Foreign Affairs Committee on May 5th, 2016

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Can I ask if you've signed an authorization for them to avoid the sanctions?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

My deputy will want to intervene now.

[Daniel Jean]

Following “Adoption Day”, where a lot of like-minded countries adjusted the sanctions because of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a number of sanctions were removed. Some of the competitive interests in certain sectors that you're talking about may not be subject to sanctions anymore. There are some areas where sanctions are clearly still there. The minister just mentioned the military.

When we did that, we also tightened the ballistic terms. There are certain goods that can be used for dual purposes, which are still subject to export control. I think that's what you're asking. I just want to clarify that, with the adjustment of the sanctions, there are certain sectors that are not at risk of diversion where companies can now operate.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Okay, thank you.

Moving on, I understand—and I know this is not official—that Canada is proposing to assume the lead military role in the Haiti stabilization force, in line with the Prime Minister's intention to broaden peacekeeping operations. It is a military force known as MINUSTAH, which until now has been directed by Brazil. However, I understand Canada is proposing to assume control by this fall.

Have you estimated what the costs of such a peacekeeping would be? Don't you think that Canada should engage with UN partners?

It has been six years since the earthquake. Pitifully little has been achieved in reconstruction, stabilization, and governance. Is it perhaps not time to shift from the military administration of Haiti to the United Nations Development Programme?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

There have been no announcements regarding decisions about what we'll do in the future, but it is true that Canada has been involved in Haiti for a long time, and we'll continue our solidarity with this country. We want to see improvements and we want to be sure that there will be an election, which has been postponed and postponed. We are not satisfied with the situation, but it does not convince us to withdraw. We want to be sure that Canadian taxpayers indeed see a result, because Canadians care about Haiti. However, we want to see an improvement and we're working with our allies to be sure that we'll have a collective effort that will provide results for the people of Haiti.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I see that you have increased contributions for non-proliferation, arms control, and disarmament, which obviously indicates that you like that program and that we will move forward.

On April 19, this committee had an opportunity to establish a subcommittee with the sole aim of inquiring into matters related to Canadian arms exports and export permits. In a recorded vote, every Liberal member of this committee voted against it.

I'm just wondering if you believe that you would be assisted by the analysis that such a study would have achieved?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

I think this committee has a lot of work to do and we just mentioned some of it. I will table, and we'll see when, the plan for Canada to be member of the Arms Trade Treaty, and let me tell you that it will be a lot of work for this committee to be sure that before Canada becomes member of the treaty that we adhere to the treaty and that we do our homework about laws and regulations. So you will have plenty of work to do altogether.

The committee is master of these decisions, but I think you made the right decision to leave some time for the Arms Trade Treaty.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you very much, Mr. Kent.

We'll go to Mr. Oliver.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ministers, for being available today.

My question is for Minister Bibeau. The estimates show a total of just over $3.5 billion in grants and contributions for international development and humanitarian aid.

I was wondering what the distinction is between grants and contributions, and how the organizations being funded are monitored, evaluated, and held accountable for the funding they receive from Canadians.

[Arun Thangaraj]

Grants and contributions are governed by the transfer payment policy established by the Treasury Board. The decision to award a grant or a contribution is, first, based on the activity that is being undertaken and on the risk assessment and fiduciary analysis we do for each recipient.

Up front we evaluate every project based on its development objectives. We then look at the financial capacity of the organization, and we make a decision as to whether it's a grant or a contribution, and we look at what oversight and monitoring are in place. We try to work with every recipient up front so that proper controls are put in place to safeguard funds. We do have audits, and every one of our project contribution programs is subject to an evaluation to ensure that we achieve the expected results and that funds are managed in accordance with the principles that we have established right up front.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Development assistance is disbursed within guidelines in alignment with the government's development goals. Can you explain how the results of this funding are evaluated and how that will affect future priorities of spending in terms of government priorities?

