Foreign Affairs Committee on Oct. 26th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I call the meeting to order.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are continuing our study of the implications and ramifications of the referendum in Sudan.

I want to welcome everyone to meeting 30. The delay today is actually my fault. I did not communicate that we were maybe going to have the other witness come for the second half, and he's on his way, so I thought we'd just delay it a bit.

We're going to start with your opening statements, gentlemen, and then, by that time, the other witness will be here and we'll hear from him. As opposed to taking two separate hours, we can do all of this in just over an hour or so.

I want to welcome John Lewis, the program coordinator of human rights for KAIROS, as well as James Davis, the program coordinator for Africa Partnerships for the same organization.

Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. We're going to turn the floor over to you for your opening statement. I believe you're going to share some time, about 10 minutes. Hopefully, by then our other witness will have arrived and we'll have a chance to hear from him, and then, as you know, the way things work around here is that we'll go around the room and ask some questions and do some follow-up.

I don't know who's going to start first.

Mr. Davis, why don't we turn the floor over to you. We welcome your comments.

[James Davis, Program Coordinator, Africa Partnerships, KAIROS]

Thank you so much.

Thank you for this opportunity to testify regarding the upcoming referendum in Sudan.

This afternoon I'll raise some of the concerns, issues, and appeals made by a Sudanese church delegation that has just completed a tour of the U.S., including visits with the United Nations Secretary General and the White House. We had hoped to bring to testify before you the Reverend Ramadan Chan, general secretary of the Sudan Council of Churches, a partner supported by KAIROS and its Canadian church members, but for logistical reasons we were unable to do so.

The Sudan Council of Churches represents Christians in north and south Sudan from the Catholic, Protestant, and Coptic traditions. As a central part of Sudanese civil society, it represents the aspirations of millions of Sudanese. I believe you received a copy of the statement by the Sudan Council of Churches.

There is a real and imminent threat to the security of the people of Sudan and, indeed, the whole region. In less than 90 days, a referendum is due to be held to decide the future of Sudan. If it goes well, bringing peace to a country that has suffered almost five decades of brutal civil war, it will be a beacon of hope to the world. If the promises of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, the CPA, are not honoured and the referendum does not deliver a credible result that reflects the aspirations of the people, then Sudan will descend into violence and instability, which will affect the whole region.

Opportunities to encourage success or prepare adequately for failure are rapidly dwindling. There is no time to waste. The CPA guarantors, the United Nations and the international community, need to demonstrate a renewed political will and commitment to enhance their engagement, not just until the referendum but also throughout the coming months and years of transition.

The Sudanese church, in her prophetic role, has accompanied the Sudanese people in times of peace and war. The church has been building peace, providing basic services, and serving millions of Sudanese people across generations as international aid actors have come and gone. It is an indigenous church, sharing the hopes and suffering of the people and giving voice to those who often are not heard. It represents the vast majority of the population of southern Sudan and a significant number of people in the north.

There's much more I can say about the border areas and some of the other contentious issues, but in the interests of time, let me just mention a few important things or demands of the Sudan Council of Churches and the Canadian churches relating to the church in Sudan as an agent for peace and hope.

First, support is needed for the emergency preparations already being implemented by the Sudanese church with and through its international partners, Action of Churches Together, or ACT, and Caritas. Support is also needed for the people-to-people peace process being implemented by the Sudanese church to alleviate violence in the south and the transitional areas.

Furthermore, the voice of the Sudanese people, as expressed through institutions like the church, must be listened to and valued, rather than relying solely on international reports and analysis.

Lastly, in the development of new funding mechanisms, local organizations, including the Sudanese churches, which are close to the people, represented by its council, must be listened to and funds must be made accessible to them.

I'll end right there. Thank you.

[John Lewis, Program Coordinator, Human Rights, KAIROS]

Along with Jim, I'd like to say thank you for the invitation to be here.

Merci, Madame Deschamps, pour l'invitation de Bloc Québécois.

KAIROS, as Jim has said, has a long history of working with the Sudan churches, predating the recent conflict in Darfur. Our relationship with the Sudan Council of Churches goes back more than 25 years.

KAIROS's human rights work has an explicit focus on the rights of women and girls. Our board mandates that 25% of our partnerships around the world are with women's organizations. In its current human rights programming, KAIROS is committed to deepening its research and advocacy on behalf of women, human rights, and peace building. Specifically, we've launched with our partners in Sudan a Women of Courage initiative, which highlights the work of women in defending the rights of women and building peace. The focus of this project is to develop strategies for overcoming gender-based violence, by drawing upon international human rights instruments like UN Security Council Resolution 1325.

I think it would be important for Canada to support initiatives coming from women's organizations inside Sudan. I'm very aware that you have already heard from some excellent representatives of that aspect of civil society. Women's organizations, as part of Canada's maternal health initiative, need to go a little bit further and empower Sudanese women, just as they need to empower Canadian members of civil society. We need to encourage our partners in the NGO sector not simply to buy into the service delivery aspect to maternal health without important advocacy on issues related to UN Security Council Resolution 1325--for example, the inclusion of women's rights and women's empowerment in the defence of women and girls.

Finally, I'd like to say a few words about the north. It seems to us that not enough attention is being paid to issues in the north of Sudan. First, as many of you know, there are an estimated 1.5 million southerners in the north. They are people displaced from the decades of war in southern Sudan. There are questions about their future. We need to encourage both northern and southern Sudanese leaders to promise not to expel one another's citizens after the results of the referendum. There are still questions specifically about citizenship rights in northern Sudan. The Government of Southern Sudan, as we just heard an hour ago from members of that government, has agreed to recognize northern Sudanese in the south as citizens. We haven't had the same guarantees from the government in the northern part of the country. Will they recognize those who are called IDPs, or internally displaced persons, in the north as citizens if the results of the referendum go the way most people expect them to?

There is palpable fear when you speak with people in northern Sudan that Sudan without the south could become what they term to me as “another Saudi Arabia”, particularly in terms of women's rights. There is a great fear that western governments—and western NGOs, it must be said—will abandon the north to the NCP, which is the government.

Thirdly, related to the north, there are issues in the border area around oil and revenue sharing. We think it's incumbent upon Canada to ensure that both parties agree that any border settlement encourages both parties to work constructively towards monitoring of oil revenues. As well, if Canadian companies are going to invest in Sudan after the referendum, they need to understand the inherent risks of doing so and be careful not to worsen the security situation and the human rights situation.

In conclusion, I'd just like to say that the key message coming from partners in Sudan is that the referendum happen on time. There are already some problems arising around the registration process, we understand, but it's important for them that the referendum, on time, is free, fair, and transparent.

If Canada has one thing to contribute to post-referendum Sudan, our plea would be to support the courageous women's organizations and other civil society organizations in both the north and, equally, southern Sudan.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, gentlemen.

Since our other witness hasn't arrived yet, we'll just get started with the questions, and when he comes in we'll have him make his presentation.

We're going to start with you, Mr. Rae, sir.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome to our guests from KAIROS. I'll just say editorially that we're very pleased to have you and your organization with us because of the great work you do not only in Sudan but around the world.

Your presentation is very powerful, and I guess my simple question is this: what do you think Canada specifically, the Canadian government, should be doing to deal with what is clearly an immense challenge over the next several months?

I think the experience of the world in these situations is that a decision to partition a country is almost inevitably followed by a dramatic movement of populations, an uptick or an increase in religious extremism and religious exclusion, and a very real threat of extensive violence. One only has to look through the history of the last 50 years to understand that this is something we know about. The world should be learning from some of the terrible experiences we've had in the postwar era, starting with the partition of India and Pakistan, which was accompanied by the deaths of tens of millions of people as a result of the partition and the movement of the populations.

So the question is what should we be doing? We have the benefit of our historical experience. We don't have to sit back and say, “Well, let's just see what happens.” We ought to be able to say, “Let's prevent a humanitarian and political catastrophe as a result of the referendum.” We all recognize the referendum is inevitable and needs to happen. Nobody's denying the need for the referendum. It's just that the consequences may be far less benign than many people seem to be asserting.

So either Mr. Davis or Mr. Lewis, since you've posed these problems to us, perhaps you could tell us what you think we should be doing.

[John Lewis]

I'll start.

As I mentioned, we've just come from a meeting with members of the Government of Southern Sudan and they mentioned to us that for Abyei, which is this region, a part of Sudan that lies in the middle between north and south, there will be a separate referendum deciding where Abyei goes. The members of what they call the GOSS, which is the Government of Southern Sudan—I think you'll be hearing from one of their representatives shortly—likened Abyei to Kashmir. So I think the analogy of India and Pakistan is probably a correct one, but also disturbing.

What's happening now, and this is encouraging, is that southern Sudanese who are in the north are already being encouraged to leave the north prior to the referendum. I think this is actually in some ways kind of helpful, because--you're absolutely right--we don't know what the consequences will be of the referendum. People tell us that we should know what the outcome is, but the consequences at this point are unknown. There will probably be some violence; how widespread, we're not sure.

One area for us to focus on is this area I mentioned briefly, which is to get the government in the north to agree that southern Sudanese who find themselves in the north, if the referendum goes in the way of separation, are recognized as Sudanese nationals. We don't have that guarantee yet. As I mentioned, we have that guarantee from the folks in southern Sudan, but relating to northern Sudanese, we don't have that guarantee as of yet.

[James Davis]

One of the things coming out, which we heard very strongly, is to keep the eye on the ball in the north. During the national elections, the southern Sudanese government said there were some 1.5 million people in the north; the National Congress Party said, no, there were only half a million; and now the National Congress Party in the north is saying, oh, no, there are maybe three million people, or more.

The hijinks there is simply that if they can get enough people to register by making it easy for them and somehow make it at least incrementally more difficult to actually vote, then it will not satisfy the 60% of registered voters going past the mark of 50% plus one. That's a real fear, and we're hearing this all over the place. The key voter education issue is that if you're not going to vote as a southerner, whether you're in the north or the south, don't register.

Because of the history of the National Congress Party, the government is a bit more opaque, I would say, about how these things play out. It's important that referendum monitors, for both the registration and the voting, are in the north.

We recently heard that the International Organization for Migration was requested to monitor in the north but turned it down, probably knowing how complicated it was going to be. Perhaps the Europeans will take over, but there should be considerable concerted pressure in the international community on ensuring there is adequate monitoring in the north.

Of course in the Abyei area, there may be some possibilities of increasing the capacity, through Canadian resources, of UNMIS, the United Nations Mission in Sudan, in that contested area.

Beyond that there is this issue of preparing for massive migration. As I said in my presentation, the churches have two international groups that they work through--Action of Churches Together, and Caritas--and they develop plans, along with civil society on the ground, to ensure there are adequate contingencies in place.

Lastly, I would say, as John mentioned, giving more than lip service and real traction to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, there might be areas for Canada to explore increasing its use of women military police in the UN forces. That's not only for the more obvious places, such as the Congo, but also in Sudan.

I'll leave it at that for now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Dr. Patry has a quick question, and then we'll go to Mr. Malok for his opening comments.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

We understand the idea of the referendum in the north and the south. But we notice there is a popular consultation with the Blue Nile province and also the southern Kurdufan province.

What are the purposes of these two...? It's not a referendum, because it's not an exercise of self-determination; it's for their aspirations. What are the goals there? Why are they having referendums in these two provinces?

[James Davis]

When they got to the Naivasha accord in 2005, there was an impasse on this. This was the most that the north could concede, that there would be popular consultations.

