Foreign Affairs Committee on May 23rd, 2013

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Gentlemen, thank you for your presentations.

Mr. Chapin, you made the statement just a little while ago that Canadians want to know what's in it for Canada, and certainly they deserve to know how their taxpayers' dollars are doing. Unfortunately, over the past years, when we've been talking about international foreign aid, the only news that seems to make it into the media is when funding has been hijacked by militia, or goods that were destined for some stricken area have disappeared. That's just a very small part of the total package, but that seems to make it to the media, and Canadians hear that.

I know there's oversight in place, of course. I'm wondering how the effectiveness of the delivery of funds, goods, and services to the people who need it most may be improved with the merging of CIDA into DFAIT. Given the larger body, could we maybe make better use of their communications department to make sure that Canadians know that we are in fact getting a bang for the bucks we're sending overseas?

[Lucien Bradet]

I want to say a couple of things about that. The first one is that, as I said in my exposé, you're going to have two ministers responsible for it now. They will have to talk the same language, because they're going to be in trouble if they don't.

Second, ambassadors will be in a better position to communicate to the countries and better manage the delivery. You go to certain embassies and the ambassador says, “Lucien, CIDA is there, I'm here, and Immigration is there”—and there is some disconnect there. That should help.

Now, the pronouncement from the Minister of Foreign Affairs should also be in big support of international development. I think the government will win if it does it well, and I have no reason not to believe they will do it well. But it's a plus for development, a plus for trade. The Department of Foreign Affairs, and Trade, Minister Fast, work very closely with Baird, and when I travel I see that all the time now. I see there is a connection that I didn't see before, and Minister Fantino also goes before or after, or whatever. I can assure you that our reputation is going up in Africa because of that exposure. The merger will help Africa to better understand Canada, because sometimes they tell me, “We don't understand. There's something wrong here.” This will fix issues of communication. Philosophy, I don't know, but definitely communication.

We talked about women. Next week, we're going to have a conference with 13 delegations from Africa—business women in Toronto talking about the development of business between African women in business and Canadians. This is all part of it. One of the big sponsors is CIDA, and Minister Fantino will be there. You see the convergence there: trade, business women, and development. That's what we have to do more and more in the future.

Sorry, it's a commercial.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Chapin, I think you were the one who talked about the private sector needing to step up to the table more, that we need to increase their involvement in any of our international trade negotiations—or is it Mr. Robertson who mentioned that? Can you maybe elaborate and give us an idea of perhaps why we don't have that involvement presently, and give an example of to what level we can increase that to make our negotiations more effective?

[Colin Robertson]

Yes, but it's based on experience and talking with people in the private sector, particularly in the field, going into our offices. I'll use Africa as an example and to a degree Latin America, where companies were going in and trying to seek assistance from CIDA to help them get a better sense of the projects and also tell them what they're doing. CIDA felt constrained, for whatever reason, not really working with Canadian companies. The trade commissioners thought this was an opportunity where we could actually bring together development and trade. I think Lucien has seen this often.

This is one thing I hope the integration does, because you had a philosophical difference, which did not serve Canadian interests. Again I come back to long-term development. It depends on sustainable jobs, which then create the conditions by which we can eventually move development on to other things. Canadians win as well because we trade with these countries. That's part of what the Prime Minister is doing.

So that part of the mindset needs to change. That's why I favour the development side. I can give you specific examples, but I think you've got the general sense.

I will say that Export Development Canada should not be ignored in this, because it plays a very constructive role in helping Canadian companies work abroad. I think that also has to fit into the development mix, because that's a big chunk of money, more than $4 billion, and it's also helping the Canadian presence abroad in a major way. It's looking at Canadian interests as a whole and the whole Canadian side.

That's why I don't want to handicap the foreign affairs department with moving boxes around. We should be thinking of broad policy at this critical time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

We're going to start our third round now. It looks as if we'll have a chance for the full third round.

Ms. Grewal, you have five minutes.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

My question goes to Mr. Bradet.

Mr. Bradet, in the last nine years you have led more than twenty missions to more than twenty African countries and have helped to organize a number of major conferences in Canada on economic development. It seems that international development is something you feel very passionate about, and the importance of combining international development and foreign affairs.

