Foreign Affairs Committee on June 7th, 2018

[Arun Thangaraj]

We were talking earlier about some of the performance indicators, and underpinning that is an enormous results framework. We do have experts in results-based management at the project level. That all rolls up into the indicators that we publish in the departmental results report.

Those indicators are consulted with the project officers, with the NGO, and whether it is something that doesn't get worse or whether it's an aspirational type of goal, those all get built in. However, again, we're looking very clearly at how we track those results and make them meaningful in terms of our reporting and ensure that we deliver value through our development dollars.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

In terms of our bilateral assistance to UN agencies, such as UNDP, UN Women, and other agencies, there are different ways we can do that. One way is to basket funds. For instance, with a number of countries, UNDP will say, “We need this”, and then a number of countries will put in a certain amount of money and we contribute to that. I actually think that is an effective way for the UN to manage the funds. There's also direct bilateral assistance, and of course, the core funding that goes to some of these agencies is vital to them.

I know UNDP has lost about 50% of its core funding. Having countries pick particular programs is, of course, what we like, because it gives us more flexibility to say, “We really like this particular gender program, and this one.” Where are we in terms of how we're providing that assistance?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

I'll have to cut you off. I apologize.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Could they answer?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

We're way over time, so I'm going to Madame Laverdière.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Thank you very much.

I would like to return to an issue Ms. Vandenbeld touched on, something called results-based management, or RBM. I tend to agree with her on this subject. We were wondering how we evaluated, in terms of RBM, the fact that many international partners were successful in avoiding civil wars. I know that many people are questioning these kinds of procedures that are sometimes quite complicated, and that risk, as I like to say,

to confuse accountability and accountancy, which are two different things, basically.

This particularly impacts the small organizations set up in northern Saskatchewan, which are often associated with one religious group or another.

Are you considering special mechanisms for these small organizations?

[Arun Thangaraj]

Over the last couple of years, we've tried to diversify the number of partners that we work with, especially with some of the smaller Canadian organizations, the ones in Saskatchewan and all over Canada that you're talking about.

We've tried to do two things. One is, you refer to it as a contract, but it's how we do the engagement with them in terms of the agreement. One of the things we do is that before they execute a project, we will often visit them in person to look at and say, “Here's how we expect money to be managed. Here's the results reporting that we're looking for.”

The results reporting is again customized to the initiative and to the deliverable. What we don't want to do is overburden a fledgling organization that may be just starting. Results are at the core of what we do, but we try to accommodate the partner when we establish those results.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Even for the funding requests, I remember that there was a competition at one point, and that the guide showing people how to fill out the application for funding was 46 pages long. We can imagine, in such a case, that it was very hard for the small organizations.

Were there changes in that regard?

I also heard of an idea to give each province and territory its own international development council, so that each of them could serve their community.

Was this idea considered? I'm not saying that it would be the thing to do, but I know that the idea was going around.

[Arun Thangaraj]

I'll bet you that 46-page document was written by me. No, it wasn't.

As I said before, what we want to do is make sure that we enable organizations of all sizes to deliver on development projects and work with the department, but that we don't overburden them unnecessarily.

We are looking at how we can streamline our requirements. How do we write them in plain language? How do we look at the contribution agreements that we have with them and use standard contribution templates as much as possible so they're easy to follow? It's doing capacity building and initial visits with these organizations, so they understand our expectations, and when they fill in a report, either on results or for a quarterly financial report, they're able to do that.

With respect to provincial councils, I'm probably not the best person...that would be one of my colleagues who's not here. We are working more with, and targeting, provincial councils to look at their members, and to see how we can make our processes a bit simpler and more easy to use so they can access and even work through some of those councils.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I would like to briefly return to something Ms. Vandenbeld said. We don't allocate core funding to these organizations very often, but we ask them to carry an administrative burden that can be quite heavy. I'm exaggerating the situation a bit by saying they get nothing for administrative costs and they are provided with no core funding, but that we are still asking them for a detailed follow-up. For many organizations, that's a problem.

What do these people do when they are between two projects? They fire their staff, and are then forced to find new people. Then, there is the learning curve issue.

Is the Government of Canada reviewing the policy of not giving core funding to organizations?

[Arun Thangaraj]

As a result of the policy, I think what we're looking at is how we engage effectively with Canadian organizations. How do we make it easier for them to interact with us as an organization? How do we simplify working with them? We do the fiduciary element; that's the part that I know best. I know that sometimes we impose a burden in costs on organizations when we can achieve the same outcome by allowing things to be done through web portals or by being more standardized.

We're trying to work with organizations in terms of how we fund them, and also in terms of the eligible costs we fund, and to do so in a manner that's much simpler so that we don't impose on Canadian organizations the kind of burden that we have imposed in the past.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

There's still no consideration of giving core funding to some...?

[Arun Thangaraj]

Not that I'm aware of, no.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you, Madam Laverdière.

Once again, Mr. Saini, please.

[Raj Saini, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much for being here this afternoon.

I want to ask a question about something that I read in your departmental plan. If you look at priority number two, advancing Canada's feminist policy, you can see that it dovetails nicely into sustainable development goal number five, but one of the main points you have there is that 50% of bilateral assistance in 2020-21 will be going to sub-Saharan Africa, because you're tailoring the funding to the poorest.

When we look at sub-Saharan Africa, we see a lot of other players: other countries, other NGOs, and other CSOs. You see la Francophonie, the UN, the IMF, and the World Bank. There are a lot of entities working there, so my question is a bit broad in response to that.

If we're going to apply our efforts in that part of the world, how are we going to discriminate? Where Canadian funding is going to be applied, how are we going to make sure that Canadian programming is going to be applied? How are you going to discern which partners to work with, which ones not to work with, which countries to go into, which countries don't need the help, and which countries need the help? How will you figure out those parameters and come up with some road map going forward, since 50% of the funding will be in that part of the world?

[Arun Thangaraj]

Let me start by talking about partners. Internally, we have a vetting process for any partner we work with. We vet them in terms of their capacity. In order to know if they can actually deliver on the project that we're potentially going to fund, we do a rigorous due diligence process in terms of their financial capacity and technical expertise. Do they have experience in-country, for example, if it's a fragile environment?

Any partner we work with goes through a rigorous analysis to ensure they can actually deliver on what it is that's being proposed. Also, in any country we work in, we do a lot of coordination with other donors so that we don't trip all over each other. Every donor has their own priority areas, and we have ours, as was clearly outlined by the minister, so what we do is ensure that we allocate our development dollars where we can make the greatest impact.

We look at where others are active and at where we can either support or be complementary, or where our partners have expertise, whether that be in education, sexual health and reproductive rights, or whatever the area is; so first it's the partner, and then it's where we can make the greatest difference. In terms of the countries, a number of indices and factors influence the decision on where we work. Again, it's about where can we make the greatest difference and where the needs are greatest. There are all sorts of indices about vulnerability, and about poverty indices and all those things. All those are factors in terms of the countries in which we work.

[Raj Saini, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

How much time do I have left? I want to split it with Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Well, it is Mr. Wrzesnewskyj's turn.

[Raj Saini, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Okay.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you. I have a quick couple of questions.

How many election-monitoring projects have we had in the last two years?

[Arun Thangaraj]

Unfortunately, I don't have that information.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Could that be provided to us, as well as the costs associated with those projects?

[Arun Thangaraj]

Yes.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Do you have an approximate idea of what the costs would have been?