What that means is not immediately clear. I know that the Sudan Council of Churches thinks that the aspirations of the majority of the people in the southern Kurdufan and Blue Nile will probably not all be met. But it was a compromise worked out when the CPA was finalized. So there is no straightforward answer other than....

Now, the elections were thought to be inadequate in the Blue Nile, at least by the Sudan Council of Churches and the rest of civil society in southern Sudan. Popular consultations happen, but it's the legislators who make the decisions. You can see that's already going to be a flawed outcome.

In southern Kurdufan province, things are moving very slowly. They haven't even elected the representatives who are going to vote after the popular consultation, so it's indeed a difficult situation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Dr. Patry and Mr. Rae.

Mr. Malok, thank you for rearranging your schedule and coming in a little bit early and adjusting for us. I'm going to give you a chance to make your opening comments now.

Mr. Malok is from the Government of Southern Sudan and is a principal liaison officer.

We welcome you here today. The floor is yours. We'll have you make your opening comments, and then we'll continue with questions and answers from the members of Parliament.

[Joseph Malok, Principal Liaison Officer, Ottawa Liaison Office, Government of Southern Sudan]

Thank you so much.

I would like to thank you for this opportunity, and I thank you for inviting me to this hearing.

I had prepared something to deliver to you. I don't know whether to make a comment on the questions you have just asked or if you want me to deliver my opening remarks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

If you want to make a comment, go ahead, but certainly we'll also let you make your opening remarks as well.

[Joseph Malok]

Okay. Maybe we'll keep it for later.

I hope the clerk has given this document to some of you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We need to have it translated, but it will be sent out to all members once we've done that.

[Joseph Malok]

Okay.

Chairperson, Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, honourable members, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the committee for inviting me to this hearing. It is an honour to be here with you to talk about the impact of the referendum on the future of the Sudan.

When the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, CPA, was signed on January 9, 2005, it basically established an autonomous Government of Southern Sudan, GOSS, within a united Sudan. One of the most important provisions was article 46 of the interim constitution of the Government of Southern Sudan that establishes liaison offices abroad. The liaison offices abroad derive their constitutional mandate from article 46 of the interim constitution, which states that the Government of Southern Sudan, GOSS, has the right to establish liaison offices, to engage, develop, and maintain good bilateral and multilateral relations and cooperation with foreign governments, foreign non-governmental organizations and associations for mutual advantage in trade, investment, culture, sports, education, credit, loans, grants, technical assistance, and other fields of developmental cooperation between the Government of Southern Sudan and those countries.

My role and responsibilities, as GOSS's principal liaison officer in Ottawa, is to advocate to the Canadian government on bilateral and developmental issues on behalf of the people and the Government of Southern Sudan and to inform the Canadian government on progress and challenges that are still facing the implementation of the CPA.

The referendum on self-determination for the people of southern Sudan and Abyei is a national exercise that will have a profound effect on the future of the Sudan as a country. The word “self-determination” is a universal principle that the Government of Southern Sudan has accepted to settle the issue of the war between the north and the south in Nairobi, Kenya, in 2005, during the long, difficult negotiation that was supported generously by the Intergovernmental Agency for Development countries, and the international community, including the Canadian government. And we thank you for that.

The National Congress Party chose the path to self-determination over secularism during the negotiations in Kenya for reasons known to them only. The agreement provided the parties to the CPA with two options during the interim period of six years. First, the unity of the Sudan must be made attractive to the people of southern Sudan by the NCP-dominated government in the north. Secondly, after six years the people of southern Sudan will exercise their democratic rights to either confirm the current unity of the Sudan, if it is made attractive, or they can choose to form their own country through a referendum.

The question is this: how did we reach this stage of a referendum on self-determination for the people of southern Sudan and Abyei?

