Evidence of meeting #19 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 promotion.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
You spoke about the importance of political parties. You wouldn't get much argument from us. But you also stressed that often the most successful approach to democracy-building is at what we would think of as a municipal level, very much community-based, which, with some minor exceptions in Canada, is without political parties. Can you comment on that?
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Centre for the Study of Democracy, Queen's University, As an Individual
I wasn't necessarily recommending that parties work at local levels. Local government here of course has been primarily independent. Occasionally there are informal party relationships locally, but it's been primarily locally based. My perception has been, in the countries I have been in and in my study of the literature, that in neighbourhoods.... It's an old lesson. It's in the assemblies in Massachusetts. It's neighbourhood democracy. The most essential thing in democracy is to learn how to lose--not just lose elections, but lose on issues all the time. You have to sign on to the rules of the game knowing that this time you're only going to get a quarter of the pie or none, but you keep coming back. There's almost nothing that creates that awareness better than working on local issues and local neighbourhood issues.
Secondly, where there are authoritarian governments, they are less threatened by that because you're not talking about political parties at the national level; you're talking about a better way of delivering service or getting a feeling for the people at local levels. So you're entirely correct that the party focus that I am recommending, which would apply to legislatures and countries that were going into elections, has less application in one of my main recommendations, which is to invest in local infrastructure. Here in Canada, with the federation of municipalities, we do have several organizations that work at that. If I had to make one single suggestion, it would be to make sure that piece is really well funded, because that is less threatening to autocrats but it is most important in getting the reign of tolerance that has to bear on democracy. You learn it, really, when you're debating whose garbage is going to get picked up.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you, Mr. Axworthy.
We have a choice, committee. I've been asked to at least try to reserve the last five minutes or so for committee business. Is that still the wish? If that's the case, we forfeit the second round.
With that, we thank you, Mr. Axworthy. You know the system here. We're kind of run by the anticipation of bells in a very short period of time. We have some committee business.
5:20 p.m.
Chair, Centre for the Study of Democracy, Queen's University, As an Individual
Are there any whips here?
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We thank you for your presentation. Welcome back, and thanks for being here.
5:20 p.m.
Chair, Centre for the Study of Democracy, Queen's University, As an Individual
Thanks for inviting me.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We will not even suspend. We'll just give them a few moments to leave the table and then, committee members, we will move on to committee business.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We have two notices of motion that have been brought forward and that have met the criteria.
Madam McDonough, do you want to speak to your motion, please?
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Very briefly, I'm asking for support for that very straightforward motion, basically informing ourselves, through departmental officials from CIDA and from the Department of Foreign Affairs, on developments in Darfur, on current and projected assistance to the African Union mission, and intended or planned contributions to the UN peacekeeping force in Darfur.
So it's very straightforward. There wasn't, obviously, an opportunity to hear from officials before last night's debate. We might have benefited from it had there been, but I think it's an important thing to do by way of follow-up, and invite the members' support for that motion.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I certainly appreciate Madam McDonough's concern over this, and she expressed it very eloquently last night, too.
There are a couple of points. We've had two take-note debates on this very issue, one again last night that several of us participated in. The government members pretty much laid out what the latest developments are, what the current and projected Canadian assistance is, and what this government's role and ambitions are.
So to that point, Mr. Chair, logisticaly I would think this might be more relevant if we did it after we get done the major study we're working on right now. Some members of the committee are travelling next week to do with this major study. I think that while that's fresh in their minds, they would like to follow up on what they learn on that study. We may have main estimates from both DFAIT and CIDA, and we'll have supplementary estimates coming in. We have a report on Haiti that's not completed.
Mr. Chair, I would argue that we have enough on our plate right now. I'm not saying that we shouldn't do this, but let's not overburden this committee. Let's make sure we get done what we've committed ourselves to right now.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you.
We're just going over the schedule here and taking a look to see what is possible. I don't think there's any need circulating it now.
Did anyone else want to speak to this motion?
Borys first, then Madam Barbot.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I'm glad that Mr. Menzies has said let's do this. I would suggest, though, especially considering the situation on the ground, that you have the potential of a genocide by attrition. We've seen what's happened in the recent past, and knowing that it's the very same regime that is in place that began the genocide not that long ago, and things seem to be building to the potential for another catastrophe, I think time of is of the essence. So I agree—and I noted it down when you said let's do this—let's do this, but let's not do it after the fact.
I think we need to support this motion, and in fact look at our schedule to do it as soon as possible. I think everyone's glad that we've had the opportunity for parliamentarians to discuss the issue, and the importance of addressing the genocide in Darfur in the House of Commons, but what this will afford us is greater detail and insight from the departmental officials.
If we're to move forward, and move forward expeditiously, it's critical not just to debate in the House, but to hear from the departmental officials, so that when we do move, we move in a way that will actually make a difference on the ground.
5:30 p.m.
Bloc
Vivian Barbot Bloc Papineau, QC
My first comment is that the French translation doesn’t adequately reflect the English version. You will be getting a translation that really corresponds to the English version. The translation also contains many errors.
5:30 p.m.
Bloc
Vivian Barbot Bloc Papineau, QC
Of course, we must have answers to be able to appraise the situation. During yesterday’s debate, these answers weren’t really given. The government spoke highly of its accomplishments but these comments were of a general nature.
The questions that we want to ask are much more precise et are related to whatever direct action the government has taken concerning Darfour. Consistent to yesterday’s motion during the debate, I would also like to propose certain amendments to the motion.
In view of the lateness of the hour and of the fact that we have to return to the House for the 5:45 p.m. vote, I think it would be preferable to adjourn the meeting and to reconvene next week.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I think the intent is to look for a suitable time.
I'm in agreement with Madam Barbot. Again, I think the translation thing is one thing, and that's an issue, but we want to be able to debate this.
In trying to find a time and looking at the schedule, after we have ministers booked, I don't see anything before November 1. We have Ed Broadbent coming. I don't know how that would work.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Bernard Patry Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
Mr. Menzies mentioned that we had a debate yesterday. That's fine, and it's great. I mean, we appreciate this. I think this motion is in a sense a consequence of the debate yesterday.
My understanding about this motion is that it's not a full study. We can have one day, for one or two hours, for officials coming from CIDA, the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Department of National Defence to give us an update on what's going on there and what Canada's intentions are for the next month.
We cannot postpone it right now because the crisis is there at the moment. From my point of view, we need to deal with this. But it's not a study. I agree that we have enough studies for the moment. We cannot study, study, and study. But to me, it's to at least get an update on one day when we can fit it in.
I fully agree in the sense that it's an emergency and in the sense that if we need to sit on another day, such as a Thursday morning, I'd agree to come on a Thursday morning, if we can find a room. We would then keep going with our schedule.
Thank you.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
I have a point of clarification.
My intention was, and I was quite sure I said, “if we are going to study this”. If that isn't what came out of my mouth, it was my intention. I don't think I said we “should” study this. I'm not a permanent member on this committee, so I'm not going to make that suggestion.
But I still plead the case that this committee has a lot on its plate right now. At some point, we have to make a decision. As you said, we have ministers coming and we have estimates coming.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative