Foreign Affairs Committee on Oct. 18th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Obhrai, for that great question.

Madame Verner, maybe you would want to respond to that glowing testimonial by Mr. Obhrai.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I would like to respond to the extremely enlightened and constructive comment my colleague made. He is right, it is fairly difficult to monitor the situation. Two Liberal colleagues shared their time a little earlier, and one of them asked me in a very interested manner what we are doing specifically to help Afghan women. The other member suggested that we should withdraw from the area, since the heat is on, and that we should tell Afghan women to go back to the Dark Ages, and tell young girls to stop going to school and to submit to the Taliban regime.

However, I agree with my colleague, this position is a difficult one. Those were two very different five-minute periods. I agree that my colleague can raise the issue which I am here to speak about today, namely democracy. CIDA's approach is recognized everywhere. The countries where we work have congratulated us on our projects. We are getting good results.

I had an opportunity to visit Mali this summer. I met the auditor general of the only francophone African country which has an office of the auditor general. He told me that he was working closely with Ms. Sheila Fraser. I think that's a good sign. We have excellent methods. Canadians know just how good their Auditor General, Ms. Sheila Fraser, is. She agreed to help Mali's auditor general. He has already produced a first report and is about to come out with a second one. To be frank, we can be very proud of our work in developing countries.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Madame Verner.

Mr. Van Loan, you have five minutes.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to talk to you about the core of what we're doing in our study, which is democracy promotion.

Right now there is a backlash against democracy promotion in a bunch of countries around the world. In Russia earlier this year they brought into effect a law against civil society organizations, basically restricting them severely and preventing them from doing their work. They've effectively shut down independent media, certainly in the electronic realm, in Russia. In Belarus you have a total clampdown on civil society. It's virtually non-operable, except in clandestine ways. Similarly, the media is virtually all state-controlled. In China you have the situation, with their getting Internet companies, of agreeing to freeze the word “democracy”, and so on. In Cuba and North Korea they don't even have a backlash; they never even started down that path. Some of these groups are now even meeting together in a Shanghai cooperation group to try to shut down democracy.

I look at this as something that as a government we find difficult to do. Another thing we find difficult to do as a government is to support political parties and political party development abroad. We've had submissions from Tom Axworthy, respected former chief of staff to Pierre Trudeau from the Liberal side—and we've heard from others—that the way one can do this best is by creating an arm's-length kind of organization, whether it be on the model of the British Westminster Foundation for Democracy or the National Endowment for Democracy.

I look at the summary you have presented and I see, for example, that under the sample programs, the word “Russia” never appears, the word “Belarus” never appears, the word “Cuba” never appears. That illustrates part of what I was saying about the limitations of being able to do aggressive work promoting the freedom part of the agenda.

We've done some “rule of law” work, for example, in China, trying to train judges and so on. Some people might be critical and say that actually helps support regimes. We're hoping that some of our rule-of-law approach rubs off, but one can be afraid of the opposite.

My question to you is this. Is there value in looking to a more arm's-length approach to some of this kind of work, on the model we've seen in the Netherlands, in Great Britain, in the United States, of creating an arm's-length form of funding that political parties can still be involved in and parliamentarians can still be involved in, but that gets into some of those more challenging things the government has trouble doing?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Van Loan.

Minister Verner.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you. You seem to be alluding to organizations whose mission is to strengthen political parties abroad. Providing effective support to political parties is compatible with our general approach to promote democracy and freedom.

The issue is whether Canada should set up an institution such as the NDI, the National Democratic Institute, or the IMD, the Institute for Multiparty Democracy, which is a Dutch body, or whether it should copy, another model. Since democratic values in politics are being increasingly recognized, it is becoming easier for organizations working in the area of development to promote every aspect of democracy, including the vital role played by political parties as instruments of political competition.

We believe it is useful to assess the best way of doing this work, including the possibility of assigning it to existing organizations. But we will be very sensitive to the committee's views on this issue and we will be pleased to take your recommendations into account.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Van Loan, you have two minutes.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

You talked about political parties, but the first part of it that I addressed, what I call the difficult countries, the ones that are downright resistant and that are aggressively moving to prevent support for democratic development...there are very good reasons diplomatically why, when we have other issues as a government to worry about, with Russia, for example, we might not want to have a government agency directly involved in that type of activity, and the same might go for Cuba or China or elsewhere. That doesn't mean we want to abandon our values and commitments to freedom, to democracy, and to seeing those values spread and promoted. I think the whole world becomes a more secure place, we all agree, if that happens.

The reason I point to some of those countries in particular--Russia, Belarus, and others in there--is they're ones that experience has told us.... You talked in your speech about how Freedom House measures an increase in democracy. The places that have been most successful have been in eastern Europe, the countries immediately abutting Belarus and Russia that have taken democracy to heart quite well. So logically you'd think the next wave might be similar countries--culturally, historically, and so on--with similar kinds of relationships with people. I see a role there as well for the type of arm's-length activity you wouldn't want to see a government agency doing directly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Van Loan.

Madam Verner, you have about ten seconds.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Take Russia, for example. We are doing development work in the area of civil law reform. We are also working closely with the Canadian Parliamentary Centre. Obviously, by investing—which is the direction we want to take—and by promoting democratic governance, we hope to obtain results. There still are challenges to meet, but there's no doubt that there are good examples of where it has worked. Take Ghana, which just put an end to a long undemocratic history and which today is an excellent example.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Madam Minister.