Ladies and gentlemen, Sudan has been at war with itself for 40 of its 55 years of independence. For the last 22 years, the war in southern Sudan has been about the unity of the Sudan, a Sudan that is secular and democratic, where religion has no place in government; citizenship is not determined by the colour of your skin, religious beliefs, or region; justice, equality, and peaceful coexistence is voluntary; national wealth is shared equally; and development projects are carried out equally in all parts of the country. All of this in the current Sudan remains a dream.

The President of the Government of Southern Sudan, His Excellency General Salva Kiir Mayardit, is prepared to have the referendum conducted on time, as is stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, CPA. He has established the southern Sudan referendum task force, chaired by the vice-president of the Government of Southern Sudan, Dr. Riak Machar, to prepare the people of southern Sudan for the referendum.

The task force has established post-referendum negotiating teams to iron out the questions of nationality, borders between the north and the south, national debt, national assets, international agreements, oil revenues, etc. Just this month, because of the importance the Government of Southern Sudan attaches to the peaceful conduct of the referendum, the president convened a south-south dialogue with all the political parties in southern Sudan to find a common ground.

He also issued a presidential pardon to those who had rebelled against the government in southern Sudan because of the results of the April 2010 Sudan general elections. His executive pardon was well received. This is in anticipation that the referendum is an historic event and the people of southern Sudan must go to the referendum as one united block.

The NCP has not responded well to the quest for peaceful conduct of the referendum. The borders between the north and southern Sudan should have been demarcated two years ago, but until today this has not yet been agreed upon. The 1956 borders are known to both parties; that is why the 2008 census and the April 2010 Sudan general elections were conducted without borders. The Government of Southern Sudan believes that the referendum can also be conducted without the physical demarcation of the borders.

The registration of voters for the referendum should have been completed three month ago, but as we speak, the registration is only slated for November 14. The Government of Southern Sudan believes in negotiations on any outstanding issues during the post-referendum period, and we appeal to the international community, and Canada in particular, to help both parties during the negotiations.

In regard to the case of Abyei, the international tribunal ruled clearly in 2009 on where Abyei belonged. The NCP accepted the ruling but refused to implement the decision of the International Court. As we speak, the Abyei boundary has not been demarcated and its referendum commission has not been formed. The international community, and Canada in particular, must put political pressure on both the NCP and the SPLM so that the Abyei referendum takes place at the same time as the referendum in southern Sudan. The Government of Southern Sudan, and indeed the international community, does not want Abyei to become a hot spot in years to come.

How will the referendum in southern Sudan affect the popular consultations in the Nuba Mountains, Southern Blue Nile, and Darfur?

Ladies and gentlemen, the Government of Southern Sudan and the SPLM party have said in several public meetings that the popular consultations for the two areas are very important for the people in those areas to decide if the current arrangement is working for them. This is going to be carried out by the elected members of the state legislative assemblies within the respective state parliaments. These popular consultations are to empower them and give them more voice in the decision-making process in their states.

The issue of Darfur is completely different from that of southern Sudan and Abyei, although there are similarities in how the war is being conducted. The people of southern Sudan are sympathetic to the people of Darfur.

His Excellency Salva Kiir Mayardit, President of the Government of Southern Sudan and chairman of the SPLM party, has stated clearly his desire to help in the mediation process, but the offer was rejected by the NCP party.

We hope that the Government of Sudan will use the CPA model in southern Sudan to solve the issue of Darfur.

The conflict in Darfur is all about an equal development and equal political representation in the decision-making process in the centre and an equal share of national resources and wealth. The Government of Southern Sudan will continue to search for peace in Darfur, even if the people of southern Sudan decide to have their own country during the referendum. It is in the best interests of the Government of Southern Sudan to have a viable neighbour in the north.

Lately Sudan has received political attention from many countries, as demonstrated at the high-level meeting on Sudan that took place in New York at UN headquarters, organized by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. During the meeting the international community, and Canada in particular, stated clearly that the referendum is a very important part of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, and any delay in the conduct of the referendum will not be acceptable.

