Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 9th, 2011

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

Mr. Latulippe, you are the president of Rights and Democracy. You cannot dissociate yourself from what the organization's management did. Investigations have been conducted to find out whether the charges against Mr. Beauregard were founded. Those investigations showed that they were not. How can you say that you will not pass judgment? I think that your duty is to pass a positive judgment and rectify the injustice committed against him. If we, the committee members, are aware that injustices were committed against Mr. Beauregard, how can you, the president of the agency that committed these injustices, wash your hands of it?

[Gérard Latulippe]

I sent you a letter on January 14 last. In it, I indicated my interest in being heard by the board. At that time, a debate arose because of two letters, the letter from your chair and the letter that I sent. My position was always to decline. That was debated at the special meeting of the board of directors. Do we have to end the investigations, the SIRCO reports, or do we have to continue them? I spoke about trust in that context. I told the people on the board that it was a matter of trust and that I wanted to put a stop to reports and anything of the kind, with the exception of my due diligence. I placed all the weight I had as president on that. So the board of directors voted unanimously to put a stop to all the reports and investigations into the past. That is why I am here before you today with that resolution that the board of directors passed.

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

Mr. Latulippe, as I understand it, the first point is that a majority of the board of directors were involved in the injustices directed against Mr. Beauregard.

The second point is that you direct an organization called Rights and Democracy. In a democracy, one basic right is the right to one's reputation. Mr. Beauregard's reputation was sullied by the organization that you now direct. Accepting that you were not there at that time, I feel that it is your duty to play a part in correcting the injustice. If you do not, what credibility can you have as the defender of rights and democracy?

[Gérard Latulippe]

I repeat that in no way do I want to attack anyone. I have even insisted that, for exactly the reasons you describe, for human rights reasons, it was essential for me to put an end to a crisis that has harmed a lot of people, both on the board and in the staff. It is a huge crisis. For human rights reasons, we must not be bringing those matters up now. That is the issue I went to battle over last January 20.

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

Mr. Latulippe, I am very concerned when I hear your reasoning. In my opinion, the organization is presided over by someone whose concepts of democracy are not those that prevail in our society and in our time. An injustice was done to the former president of Rights and Democracy. As you are explaining it to me now, we have to forget that. Go and explain it to Mr. Beauregard's widow. I will not lie to you, I am shocked to hear you make those statements.

[Gérard Latulippe]

I would just like to say that…

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Dorion. That's all the time we have.

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

Mr. Lunney, take seven minutes, please.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Monsieur Latulippe, thank you very much for appearing here with your colleagues today. We appreciate your being here.

First, I'd just like to comment. A question has already been raised about the reputation of a member of the board, and comments have been made about that. I think it behoves all members of this committee to be sensitive to the reputations of persons who have tried to serve Rights and Democracy on the board and in other capacities. I also appreciate the tenor of your comment in regard to respecting the name and the reputation of your predecessor, Mr. Beauregard.

That said, we recognize also that there are some constraints on what you can say before the committee because of ongoing legal matters related to the dismissal of some former employees.

Now, let me just take up my first question from this footing.

Rights and Democracy seems to have a bit of an identity issue, and I think you partially addressed it in your remarks. Rights and Democracy is not operating under a normal framework as a government agency. Certainly it's not CIDA, it's not DFAIT; it's an arm's-length organization from the government.

On the other hand, it's not a private donor, as you mentioned in your remarks. I think you report having contributed some 729...is it million dollars to the UN?

[Gérard Latulippe]

It's thousands of dollars. It's $729,0000.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you. That's a nice correction.

You gave $729,000 to the Office of the UN High Commission, apparently reported as from a private donor.

So it's not an NGO, it's not a private donor, it's not a direct arm of the government. It has a bit of an identity issue.

But in relation to the United Nations, there was a question about an office that was opened by Rights and Democracy in Geneva. I think it was referred to in the Deloitte report.

[Gérard Latulippe]

Yes.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Rights and Democracy had opened this office and registered the office, under Swiss law, as an NGO. I think it speaks to this confusion about the identity of the organization.

Is there anything you can comment on about the purpose of the office? Was it necessary to have an office at the United Nations, and in what role did it actually serve the organization?

