--and with issues like what happened in Pakistan, not only do you have to be concerned with what is happening, but you also have to make budgetary decisions on what may happen.

In some years, I'm assuming, when there have been problems like we've had in the last couple of years worldwide, you have to be very, very judicious in how you spend taxpayers' dollars, and maybe things have to change, whereby some organizations don't get the support they got in previous years.

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Exactly. These are, as I say, difficult decisions. This is why I have discussions with CIDA staff and my staff.

A good example would be Haiti. I clearly articulated, soon after the Haiti earthquake, when the Prime Minister of Haiti was here and we were told how many schools had been destroyed, that I wanted to ensure that if we put Canadian dollars toward rebuilding schools, they were going to be built to a standard that would withstand future earthquakes. I didn't want to see Canadian dollars going to build a school that.... Haiti gets natural disasters on almost a yearly basis. I said that this was not the best use of taxpayers' dollars. I said we wanted to build a school that would withstand the floods, the cyclones, etc., that Haiti faces.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

I have one last question--

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Sorry, but I'm going to stop you there.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

We have about enough time left for one round of one-minute questions.

We'll start with Mr. McKay, question and answer, and then we'll move around.

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

Well, this is offensive, the way this thing works.

Madam Biggs, in your assessment, is there anything that would have led you to believe that Kairos is an anti-Semitic organization?

[Margaret Biggs]

My dealings with Kairos were on the proposal that they submitted to us and that was the--

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

The question is, is there anything in your assessment that leads you to believe that it's an anti-Semitic organization?

[Margaret Biggs]

There was nothing in the analysis that I saw on the--

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

Thank you.

[Margaret Biggs]

--program proposal.

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

Thank you.

Madam Minister, you said that Minister Kenney didn't check his speech with you first. Who speaks for the government? You or Minister Kenney? He said specifically that Kairos was “de-funded” because they're an anti-Semitic organization. So who speaks here for the government? You or Minister Kenney?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you.

You have eight seconds to finish that one.

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Each minister speaks for their particular responsibility and their particular area. Together, as cabinet, we form government, so every individual minister's contribution is as a spokesperson for the government as a whole.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Lukiwski for one minute, question and answer.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

I honestly don't have a question.

Again, I just want to make a commentary and see whether or not Minister Oda will agree. What we came here to try to ascertain is, number one, whether Minister Oda misled Parliament, misled a committee, and tried to mislead the Canadian public. The minister has responded to all those questions, stating that no, she has not.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

A point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Yes.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a lot of respect for you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I am one of the ones who have said in the past that you have been a very fair chair of this committee. This morning seems to be the exception. This is obviously a way of running out the clock.

In the last 15 minutes, you gave us one minute and 10 seconds. You gave the Conservative regime members 12 minutes. Now you're back to them without going to the Bloc or the NDP.