Mr. Speaker, the Canadian men and women in the military, police and those working in development or with NGOs deserve our full support. I support them and so does our party.
The problem we have is that the government is not being upfront with Canadians. Canadians need facts about what we are doing, how we are doing it, and why we are doing it. That is the problem with the government. It refuses to tell Canadians all the facts.
Time and time again, parliamentarians, whether members of Parliament or Senators, have gone to Afghanistan on fact-finding missions only to be disappointed by the lack of transparency the government has shown them on development in that region.
Upon arriving in Afghanistan, these parliamentarians are restricted to certain areas and given the government's promotional material. We all realize that we cannot just go into any country that is war-torn, but these parliamentarians just want to be able to see first-hand how aid money is being spent, who is receiving it, and what are the results.
Time and time again, they come back to Canada not knowing the full picture of progress or non-progress of development in Afghanistan.
If development efforts are successful, why are the Conservatives not showing parliamentarians and all Canadians the results that have been achieved? This could go a long way in reassuring Canadians that the assistance being provided to the Afghan people is done in the best ways possible.
Because of the failure of the government's communication, we have no choice. The only source of information comes from NGOs working in the area. Disturbing reports we have been receiving over the past year have been coming from the Senlis Council.
Here are some of the observations that the Senlis Council has reported to us. One of the biggest problems in the south is the poppy growing business. As long as Afghanistan remains the world's number one supplier of heroin, the Taliban will remain well financed. Afghanistan produces 80% to 90% of the heroin supply in the world and its production is increasing every year. Most of that heroin is going to the European Union and mostly European countries.
The Senlis Council is calling for a village-based poppy for medicine program. This type of program can put money in the pockets of poor farmers and provide a cheap source of pain killing medication throughout the third world. As long as the Taliban and other insurgents have access to this kind of money in Kandahar, we will never have a safe place for development.
Before I became a member of Parliament, I worked in underdeveloped countries helping farmers become productive. We helped them with their irrigation and growing techniques. We introduced new varieties and better fertilizer management.
We helped build greenhouses to grow their transplants and to keep the farmers from working the fields in the rainy season so they could protect their seedlings in these greenhouses. We installed refrigeration systems to improve the quality of their produce and we implemented cooperative marketing to maximize their returns for their crops.
The results of these new practices made these farmers proud and prosperous. Canadians not only have to get rid of the heroin from the Taliban leaders, we also have to help these farmers have a better future with other crops. We have great farmers and organizations right here in this country who could greatly help these farmers in Afghanistan by growing these new crops to help replace the poppy production.
The Senlis Council has many other recommendations and I strongly urge the government to listen to it because its members are on the ground seeing what is going on. I will mention a few more recommendations coming from the Senlis Council.
It says we should appoint a special envoy to coordinate Canada's efforts in Afghanistan. The appointment of a special envoy will help the war zone coordination and optimization of Canada's development, diplomatic and military, and optimize civilian volunteer resources to achieve Canada's main objective.
We should also increase spending to reflect the importance of Afghanistan as Canada's top foreign policy. Optimizing Canada's development efforts in support of its military efforts will require significant increase in delivery of humanitarian aid and development.
Canada must raise its annual development spending from $139 million and provide the Canadian embassy with the resources necessary to reflect the top priority Afghanistan represents in Canada's foreign policy. It has to empower Canadians to assist in bringing prosperity to Afghanistan.
The Canadian government should facilitate the deployment of Canadian volunteer experts to bring sustainable prosperity to Afghanistan, similar to what I mentioned about farmers going over there to help. It should enable assistance programs and professional exchanges between Canadians and Afghans. It will not only increase mutual understanding, but it will also empower Canadians to provide direct support to communities in Kandahar, and enhance Afghanistan's potential for prosperity.
As everybody in the House knows, Mr. Manley and his panel has released a report with some recommendations for aid and developments in Afghanistan. Under the section titled “Government of Canada International Assistance to Afghanistan”, it states:
—the Canadian aid program in Afghanistan has been impeded not only by the dangerous security environment in Kandahar but by CIDA’s own administrative constraints. More than half of CIDA funding in Afghanistan flows through multilateral agencies, and another 35 per cent is chanelled through national programs administered by the central government in Kabul. This leaves little for locally managed quick-action projects that bring immediate improvements to everyday life for Afghans, or for “signature” projects readily identifiable as supported by Canada. Funding allocations aside, CIDA staffers in Kandahar do not often venture beyond their base, in part, we were told, because of restrictive security regulations maintained by CIDA’s headquarters in Canada. While it is undeniably difficult to place civilians in a conflict zone, CIDA should delegate decisions about security of movement to civilian and military officials on the ground who are best placed to make such assessments. It makes little sense to post brave and talented professional staff to Kandahar only to restrict them from making regular contact with the people they are expected to help.
It goes on to say:
While we acknowledge the courage and professionalism of the civilians posted to Kandahar, the Canadian-led PRT in Kandahar also displays signs of the fragmentation and uncoordinated effort that prevail throughout the programming of international development aid in Afghanistan. Effectiveness would be enhanced by aligning national and departmental priorities and operations more closely...
I hope the government will take note of these recommendations and follow through with them.
I have spoken to representatives from the NATO countries over the last few months. As already was recognized in the debate over the last few days, countries from NATO and Europe are not contributing enough on the military side. However, we can learn a lot from these countries on what they do on the aid side. Many of these countries, such as Norway, Denmark, Holland and Britain have better systems in delivering aid, with better results.
The main reason for the results, as mentioned before in the report, is the military and aid people on the ground in the countries delivering aid are working close together. They are able to make decisions and disburse funds faster and more effectively. The Afghan people can see it and they can associate with the countries that are not there to protect them but are there to deliver aid.
NATO representatives told me the most positive result is that the Afghan people see the benefits of the aid almost immediately after the arrival of the military personnel in their villages. As soon as the Taliban have been chased out, automatically the aid goes in, whether it is water or help to build schools. All of a sudden the villagers see that positive results are happening. Their success is two-fold, protection and development, working hand in hand.
As the Senlis Council report has stated, Canada's incoherent development strategy is failing to address even the basic needs of Kandahar's people. This failure is increasing the support of insurgency. It states that a complete overhaul of development infrastructure is also necessary. As well, a new strategy and structure is needed to ensure Canada's development efforts complement those of its military.
I will repeat, again, that they have to work together. They have to be on the ground. There have to be results quickly or the Afghans will lose any faith in the country that takes over in a military exercise. The failure to address the extreme poverty, hunger and mortality rates as well as to boost economic development has caused local Afghan support to decrease and has compromised the entire Canadian mission.
The focus has to be more on development. The Prime Minister recently announced a guaranteed defence spending increase. No one is disputing that. Our military needs the best equipment and training, without question. However, if we are to increase defence spending, why not go in tandem and increase aid and development and deliver it in the proper manner? Most important, as I previously stated, we need to change the administration, how it is dealt with and the way this aid is delivered.
