Foreign Affairs Committee on Oct. 24th, 2006

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. McKay, thank you very much for your superb bill and your amendments. They really will make a difference in terms of ensuring that government moneys are spent for what they are intended.

We're all perhaps guilty of this over time, that not enough of the moneys that have gone into aid actually get to the people on the ground who need it the most for those basic needs.

I just want your opinion. With the amendments, your bill is almost identical to a bill put forth by Madame Desjarlais, who used to sit in the NDP caucus but now is the chief of staff to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. Mr. McKay, if your bill with the amendments you're proposing is identical to the bill proposed by the current chief of staff to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, shouldn't the government really speak to the chief of staff to ask whether she supports your bill and to get her ideas as to the veracity of your bill, which I'm sure she will wholeheartedly support?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thanks, Mr. Martin.

You know, we may end up doing that, but I just want to say one thing--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Be careful what we ask for, right?

You mentioned that she used to be in the NDP and that now she's a chief of staff. I don't know what that really brings to it, other than it's a real step up, in my opinion.

Mr. McKay.

[John McKay]

I think that's a wonderful idea, but I'd actually propose that you call the Prime Minister who signed the letter that says:

We are writing to urge you to introduce legislation which establishes poverty reduction as the aim for Canada’s Official Development Assistance (ODA). A legislated mandate for Canada’s ODA would ensure that aid is provided in a manner both consistent with Canada’s human rights obligations and respectful of the perspectives of those living in poverty.

If you go to clause 2 of the bill, what does it say but that it's a “manner consistent with Canadian values, Canadian foreign policy”. It promotes human rights. You know, I don't know what else you would say.

In clause 4, it states:

(a) contributes to poverty reduction;

(b) takes into account the perspectives of the poor; and

(c) is consistent with Canada’s international human rights obligations.

Presumably the Prime Minister could have written this bill himself.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Well, didn't the current Prime Minister--and there are many quotes, I think, to support this--very publicly support the essence of your bill, in meaning and intent, repeatedly, when he was in the opposition?

[John McKay]

And in their platform.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

That's right.

[John McKay]

So I'm not quite sure whether the objections are substantive.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Actually, that's my question. What possibly could consume the Conservative Party to want to oppose your bill, since it appears that from the very heart and guts of their current party, they have the origins of your bill and support from the Prime Minister all the way through to members of Parliament and chiefs of staff.

[John McKay]

Mysterious are the ways of the Conservative Party, and I could not comment on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I'm certain that if the Conservative Party brings forward amendments, it will only be to better this bill, and we can be assured of that.

You have another minute actually, but I hate to give it to you.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Go ahead, Keith.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

I think I'd simply like to say that it's been a wonderful, constructive discourse, Mr. Chairman, and I really appreciate the opportunity to have spoken.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right. Well, we give the fair amount of time.

[John McKay]

You seem to have a lot more fun than the finance committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Menzies.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Seeing that it appears we have moved to clause-by-clause, and please take this constructively--

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We haven't gone to clause-by-clause. We can go through--

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

It appears we have, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Well, we haven't.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

I do want a point of clarification, and this is one of the things I had raised an alarm bell about. This is the advisory committee.

Correct me if I'm wrong. I believe it's on page 1 of your suggested changes. You're changing the advisory committee to read “civil society”. Am I reading this right? That's where you want to insert that?

[John McKay]

Where it says “Committee” in clause 3, under “Interpretation”--“means the Advisory Committee”, that's deleted.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

That's deleted to become “civil society organization”.