Recently the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade has decided to focus its engagement in Africa on the new economies that are rapidly expanding. Do you think merging CIDA with the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade will help to accomplish these goals?

[Lucien Bradet]

Certainly.

I like CIDA, and I have worked very closely with CIDA in the last couple of years. But I think, as Mr. Robertson says, we must ensure they work very closely together, day and night, and at breakfast and in the breaks. The integration process will be very important.

In my recent discussions with the CIDA and DFAIT people, I see hope on both sides that we can do more than what we have done before, for everyone, for every Canadian. We talk of the private sector. You know that the private sector is an instrument of development. I think about CRC Sogema in Montreal; it has established the taxation system in 17 African countries. With what money? With CIDA money. That's trade. That's investment and that's good for development. I could cite you examples like that.

I agree with Mr. Robertson that the most welcome people at CIDA were not always the private sector, but that is changing because one is seeing that as a major instrument of development.

So I think it's good news. Let's make it work. But it will need your help and support. As a committee you're very important, because people listen to you in Parliament, and Canadians want to know what you think. We will help, and you should help as well to make it happen and work. I think that's important.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Many people feel that the issue of development is combined and taken into consideration while examining foreign policies, and a positive effect will be seen on foreign countries since development is essential to helping many foreign countries that Canada interacts with.

In light of your experiences as the president and CEO of the Canadian Council on Africa and your vast experiences visiting several different African nations, please comment on the potential benefits of the integration of CIDA and the Department Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

[Lucien Bradet]

I think the benefits will be that aid will be more in keeping with the general policy of the government, which some people question is not always clear. That will be clearer.

One of the things that people don't know is that 80% of our business with Africa is in the knowledge business, services. You know what? When a company goes to Africa, first of all, they do two things. They find a partner over there, because they cannot compete if they don't have a partner. What they do with the project is they leave knowledge behind, they create good economies for Congo or whoever, and that creates jobs.

The second thing it does that's very good is it creates investment opportunities, like the mining industry. The mining industry of Canada has created 50,000 jobs in Africa. It has paid more than any other field in the continent. For me, that's very important.

The third thing is you talked about EDC a minute ago. I hope the committee will pressure EDC in the not too distant future to open an office in Africa. That's the only continent where they haven't opened an office. I work very well with EDC, don't misunderstand. I think they are champions for Africa. But it's time they opened their minds and said this is a place to do business.

For the last five years they have told me, Lucien, it's coming, it's coming, it's coming. Well, it's not there. So let's make sure that we have something, either in South Africa or wherever.

I could talk to you for an hour, I'm sorry. I'm stopping.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

That's all the time we have.

We're going to move over for five minutes, starting with Mr. Dewar.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you. I'm going to share my time with Madame Péclet.

I just wanted to nail something down. Mr. Robertson, I think I'll put it to you.

We had witness testimony at the last committee hearing about the concerns right now of the concentration of power within the Minister of Foreign Affairs' office, and we've certainly seen that in announcements, etc.

The concern you've mentioned around making sure we still have that voice for international development is certainly aligned, and we all get that with our foreign policy. But in the legislation as you see it, we have “the minister”, and that's the foreign affairs minister, and then “additional duties”. I certainly get and agree with this idea of putting people together and thrashing things out, but my concern is right now what we have is a very concentrated office, and we have a structure that's going to bring in another office.

You were underlining the concern around development dollars and where are they going to go. How do you see managing...we'll call it creative tension? Some others might have other words for it, but how do you ensure that things aren't going to be swallowed up by one minister? I think that's a fair concern, and certainly when you see the legislation structured the way it is, how is this going to happen? Who's wagging the dog, so to speak?

We had someone else who said trade could learn a lot from those in CIDA who are doing good CSR work.

The Kofi Annan report just on Africa, which I'm sure gained a lot of attention for you, is something that is a lesson. You can't just look at GDP and exports; look at results. And that usually comes from a sensibility of those who are in international development. How do we make sure we're not, within the structure, losing that important voice?

[Colin Robertson]

Leaving personalities aside, the legislation as I read it now makes this a significant part of the portfolio of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who has overall responsibility, which I think is a good thing. You do need a single point of contact.

