Evidence of meeting #22 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sanctions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Afghanistan Policy Adviser, Oxfam International
Thank you very much for those questions.
Peace-building reflects the nature of Afghan society. I think it is one of the most communal and tribal societies in the world, and peace-building works at that level. It works with families and communities.
I think it's clear from the experience we have working with peace-building organizations that they have a very significant effect, a very significant impact, on the communities where they work, and I think it's also important to recognize that sometimes the frictions and disputes that exist at a local level feed into the wider conflict and are sometimes exploited by those who are engaged in the conflict--criminal groups and militant groups--to further their own ends, but of course it has its own benefit, which is bringing greater peace to communities.
As you rightly pointed out, we are calling for a national strategy, because although around a dozen or more organizations engaged in peace-building work endorsed our report, they have limited resources and of course affect only a limited number of communities. The people who work in these organizations ask me why this did not happen five years ago, why there was not a comprehensive plan to work at a local level. They understand the nature of Afghan society and how important it is to have peace at that level.
We are calling for a national strategy and we hope and believe that the Canadian government could give strong support to that. Of course there'll need to be some financial support; if CIDA contributed, that would lead the way and encourage other donors to do likewise. I think there is real potential here for a very positive program that would bring very real benefits to communities who are, in some cases, suffering from significant levels of insecurity and violence.
That's what I would say about the peace-building program.
On transparency, some donors are better than others, but what we want to see is comprehensive transparency. Indeed, the Afghanistan Compact calls on donors and commits them to be transparent with all aid information. They are yet to live up to that commitment; we believe a commission tasked with monitoring aid could encourage them to do so and could ensure that such information is collated, analyzed, and assessed, and then there could be indicators of how well donors are doing. If we can't clearly identify the bad practices, we won't be able to put them right.
I think it's in everybody's interest to have a commission of this kind to assess what's going wrong and how we can improve the delivery of aid.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB
Thank you very much.
Mr. Waldman, at the beginning of the summary it says that existing measures to promote peace in Afghanistan are not succeeding. You made a comment about the United States putting $100 million a day into the military and $7 million a day into aid. I'll use the example of Haiti, because hopefully we can look forward to a reversal of some of that. We were spending $100 million a year in Haiti on 500 soldiers and all the military equipment, but it was absolutely essential to bring the security around. Today the Prime Minister has visited the country, and it's such a secure place that he's able to visit Cité Soleil in unarmoured vehicles. My point is that $100 million a year is now going directly into the aid of the country, and it's having good results.
I look at some of the results from Afghanistan and, in spite of the large military equipment, there are 19,000 community development projects, 530 elected councils. There are many, many of these, with 700,000 children in school, and many millions of girls in school too. It looks like there has been quite a bit done on this, while recognizing that there is always more that can be done.
Looking optimistically toward the future, would you not think that once the area has become more secure, this aid money can then be directed more effectively into moving this direction of government's improvement and democracy's improvement quicker?
4:55 p.m.
Afghanistan Policy Adviser, Oxfam International
I think it's clear that there is a lot of work that needs to be done to improve security. Indeed some of the spending by the international community is to build Afghan security forces, and that of course is correct. We are saying we need to recognize the extent of the destruction of the wars and how far we have to go to tackle poverty and create stability. Still, one in five children dies before the age of five. Their life expectancy is around 43. It has one of the highest levels of maternal mortality in the world. So conditions are still very bad.
If we want to achieve stability and security, we believe that reducing poverty will be an essential element of that strategy. I believe there is increasing recognition of that. I think we need to recognize that insecurity and persistent poverty are linked. Given the circumstances in southern Afghanistan, and the history--the illiteracy, extremism, and other factors, including corruption in the government and disproportionate force by international forces--in conditions of extreme poverty, people may join the militants.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB
Your organization has been there for twenty years. Would you not say that there have been great strides and improvements made over those twenty years? By all accounts, it looks like there are many successes.
4:55 p.m.