[Marie-Claude Bibeau, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

As you know, we are actually going through this review, and we want to make decisions based on facts. We are really into the deliverology process. It's hard for me to answer your question clearly now because we're really in this process, but we really take all of this very seriously.

I will have much more to explain next time. Sorry.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you very much.

Now we'll go to the last round.

Mr. Genuis, go ahead, please.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Minister Dion, Santayana said those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I would be curious to hear your opinion of the American 2009 reset policy towards Russia. This was a policy of reset to an increased engagement.

Do you think that policy worked?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

I don't know. If you compare it with which other policy? The relationship between Russia and the United States is key for the world. Even in the tougher times of the world wars, these two countries were speaking together. Just read the books of Kissinger and you will see. It's impossible to think that they would cut their channels. It would be awful for the world.

The policy that Canada followed in the last years would have been foolish for the United States. I don't think it was very wise for Canada, but it would have been foolish for the United States.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Minister, I'd just like to clarify, though. I don't believe that we should ever eliminate the possibility of, say, back channels with Russia. My question was specifically about the reset policy, which was a policy of communicating a reset in relations. I guess you've answered it the way you want to.

I want to ask you about the issue of human rights, though, because your government has decided to kill the Office of Religious Freedom, and we've had that debate and we probably won't get to agreement on that today. But certainly at the same time you've professed concern about religious, ethnic, and linguistic minorities.

During a debate we had on this in the House, you talked about your intention to continue this work, to expand this work, just to do it in a different way. That debate happened on March 21. We had a budget that didn't have any commitment for a new, let's say, human rights office or vehicle for delivering these things. The office was officially killed on March 31, and here we are on May 5, and despite claims about continuing to do this work, expanding this work, we have absolutely nothing in place, so we've lost time. We haven't heard an announcement.

So I would like to know—and I think Canadians and especially people affected by the good work that Canada was doing would like to know—where the plan is. Where's the plan when it comes to international human rights? The Office of Religious Freedom is gone. We've seen no replacement, no announcement of replacement. So where's the plan, Minister? When will we see it?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you very much.

The office of religion was supposed to sunset—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I just want to clarify because you said “office of religion”. It's the Office of Religious Freedom, which is something very different.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

I agree with you.

It was supposed to sunset. It does not exist anymore, but all the programs that were planned are going ahead. Not one of them has been cut. It's true that we are working on a plan that will enhance our ability to protect human rights around the world, including freedom of religion, to be sure that Canada will be more effective. I understand that you want to see this plan yesterday, if possible. It's coming, and I think you will be very impressed by the plan when it gets out.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Minister, just to clarify, it wasn't yesterday that I wanted to see the plan. I think we should have had a plan in place when the previous structure was done away with. You could have extended the previous structure by a month or two months if you wanted to.

I have about a minute left, and I want to just get a question in for Minister Bibeau.

The earthquake in Nepal was about one year ago, and my understanding was that around that time there was a specific plan in the context of our development assistance to ensure that there would be support for the Tibetan minority in Nepal as well. A year later, I wonder if you could update us in general on Canadian activities in Nepal, specifically whether support was given to the Tibetan minority to ensure that Tibetan refugees in Nepal were included in terms of receiving relief.

[Marie-Claude Bibeau, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

I'll have to get back to you. I'm sorry, I don't have the information.

[Arun Thangaraj]

There it is, right there.

[Marie-Claude Bibeau, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Thank you.

Between April 25 and May 25, 2015, Canadians donated $51.7 million to eligible organizations to assist Nepal. This incredible generosity strengthens our commitment to continuing to help Nepal rebuild.

That was followed by $27 million in emergency assistance. Canada has committed to providing $24.7 million to support the reconstruction in Nepal. Of this total, $10 million will go to rebuilding housing in rural localities.

That is all the information I have about Nepal for now.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Just on the Tibetan minority, if you could get back to the committee subsequently with information, we'd really appreciate it. Thank you.