Foreign Affairs Committee on June 7th, 2006

[John McNee]

My recollection is that the United Nations Secretary General pulled his people out of Iraq when their security couldn't be guaranteed and their key people were killed, for number one.

We can't ask the United Nations personnel, who include a lot of Canadians, to take unreasonable risks. But at the same time, the multilateral system has very much come to the aid of Iraqi reconstruction, and Canada chairs the donors group of the multilateral trust funds assisting Iraqi reconstruction.

I think there's a recognition of the importance of Iraq succeeding, but that isn't to say, at the same time, that there aren't lingering deep divisions within the United Nations over Iraq.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. McNee.

We'll go to Ms. McDonough. Five minutes, please.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to ask three quick questions. First, you spoke about the importance of the millennium development goals. Every witness, and there were many over the last couple of years, who appeared before this committee stressed that it's absolutely essential for donor nations to meet their 0.7% ODA obligations or the millennium development goals simply couldn't be reached. So I'd like to ask you to address that briefly.

Second, as you will know, the non-proliferation treaty process ended in complete chaos last June, and in October members of the middle powers initiative inaugurated an article VI forum at the United Nations to try to get this back on track. I wonder if you could speak about the middle powers initiative and how Canada can support this, because it really is a very major concern.

Third, today at noon several NGOs sponsored a very interesting and constructive event around the need for Canada to show some leadership in relation to the whole issue of small arms and light weapons. Currently we have a UN program of action on this, but are falling far short. They've pointed out that there are no international standards to even measure progress, and they were urging Canada to announce its support for an international arms trade treaty, which 45 other governments have done, to provide leadership around this. I wonder if you could comment.

[John McNee]

Mr. Chair, on the first question, about the 0.7%, it's one we discussed a moment ago.

I think the target is one thing. It's important that donor countries increase their efforts. That's absolutely for sure. Canada has done so in recent years in important ways, and that was confirmed in the budget recently. As I said before, I think that's one question. The effectiveness of aid delivery is very much another one, and that has been very much the credo of CIDA, as you know, and of our other donors.

Finding ways in which the donors can reinforce each other's efforts, cooperate, and... Some very interesting and promising things have been done by CIDA working with some of our like-minded partners, with the British and others, whereby we aren't imposing the same demands on recipient countries, but we'll be satisfied if the British audit a project.

So I think that--

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

The British delivered on their commitment to 0.7%.

[John McNee]

I have to repeat, as before, that the setting of ODA spending targets is a policy question for the government; it's one public servants implement, and I don't really think it's up to me to comment.

On the NPT, I would agree very much that this was really a signal failure last time. The NPT has been, is, and, I should venture to say, will be central to Canada. I think Canada enjoys particular respect as a country that could have developed nuclear weapons--we had the capacity at the end of the war--but didn't.

I would like to inform myself better about the middle powers initiative. It certainly is a priority for us and a deep concern, I know, that last year no real progress was made on reinforcing the NPT.

Small arms and light weapons are the curse in Africa and in many other parts. It's a complicated problem because in some areas it's related to gangs and criminal violence. In others it's inter-ethnic, so even the definition isn't simple.

As you know, Canada took the lead in the fight against anti-personnel land mines and has been very active on the small-arms front. How we proceed now, I confess, I don't have an easy answer; it's something we should look at carefully, because it's the scourge in much of the developing world.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Mr. Obhrai. Welcome, Mr. Obhrai. You have five minutes.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Thank you, Mr. McNee, for coming.

I was in the UN with Peter MacKay, the foreign minister, and with Alan Rock, and we had the opportunity to sit in your future office. We talked with Kofi Annan and we talked with the assistant secretary general.

Many of the questions that are coming from this must be on government policy issues like 0.7% and the treaty signing and everything, which we'll debate in the House, but the main job that will occupy you when you're there will be UN reform, which is going to become the crucial thing in the coming years. Kofi Annan's reforms come in here, but Mr. Annan will be leaving at the end of this year. I do not find an appetite in the UN for the implementation of Mr. Annan's so-called reforms during his tenure.

We in Canada are a little concerned about how the selection for the Secretary General is going to be done. I noticed that it will be by the Security Council, leaving it again up to the five members in the United Nations with their extraordinary powers that curtail many of the decisions that come from the United Nations because of the politics being played.

In order to make this thing effective, the first area would be--and I want to know your opinion on this--the transition to the new Secretary General. Depending on his own agenda and on how much you and we push for the reform, I believe the new Secretary General will be the guy who does the reform. I'm sorry to say that for Kofi Annan time is running out. I did meet with the Secretary General and the other guys, and although they are working, I don't see the effort.

Do you agree that there is going to be no appetite now and that we should concentrate on seeing who is going to be the next Secretary General and push for the reforms at that time?

[John McNee]

I think that's a very good point.

It will be a very difficult act to follow for whoever becomes the new UN Secretary General. Kofi Annan has made a huge impact, especially in terms of highlighting human rights and the humanitarian dimension of the UN's work, but he is in the last months of his second term in office, and that isn't the time when any leader is best placed to push things forward. At the end of the day, though, he is the chief civil servant. The United Nations is the membership, and it's incumbent upon Canada and the other members to try to make the place work better.