Afghanistan Policy Adviser, Oxfam International
I would certainly agree that there have been significant strides forward in a number of areas, but I think it is important to recognize that in many areas of Afghanistan--and we tried to demonstrate this in our report--there are still areas of very severe poverty. In those conditions we may find that individuals are joining the militants, or growing poppies. We're saying that those gaps need to be addressed. There have been improvements, but we can certainly do a lot more with the funds coming into Afghanistan.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you, Mr. Waldman.
We'll sum it up with Mr. Dewar, please.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
I'll be very quick.
I've had the benefit of reading the report from Oxfam, and I thank you for it. I'm assuming it has been submitted to our researchers. Thank you for your work.
You talk about peace-building having to be at the local level, and that there are ways to do it. The jurgas is one way. Where's the UN's role in this, and can the UN play a role in this at all?
4:55 p.m.
Afghanistan Policy Adviser, Oxfam International
I think the UN may have a role in this. I'm not exactly sure what that would be; perhaps they could help facilitate the development of a strategy. We believe it should be led by civil society so that it retains a high degree of legitimacy in the eyes of the population who would be participating. Certainly the UN could promote and encourage and help to facilitate it, and its offices in the provinces and regions could give support to any program that was implemented.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you very much, Mr. Waldman. I would invite you to submit any other comments that you have.
I'll tell you a little story. I had three workers in my offices, one in Ottawa and two back in my riding. Each one of them called me and asked if I wanted the Oxfam report printed, and I said yes. And somehow all three of them printed it, and I think each copy is about this thick. I have three copies of the report, but no, I only read it once. It is fairly comprehensive. We appreciate that.
Because of the short timelines that we have here, I know I cut you off, and I apologize for that. If you have anything that you would like to add, it will be put on the record. We would appreciate it, and we would welcome you to do so. Thank you very much.
We'll suspend for one minute. We'll move to committee business. We have a number of issues we want to quickly deal with. Mr. Dewar has a motion that he would like brought forward on the Radarsat, and we will then look at filling in a couple more timelines.
We'll suspend for one minute.
5:03 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We'll call this meeting back to order. We'll move into committee business. We are public.
Madame Deschamps, go ahead, please.
5:03 p.m.
Bloc
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I would like to follow-up on the motion tabled by Ms. Barbot last week regarding the Khadr affair. Since the agenda has not been set, after the recommendation, the possibility of calling witnesses, I—
5:03 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We certainly will welcome those witnesses. We are inviting people to bring witnesses on the Khadr motion forward. Can we deal with that as soon as we're done with Mr. Dewar's motion?
Mr. Dewar, you're concerned about the witnesses.
Madame Deschamps, go ahead, please.
5:03 p.m.
Bloc
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I looked at the calendar and I saw some dates that we can reserve for sittings right away.
5:03 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
But we need to ask the parties to bring forward witnesses. We do have a witness list, but we don't want to cut it short. Today, with regard to Burma, we felt that maybe we moved a little too quickly, and we've had to invite back. So we're inviting all parties--the government and the opposition--to submit their witness lists as quickly as possible, and then we will look at inserting the Khadr issue as soon as possible.
We're going to move to Mr. Dewar. Mr. Dewar has brought forward a motion to bring his motion forward.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Exactly. To start things off, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to move a motion that we bring to the front of our business agenda the motion that I have at the bottom, so that we can discuss it. I guess, to start things off, I need to move a motion to discuss and hopefully pass my motion. I would leave that with you.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Mr. Dewar has now moved that we bring his motion forward to discuss it. It is one of the two that was mentioned as being time-sensitive. The government has an extension, but we wanted to do it before the 15th, I think, or whatever the date was there. So are we in favour of discussing Mr. Dewar's motion now?
5:05 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
I think the motion is in front of everyone. Because of time constraints, I won't get into a long introduction. I would just like to say that the reason I brought it forward was to have this committee study the responsibilities and the various issues around the government's dealing with the sensitive issue of Radarsat 2. We know there are responsibilities for the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and we simply wanted to have a study on that so that we could discuss this at committee and hopefully bring forward some recommendations to the House.
I'll leave it at that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.