Thank you very much.
I thank you for making your very passionate presentation.
I don't think it's going to come as a surprise to you that those of us sitting along here, anyway, believe very strongly that the primary purpose of foreign aid is to reduce poverty. It is not to further private sector interests or short-term trade priorities. In particular, we feel that aid shouldn't be used to benefit profitable corporations or to finance the activities they should do anyway, such as cleaning up environmental waste or training workers.
Now, in your piece in Embassy last month, you claimed that co-funding with the private sector has never meant subsidizing when it comes to international development. But I think the facts speak for themselves. In the fall, CIDA announced $26 million in partnerships with Barrick Gold, IAMGOLD, Rio Tinto Alcan. At the same time, we are learning that established NGOs, such as Development and Peace based in Montreal, are having their funding drastically cut.
At the same time, I also want to recognize the comment you made about the diaspora, about the contributions the diaspora can make, and does make, without us and without any private enterprises. Those things come because of the connections with the homeland. Whether you're first generation or whether you're third generation, it's that connection to a country. Among the Indian diaspora, I've certainly witnessed to a large degree the changes that have been brought about as a result of the role played by the diaspora directly.
I agree with you that a lot of that is very direct work that is coordinated by somebody from the village or somebody from the area. However, when we think about public-private partnerships and some of the work we've been doing, we have some very serious concerns.
Isn't it fair to say that the controversial partnerships with mining companies have actually replaced funding for established NGOs that are doing critical work in the field of advocacy? When you look at the facts—and we have—isn't this clear?