Kofi Annan has come up with some excellent ideas. Some have been implemented already--whistle-blower legislation, ethical standards, internal oversight--and that's great. The more sweeping management reforms that he proposed have a lot of resistance from countries in the third world because they fear that it would lessen their say in how the place runs. We have to be sensitive to that but at the same time keep on pushing for what I called at the outset modern management principles and practices.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Let me just intervene for a second.

Your effort would be to work toward getting this new Secretary General.... We have said there should be a broader consensus than the consensus of the Security Council five. That should be where you should be working. Am I right? Would that be a priority?

[John McNee]

I'd say briefly that I think Canada launched an excellent idea, which is to let a little sunlight into this process, while respecting the fact that the procedure for selecting the Secretary General is set down in the UN charter and the nomination from the Security Council then goes to the General Assembly. For a position as important as the Secretary General of the United Nations, it really is an antiquated—that's a polite word for it—process, and I think Canada has done a service by suggesting a more transparent, open, consultative process, suggesting that people apply and so on. Let's see where that goes. Sometimes you have to plant the seed before it comes to fruition.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. McNee.

Mr. Wilfert, five minutes.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Ambassador, at the end of World War II Canada was the only state to in fact be on all of the committees of the United Nations. At one point it was even suggested that we become a member of the Security Council. Now we have a government that.... Mr. Van Loan's comments underline some of our concerns as to how committed this government is to the United Nations. Clearly there is a view that this government is not as committed to the UN as previous governments. So I would ask you a number of things.

In terms of the mandate that you have as ambassador to the United Nations, are you able to tell us what it is, and do you feel comfortable in terms of having the necessary ability to carry out Canada's national interests at the UN?

Secondly, what is your view of the ICC, the International Criminal Court?

An area of concern that certainly I believe we need to be highlighting at the United Nations Human Rights Council is the issue of Burma and human rights in Burma. And in terms of how effective this new council will be—and I realize you're not there yet—what role do you see Canada, or certainly yourself, articulating in light of the Havel-Tutu report from the United Nations?

Fourth, in terms of the whole issue of bringing the UN into the modern age, Japan is clearly paying more than its fair share and it's not getting fair treatment, in their view. Clearly they're now proposing another approach in terms of getting assistance. The Americans are giving lip service, it seems, to that proposal. Can you make any comments of a general nature, at least, on that type of issue? It clearly is going to be on the agenda come the fall.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[John McNee]

Mr. Chair, I think the first question is really, with great respect, a political one, and is a question to put to the minister, if I might suggest. I would simply note that the government has made very clear the importance of our bilateral relations and our multilateral engagement. I think that's in a long Canadian tradition of the conduct of our international affairs.

The International Criminal Court I would put down as one of the innovations achieved in the UN system in the post-Cold War period, and one that I think has tremendous promise to ensure that there isn't impunity from crimes committed. I noted that Joseph Kony, the leader of the Lord's Resistance Army, is the first one to be indicted. This court will cast a very long shadow, I think, and my personal view is that it's an important step forward.

As for the new Human Rights Council, I should note that it's just getting going. We have hopes that it will find ways to be more constructive than the Human Rights Commission, though one has to remember that a lot of criticism of the commission is partly because over the last 20 years its drawing attention to human rights abuses started to sting, and countries didn't like the stigma that attached to it. They wanted to get on the commission, those who misbehaved, so they could blunt that.

I think that Canada will work hard to try to find ways that make this council an effective one. Burma certainly is an area of concern. Whether or not the council will function in the same way of highlighting country situations, I honestly don't know yet, Mr. Chair, and it remains to be defined.

On the question of Japan, I assume that Mr. Wilfert alludes to its desire to join the Security Council. There was a sustained effort, as you know, not only by Japan but by Brazil, Germany, and India, to gain permanent seats. There was not consensus on that. My anticipation is that the issue will come back again, because the composition of the council reflects the kind of anti-fascist alliance that emerged from 1945, and doesn't really represent the current realities. On the other hand, the effective functioning of the Security Council, its accountability to the general membership, and transparency, to my mind, are almost more urgent problems and things we should work on as Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. McNee.

Mr. Goldring, five minutes, please.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ambassador McNee, once again, congratulations.

Ambassador, in your remarks today, you mentioned a peace-building commission that had been launched. From what we have seen in some of the countries, Haiti in particular, about real concerns about the effectiveness that the direction of the United Nations, either in its peacekeeping or its military presence there.... You had mentioned “threatened by or emerging from conflict”. I dare say that I think the country is really both.

In the discussions there, when we visited, there was some concern about whether they had a mandate, whether they had strong rules of engagement. In other words, by not clearly defining the mandates and the rules of engagement for the peacekeeping operations, there's a sense that perhaps there is still something missing in the direction. Of course that would lead toward your peace-building commission, which I would imagine would be a follow-up to it.