I think in adding that to the minister's portfolio, that minister, by definition, with responsibility to cabinet and to you as members of Parliament, has to take that into account. That becomes an additional part. In the past, when I go back to the eighties and the nineties, when we jiggled the chair slightly and added to the Minister of Foreign Affairs...there was no question in the early eighties, for example, when we did this that the then Minister of External Affairs, Allan MacEachen, spoke with greater authority because that was part of his portfolio.

I have no doubt that the current minister, Mr. Baird, should take.... He has, not entirely elaborated as yet, a dignity agenda, which goes into a lot of the things that are absolutely vital to development—women, girls, the disadvantaged groups.

I think the CIDA addition should play a major role, because it needs to be remembered—and I go back to Lloyd Axworthy, who also had things changed when he was there, and his whole sort of soft power. He took into account all of the facets of foreign affairs. In a sense you're arming the foreign minister. Again, to use the example of other countries, the foreign minister in Britain, the foreign minister in many of the European countries, Hillary Clinton, what she did—you added aid to Hillary Clinton and she significantly increased what she was able to do and with devotion to a couple of areas, in particular women, as you know, as a key piece of it.

So my argument would be that the foreign minister will have this because it is now part of their responsibility, and in a sense we're going to get a better—

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I'm going to Madame Péclet, I'm sorry.

I'm sharing some time here.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I will be brief.

Actually, in your three presentations, you said explicitly that the policies of these three departments worked perfectly together. We agree, however, that the role of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is to promote Canada’s interests abroad, while the role of international development is not quite the same. It is not to promote Canada’s interests abroad but, rather, to promote respect for human rights and to reduce poverty, indeed to eliminate it. There are some subtle differences. One wonders how these policies are actually going to work together. In your eyes, everything is fine, it is a done deal and working perfectly, but that remains to be seen.

Mr. Robertson, you talked about corporate social responsibility. It is important to know that corporate social responsibility is necessary in the eyes of the Department of International Trade, but it is not mandatory. In fact, we are committed to international standards, but they are not mandatory in Canada. When it comes to international development, though, respect for human rights is key to CIDA.

How can we make sure that corporate social responsibility will be observed and promoted as a Canadian international development policy?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Robertson, very quickly, please. We're over time.

[Colin Robertson]

If I could use the phrase “corporate social responsibility”, companies now realize that's how you do business. Corporate responsibility covers things like women and girls. This is good business practice. This is now becoming part of the culture of companies. They do this, not because they have to do it, but because they see it as good for their business.

[Lucien Bradet]

I would just like to add one last word.

while the chair isn't looking at me.

I do not agree with you when you say that everything is fine. If everything were fine, we would not be doing what we are doing today.

Things don't always work perfectly. I think the effort of the merger will try to correct some of the problems we have—and we have some problems, otherwise we would not have the legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

We're going to finish up with Mr. Dechert for five minutes.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to go back to you, Mr. Robertson. We were speaking earlier about what other international countries have done. Can you share with us any insights you may have on the experience of those other countries in the way they've integrated foreign policy and development policy, and anything that Canada can learn from those experiences?

[Colin Robertson]

There's a whole series of best practices. I know the departments are going to be looking at this. They should provide you with this information as to what are the best practices. I talked about the who, what, when, where, why. These are all questions you have to ask. We have a department—

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Can you think of anything that wasn't done well in one of those other countries, a pitfall we could avoid?

[Colin Robertson]

There have been a lot of bad experiences that we can talk about, but I would look to the more positive. It's what you learn in these things. Every case is a little bit different, but I do think the road we're going down is the right one. After all, we talk about trade and development. What we should be saying is trade is development.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Sure. Thank you.

Let me ask a general question to all three of you. You're all very experienced in matters of international affairs; you've worked in the Department of Foreign Affairs and other ministries throughout your careers. Have you thought about this possibility in the past? Has this been discussed between you and between other people in the international community? Was it a surprise to any of you that this might happen? Perhaps you could tell us about how long this has been discussed, bandied about in the international community here in Canada.

Who would like to start?

[Lucien Bradet]

I'm not surprised. I thought it was going to come at one point in time. Definitely, that higher council made recommendations five or six years ago for policy coherence, for more strategic thinking, and every time we were thinking, wouldn't it be nice if those three were meeting every week in the same room to hash out problems and find consensus? We thought that for the last few years, and I think it's important that it's happening now.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Mr. Chapin.