Today I will discuss the work of Elections Canada in promoting democratic development internationally, the value-added that we bring—at least in our view—to Canadian efforts in this sphere, and the ways in which our collective efforts can be maximized.
Elections Canada has long played an active role on the world scene, assisting countries in their efforts to establish sound democratic electoral processes. Since 1990, as a matter of fact, we've participated in initiatives in nearly 100 countries—admittedly initiatives of varying magnitudes. By the way, my office, through my predecessor, was also involved on the international scene in Latin America, Chile in particular.
Our activities range from sending a single expert to address one aspect of the electoral process to assembling multi-year, multi-country teams to undertake in-depth and ongoing analysis and assistance, to undertaking observation and accompaniment covering all areas of the electoral process. These initiatives have given us the experience that has proven instrumental in evolving a unique approach to international electoral assistance. Our approach is one of accompanying—therefore my use of the word “accompaniment”—electoral management bodies before, during, and after elections, and of helping them develop and strengthen institutional frameworks, skills, and autonomy, or independence, which are crucial building blocks to electoral democratic development.
This approach is an elastic model that allows for mutual learning. It has enabled us to accomplish a great deal, for instance, with our partners and colleagues at the FEI, the Federal Electoral Institute of Mexico.
The principle of accompaniment guides our international work and was most recently exemplified in two multilateral election monitoring missions in which we worked closely with the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq and the Conseil Électoral Provisoire in Haiti.
The international missions for monitoring Haitian and Iraqi elections, both of which I chaired, are unprecedented examples of the extraordinary level of international cooperation mobilized for those purposes. Each mission was led by a steering committee comprised of executives of electoral management bodies from around the world, who provided expert and independent peer review to both the Iraqi and Haitian electoral management bodies. These missions also passed judgment on the elections, issuing timely reports to the public on the proceedings. We accompanied the Iraqi commission through three electoral events in 2005, the January 30 elections for the transitional national assembly, the October 15 constitutional referendum, as well as the December 15 Council of Representatives elections, the body which is now effectively ruling Iraq.
The value of the IMIE model is best illustrated by what it accomplished after the Iraqi legislative elections last December. In the midst of accusations of fraud against the IECI that threatened to destabilize the situation in Iraq, the mission took the initiative—without consulting anyone—to quickly put together and send a special team of four experts. Two of the experts were chosen by me and two by the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, Mr. Amr Moussa. The critical and timely report of the electoral experts, including Doug Rowland, president of the Canadian Association of Former Parliamentarians, and Rafael Lopez-Pintor, a Spanish professor—whom I know well—helped to defuse a volatile situation between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites. We also held a post-mortem meeting with the IECI in March 2006 and discussed the full experience of the IMIE in Iraq, as well as the next steps, and provided advice on building a permanent Iraqi electoral commission, on which we have expertise.
In Haiti we accompanied the CEP through the first and second rounds of their presidential and legislative elections in 2006. For the municipal and local elections, and the run-off for the legislative...scheduled for December 3 of this year, Elections Canada has accepted the Haitian government's invitation to continue to accompany the CEP through a longer-term monitoring mission. That initiation was also made by the Canadian government, I should say, through CIDA, so we've accepted the invitation of the Canadian government, as a matter of fact. This mission will provide regular reports to the CEP on developments in the field, as well as electoral experts who will work directly with the Conseil Électoral Provisoire.
Our support for these elections is therefore even more focused on accompaniment, that is to say, helping them along, while still preserving our independence in producing our report on the elections.
Now I'll continue in the other official language.
These are some of the substantial accomplishments we have achieved with the resources I have been able to allocate to our role on the international scene. Obviously, my first priority is administering Canadian elections. The needs of Canadians come first. With more money and people assigned to our international role, we would be able to accomplish much more.
Pure observation is not the best way to deploy Elections Canada resources. Our strength lies in providing electoral support that addresses the longer process of democratization. We do this by working to build the capacity and the independence of electoral management bodies — by helping to design, development, implement and strengthen electoral commissions, while respecting the cultures and histories from which they emanate.
Elections may appear simple, especially in Canada, but they are not simple in Canada and, certainly, they are not simple abroad. Elections involve the intersection of different political forces, and managing that process is very complex. Not surprisingly, electoral assistance is also complex work.
The terms of your inquiry include examining ways in which non-governmental organizations and government bodies can best contribute to democratic assistance globally. It is useful to reiterate that Elections Canada is an independent agency of Parliament. This independence provides us with credibility and effectiveness on the international scene.
There has been a recognition on the part of CIDA and DFAIT of the importance of getting those who are involved in democratic development to exchange information and coordinate efforts. The Democracy Council is beginning to facilitate this. Other witnesses who have appeared before you have spoken about this.
The risks involved when Canada is the only, or the foremost, country engaged in assisting countries where democracy is fragile have been underlined by Ms. Alexa McDonough in her comments on October 4. That's what we did in Irak; that's what we did and are continuing to do in Haiti. These are the risks, whether Canada is acting alone or is leading international missions. And I believe that assisting developing democracies is a riskier endeavour today than it was 10 or 15 years ago, at the start of the post-Cold War era. But today we have a better understanding of the risks involved. There have been failures in the past, there will be failures in the future.
I understand the committee is considering a number of ideas for increasing the efficacy and profile of Canadian democracy promotion. It is important to have coherent and well-considered approaches. The growing interest in supporting political parties, for example, needs to be considered carefully. I even have some observations to make, if that is of interest to you.
Finally, democracy promotion is challenged by the growing perception in some parts of the world that democracy is not bearing fruit in terms of improving the day-to-day lives of the people. Setbacks will occur, but this does not mean we give up.
In my view, there is no alternative to democracy. What is needed is support for the entire process of democracy building and for the system as a whole, based on each country's values, history and culture. That moreover is our international trademark, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.