Madam McDonough, for ten minutes.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister and Deputy Minister, for being here before the committee today.

Madam Minister, you've indicated that CIDA works in a partnership with defence officials in Afghanistan. Based on the information available, the attempts of my party to make a calculation of what the complexion of that really is led us to the conclusion that for every $9 being expended on defence in Afghanistan, there is a mere $1 being expended on international development, diplomacy, and peacekeeping. Could you indicate whether our calculations, based on the information available to us, are in fact accurate in that regard?

Second, in the House yesterday, in response to my colleague Dawn Black, the NDP defence critic, you asserted that the work in Kandahar was being conducted with the greatest transparency, and you referred to technical briefings done by officials in the department. I'm wondering if you can supply to this committee the documentation, the detailed papers, on the basis of which that transparent technical briefing has been provided. In other words, can you share that with us?

Third, I'm sure you will be aware of growing concerns about the increasing militarization of aid. We understand that the previous government had begun to express the position at the OECD that they were in favour of changing the definition of what is considered to be official development assistance to include military expenditures. Could you indicate the position of your government on this issue in general? In particular, can you indicate to us how many PRT members are actually employed in Kandahar and, of those, how many are CIDA employees and how many are defence employees?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Madam McDonough.

Minister Verner.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

As far as military expenditures are concerned, you would have to ask that question of my colleague the Minister of National Defence. Development aid expenditures total $100 million, including $15 million which will be spent in the Kandahar region by the end of the year according to our estimates.

As for the technical details, we would be pleased to send you the information which was provided during last week's meeting. That makes me smile. You mean to say that your colleague asked me about some technical details he was unfamiliar with. He will have read them and will see for himself that we are acting with full transparency in this matter.

We are not militarizing our development aid. I know that your party does not support our mission in Afghanistan. I know that your party held its convention in the Quebec City area. As you know, thousands of military personnel live in the Quebec City area with their families and their friends. The NDP, at its convention, said that it truly does not believe in what our people are accomplishing over there.

Not only do I live in that area, but I took the time to listen to what the people had to say on this issue. I was given very specific examples of how we need to gain the trust of the Afghans. However, the results are there. Reconstruction is happening. The situation is difficult. It is not easy to work in that type of situation. Humanitarian aid can only happen when there is security. Everyone is saying this. I don't understand why you still don't see that.

If our humanitarian workers, especially local ones, because that is our approach—

We didn't go there to impose our views. We went there and we made sure that everyone, including communities, village councils composed of elders and women, who now have rights, participated in establishing the priority of the projects. The country now has a constitution. When the people tell us what they want, we work at making it happen. But to do so, we need security. We need the security provided to us by Canadian soldiers.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Madame Verner.

Madam McDonough.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, I have to say honestly that I've rarely ever been more patronized by a witness before this committee, particularly by a minister.

I had a very specific question: whether $9 in military expenditures to $1 in international development, diplomacy, and peacekeeping was in fact an accurate ratio. I got no response whatsoever, so I want to ask the question again.

I know that you have stated we can get the details on defence spending from the defence department, but I can't believe for a moment that when you have been aware that this question has been raised again and again you're not in a position to give an answer to it. If you're not today, I would ask you to provide an answer to the committee following this meeting.

Secondly, I had asked very specifically for numbers on our PRTs in Kandahar. How many CIDA employees are there? How many defence employees are there? Let me add to that: are there other personnel from any other sources in those PRTs?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Madam McDonough, just for information's sake, next week Defence Minister O'Connor will be here, and we would encourage you to ask those questions on military spending of him.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

You can be sure I'll ask those questions again.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I think Madame Verner has fairly clearly shown the dollars that have been delivered into Kandahar and into Afghanistan.

But if you want to, expand on that a bit, Minister.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Certainly.

When my colleague the Minister of National Defence appears before this committee he will address the matter of his budget. I, however, will stick to CIDA's budget. And, regardless of whether your party supports the initiative, funding will reach $100 million by 2011.

We plan on helping the people of Afghanistan to take control of their future, and we are doing so at their request. We estimate that, by the end of the year, $15 million will have been spent on various projects in Kandahar. Four CIDA employees are working there. They are working with the local population to ensure that Afghan voices are heard when it comes to prioritizing projects and undertaking the reconstruction of Afghanistan.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I have a final brief question.

There are four CIDA officials, and you aren't able to tell me how many defence officials there are in the PRTs, so I'll ask the defence minister that next week.

Secondly, you referred to working with on-site NGOs in a partnership in Kandahar. Can you tell us which NGOs and how many international development workers there are working in the partnerships with CIDA who are on-site in Kandahar?

I've been there, I've tried to get answers to these questions, and except for these kinds of generalities, I'm still unable to have the slightest idea of what you are referring to when you talk about all of these CIDA officials and NGOs working in international development work in Kandahar.

I wonder if you could address that, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Madame Verner.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

We are working with various groups in Afghanistan, such as CARE Canada.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

“In Kandahar”, was the question.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I am going to ask Mr. Greenhill to provide you with information about Kandahar.