Will you be directing attention to that, to try to bring resolve to the concern so that when we are engaged in particular areas, such as Haiti and other parts of the world, there will be the troops, the area direction will have a strong mandate, and they will have strong rules of engagent?

I've mentioned an article that just came from the paper about a Canadian RCMP officer who was with United Nations troops. It clearly indicates, once again, that there was a lack of direction on what to do under the circumstance. I wonder if you could respond to that and the concerns.

[John McNee]

Mr. Chair, the first thing I'd say is that I'd like to commend the committee for focusing on the situation in Haiti. I think this is a situation of great concern to Canadians; it isn't partisan. Canada has contributed a great deal in Haiti in the past, and it is doing so again. The situation is in our backyard. It has important implications for us.

I know that the mandate of the UN mission is to be renewed, I think, on the 15th of August. I'm going to get there a few days after my predecessor departs in early July. I think it's very important that this mission has the kind of effective mandate to enable it to do its job. Even though we're not on the council right now, the point we'll be making clearly, just as he did, is the great importance of the UN mission being given the right mandate for it to be effective on the ground.

I note, and I only really have the press reports to go on, that the UN is investigating what happened in the tragic death of the RCMP officer. I think it's very important that this be pursued as well.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Well, that is a specific ongoing investigation. When we were visiting the country, the general comments actually mirrored that. What happens is that there's a reluctance to engage; there's a hesitancy about whether they have the total direction to go in. And there's a large area in Port-au-Prince, the red zone, that for some inexplicable reason has been left alone. Maybe it's waiting for a new mandate.

These are the types of things that are of concern for the troops and for the people who are engaged there. For the police, too, not to have the authority of arrest...clearly, these types of situations and authority should be given to help bring the issues along.

[John McNee]

Mr. Chairman, just very briefly, I recall that since the elections, the UN has sent a mission to Haiti to try to assess the security situation to determine whether the mandate is sufficient. So I think they're working on it, and we'll certainly pursue it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Madam Bourgeois.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good afternoon, Mr. McNee. Congratulations on your appointment. I believe that you have everything it takes to be an excellent ambassador, particularly since, because of the March 2006 UN reform, last May, Canada was chosen to sit on the new Human Rights Council. I imagine that either you or a government official will sit on this council.

We have discussed important issues, including Haiti, Darfur, and Uganda. There is also an important issue here in Canada. You are no doubt aware that for over 20 years now, the United Nations has been working on a draft declaration to recognize the rights of indigenous peoples, but the new government appears to be ready to jeopardize the historic consensus that exists between the United Nations and Canada.

You have the ability to advise the government and make recommendations; do you think the time has come for Canada to show leadership in aboriginal rights, particularly since it is one of the UN founding nations, and because it has always been a leader in this area? What would you advise the government to do with respect to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?

[John McNee]

Mr. Chairman, please allow me to clarify something about the Human Rights Council. As you know, the United Nations headquarters is in New York, but the council will be based in Geneva. My colleague Paul Meyer, Canada's Ambassador to the United Nations Office, will be in charge of the operations there. The broad principles originate in New York, but the implementation will take place in Geneva.

I am aware of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. However, in our system, the advice provided to the government by its officials is confidential. I cannot speculate on any advice I might give the minister from my vantage point in New York. It would simply be a representation, Ms. Bourgeois.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

You must understand, Mr. McNee, that it is an important issue. You have been telling us — and on this I have no doubt because I have read and re-read your brief — that you are an advisor, that you can make recommendations. You are a very important person. You tell us that you are aware of issues that are important to Canada, and you understand Canada's priorities. But you can't tell me if, at the UN, you will recommend...

I understand that the UN has a presence in Geneva as well as in New York. Nevertheless, if you are aware of the issues, then you know that, for the last 20 years, Canada has been criticized for the way in which it treats its aboriginal communities. You are well aware of the fact that the Human Rights Council will be discussing aboriginal rights in Canada. What is your position on this issue? That is what I would like to know.

[John McNee]

Mr. Chairman, I think this is a fundamental concept for Canada and for all the other member countries of the United Nations, including those that are members of the new council. All these countries are prepared to review their human rights performance. Canada has always been very open. Of course, there has been some criticism. No country is perfect. In my view, the principle is very important.

With respect to your question regarding the statement, I have not yet studied this issue thoroughly. Once again, I would say that the advice officials give to the government are intended for the government.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

I want to thank Ambassador McNee for being here today.

Certainly, speaking on behalf of our committee, we wish you all the best there. The need for reform at the United Nations is not something that is questioned. I think all people recognize there are reforms that need to take place. It's not for a lack of issues that you deal with, whether it's poverty around the world, AIDS, terrorism, weapon proliferation, you name it, there are just so many issues, but the effectiveness of dealing with it is what your major issue will be.

We hope that the United Nations becomes effective in what it's called to do. Someone has suggested that if it doesn't reform it has the danger of becoming nothing more than a debating club.

We wish you all the best in your position, and thank you for being here today.

We will suspend and await our next witnesses.