What else can Canada and the international community do to ensure that the referendum is credible? Ladies and gentlemen, we believe Canada and the international community must send election monitors to both northern and southern Sudan to help in the smooth running of the referendum process. We know that Canada is chairing the referendum basket fund for other countries to contribute money to support the conduct of the referendum. We also know that Canada has prepared a library of documents to support the post-referendum negotiation. Also, CIDA is taking a leading role in the humanitarian development initiative in southern Sudan and the Abyei area.

However, we'd love to see Canada move beyond humanitarian assistance to take a leading role as a middle power and an honest broker in pressuring both parties to negotiate in good faith for the sake of peace in the region. If the referendum is delayed or the result is disputed, the consequence will be great, not only for the people of southern Sudan but for the whole region, given the fact that the former Ugandan rebels--the Lord's Resistance Army, or LRA--is still a menace in some parts of southern Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, central Africa, and now Darfur.

The President of Sudan, General Omar Hassan al-Bashir, is on the record as saying he will be the first to recognize the wishes of the people of southern Sudan should they vote for independence from the north. The people of southern Sudan and the international community will hold him accountable should violence erupt because of non-recognition of the result of the referendum. The President of the Government of Southern Sudan and the people of southern Sudan have stated clearly in many public rallies that they will accept the result of the referendum should the people of southern Sudan choose unity over separation. We expect the same from the north as well, although there are voices in the north that say otherwise.

There are many cynics who say that Sudan is a married couple in an angry divorce. We are frightened of the violent fights, but we see Sudan as a mother giving birth to twins. When the labour pains are over, the two children can grow up as friends.

Thank you for inviting me to this important hearing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Malok, and thank you also for your flexibility in working with us.

We're going to continue with the questions, and I'm going to turn it over to my friend Monsieur Dorion.

You have seven minutes, sir.

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Malok, Mr. Davis and Mr. Lewis for being here.

Mr. Malok, you talked about Darfur and even about the sympathy the people of Southern Soudan had for the Darfur people.

Are there any projects for a potential union of these territories? If not, why? What do Darfur and Southern Soudan have in common? Why are they distinct entities? They fight separate wars and they are not allowed the same political status by the international community

[Joseph Malok]

Thank you so much for your questions.

There are similarities between Darfur and southern Sudan in the way the war has been conducted. The demands of the people of Darfur are different from those of the people of southern Sudan, but they share one thing--the unequal development and unequal power sharing within the central government. This is what they share in common.

As you know, the war in southern Sudan started a long time ago, in 1955. The demand of the people of southern Sudan was to have a secular state in Sudan whereby everyone would have access to power and wealth, to have a country that should not be ruled by religions. This is what the people of southern Sudan have been looking for.

Historically, people of southern Sudan have killed themselves alone: there were voices demanding a separation of the south, but the majority were still fighting for a united Sudan. We failed because the government in the centre was not helpful.

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

I will share my time with my colleague Ms. Deschamps.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to come back to the women's issue. We know that, when countries are at war, women often are the most affected. They are victims of sexual abuse and violence and very often, these despicable acts are unpunished. Before being operational, our Committee had the privilege to have an informal meeting with Mrs Zaynab Elzawi. She really surprised us when she told us that the civil society — and you even spoke about the Soudan church — was not involved in the implementation of the peace accord. I would like to know why.

Also, women from the North and South have cooperated, in spite of their differences, to propose some solutions on the eve of next January referendum. But they have no support, no resources. I think the Canadian government should give them a stronger support.

Finally, I would like to ask another question. It is more a comment about what Mrs Elsawi told us. Talking about the referendum, she said that women will be the losers, once again. Why do they have to be the ones who will be the most affected and the most victimized by this referendum?

[John Lewis]

Thank you for your question.

I'm going to respond in English.

I read Madam Elsawi's testimony. I know Zaynab reasonably well and some of the women's organizations that work in Sudan, and it's quite powerful to speak with them and hear what they say.