[Gérard Latulippe]

There are two things there. The Deloitte report.... The board, as a matter of fact, has closed the office in Geneva. And I agree with that, because I want to do programs in the field. We just hired our first expatriate ever in Afghanistan. That's where I think we have to improve human rights. I just hired the first program officer in Pretoria for a program in Zimbabwe when we helped journalism to work in a very difficult situation in that country. That's where we have to be. That's where the law tells us to be. That's why I think that was a good decision.

Regarding the grant, it's not a grant to the High Commissioner for Human Rights; it was a donation without any term of reference, without any activities, without any evaluation of results. When you do that you need to have a process to evaluate the results. This was an issue, not only for the High Commissioner for Human Rights, but also in many of our programs. That's part of the improvement. That's part of the future. That's part of the thing we're working on in the future. That's also why you have to help us to put an end to the past and to build into the future.

Look, somebody has to put this to an end. This is my job. You know, 2011 is not 2010. The crisis was in 2010. You have a role to help me to make this organization again a flagship for Canada abroad, for its values. I need you for that. Let's go into building this new organization, and we are in the process of doing it.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Okay, I thank you for that remark. I appreciate that.

Frankly, hardly anything stays the same. The world itself is changing very quickly on us. Businesses in Canada have had to go through some major restructuring in many cases to stay competitive in a worldwide economic crisis. The world in terms of democratic needs and opportunities has changed dramatically. The situation in the Middle East with the realignment and the protests in the street all bear witness to the need for some assistance in developing democratic institutions.

Along that line, one of the remarks you made here was you receive a core funding of about $9 million from the Parliament of Canada, and essentially that is your core mandate. You're providing services, according to your testimony here, in about 12 countries, and it also pays for your activities here and abroad. I'm interested in your remarks here about diversifying your source of funding to be able to fulfill your mandate. I wonder if you could help us by looking to the future. How do you see that? And how do you see those opportunities being afforded by funding from other sources to augment what's provided by the taxpayers of Canada?

[Gérard Latulippe]

Let me explain to you what I consider is really our main challenge. We have a core funding of $9 million. In fact, 60% of this amount is going into the field; 40% is on overhead and on activities in Canada. More than going forward, with the increase in cost of living, the increase in the salaries, this amount over the yield will be reduced to a point that our capacity, with only a core funding to conduct our mission, will be substantially reduced. What we need is to diversify our funding, to find an alternative source of funding, and also to do important projects, projects based on getting your funding through international donors and increasing your capacity to achieve your mission by doing just that. That's why I also need Parliament to help me to give the centre this capacity of diversifying its funding.

This is also where this world of international development works. It works with projects that are funded by international donors, and more importantly, we're doing grants, but we're doing small grants. If you have a small grant of $200,000 in Zimbabwe and at the same time you have a capacity for your organization to do a program of $1 million or $2 million, you're a lot more effective. That's where I want to lead the organization.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

The final question I would have for you here is about your asking for the committee's help in looking at the legal framework of Rights and Democracy. I mentioned there seemed to be an identity crisis in how this organization operates in the world and about the centre's powers in the field of fundraising. I wonder if you could shed any light on how you see that working.

You also asked for a closer relationship with parliamentary committees and parliamentarians as a whole. I notice you have a function coming up in the near future in Parliament about women's issues in the Ottawa area, I believe. I wonder if you could help us to better understand what you see as the changes you envision.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'm going to have to cut you off there. We'll have to pick that up in the next round, if your colleague wants to. We're out of time.

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

Mr. Dewar, sir, the floor is yours. Seven minutes.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I am glad to have Mr. Latulippe in front of the committee. It was unfortunate that our meeting was cancelled. I understand you were here and available, and I have voiced my concern about how that happened, knowing that we shouldn't have that happen again.

I have some questions on the information that's been provided by Mr. Latulippe: the letter you sent to the committee, and the information you sent today. I just want to go over what I think is very important.

First of all, do you have a tally of how much money was spent in that interim period when Mr. Gauthier was president and the contracts for Deloitte & Touche, for the PR firm, and for SIRCO? Because as of April 1 of last year it was about half a million dollars, and I'm just wondering if you can tell us how much money was spent on those contracts as of today.

[Gérard Latulippe]

The SIRCO report was $170,000.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Right, you mentioned that.

[Gérard Latulippe]

Deloitte was $250,000.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Yes.

[Gérard Latulippe]

The lawyers—

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Can't forget them.

[Gérard Latulippe]

—over and above, until now, it's about $400,000, at least.