The issues confronting women in Sudan are enormous in both the north and the south. In the north, as you know, there are issues around the legal system, which I think Madam Elsawi spoke about a little bit.

I don't want to make too much of this, but in the south there are some traditional hurdles in the way of the participation of women. Women are often kind of put at a separate table, if you like, during the peace negotiations. The women will sit over here, and then, you know, the serious discussions go on over there.

It's been 10 years since the signing of UN Security Council Resolution 1325. October 31 is the 10-year anniversary. Part of the resolution was that each signatory would develop its own national action plan for making progress on issues of women's participation in peace-building.

Canada has just released its national action plan, which I encourage you all to read. It's quite good. It sets up some guidelines, some indicators, for all of us to begin to follow not just in terms of addressing gender-based violence, but equally importantly, in terms of empowering women and women's organizations to be included at all levels of peace negotiations.

Jim made an excellent recommendation, one that comes directly from the national action plan, which is that in any peacekeeping mission, or any mission abroad, even a humanitarian mission, the member states be encouraged to include women wherever possible. We mentioned the UN police. There's been some experimentation in other parts of Africa with them that have ceded some results.

There's a lot in the action plan that I think we could be doing a lot better. Part of what KAIROS has done over the last five or six years with our partners is some human rights training, specifically with members of the Government of Southern Sudan, on the rights of women. We want to continue that work. It's long-term work. There are some excellent women's organizations that demand our support. We're doing what we can in that regard.

I won't go into all the details of the action plan, but there are a lot of really excellent ideas in this action plan, which I believe was just launched a couple of weeks ago. You can find it on the Foreign Affairs website; you all know this. There are some excellent ideas in there. They are not just about ensuring that issues of gender-based violence are addressed but are about how to empower women to be involved in addressing those issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

We're going to move back over to this side of the table.

We'll go to Mr. Obhrai.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As you know, I'm the parliamentary secretary, so I'm well aware of the actions the government has taken. I've met Mr. Malok on many occasions.

I just wanted to give you a small update on the further actions you talked about in reference to the UN high-level meeting that took place that was attended by Minister Cannon himself to address that issue. Many of the concerns you're addressing involve those concerns, so I will carry on and let my other colleagues ask the questions.

I had just gone to Nigeria for the independence day celebrations, and I met the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, Mr. Carson. I had a breakfast meeting with him.

That, by the way, resulted in my missing, by 15 minutes, a car bomb that had been placed in the car. Otherwise, there would have been a byelection in Calgary East, too. It missed me by 15 minutes just because I had breakfast with Mr. Carson, which was a good thing, anyways....

That was true, because then I missed the bus with the president, and I had to go myself over the road where there were two car bombs.

The issue was a very strong concern with the Government of Sudan on fulfilling many of the requirements that you've all pointed out about the referendum coming on time. As you know, Mr. Bashir cannot attend due to ICC warrants, so Mr. Taha, the vice-president, is the person who tends to do all that.

The concern that has come out of this, as you rightly pointed out, is to tell the Government of Sudan that they must hold their referendum and to continue. To that effect, all the ministers who were attending have written a very strong letter, which I delivered to the minister, to Mr. Taha, expressing the international community's very serious concerns in reference to any delay in the referendum and to move ahead. This was in no uncertain terms made very clear to the Government of Sudan, that they have a responsibility to meet their portion of CPA.

We will continue monitoring that. The Government of Canada will continue to remain engaged. We have called in people from both north and south Sudan to train as referendum experts. As you all know, the referendum has to be very transparent, otherwise the north will use it as an excuse to say it won't meet the referendum agreement.

I just wanted to let you know that all these concerns will continue to be addressed. It's a main concern of the government and the whole international community.

With that, I'll stop and let my colleagues go ahead, because I think they have some challenging questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Go ahead, Mr. Lunney. You have about four or five minutes.