Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 16th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

There is still time on the Liberal side.

Mr. Sidhu.

[Jati Sidhu, Liberal, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

I'll go to Mr. Rigby. He made a comment about 10,000 employees in 107 countries.

Since the unemployment rate is pretty high in our own country, my question is, are those 10,000 employees all Canadian?

[Vincent Rigby]

The 10,000 employees are all Canadians, I do believe. I don't think they include the locally engaged staff.

I'll defer to my colleagues here, who are ex-DFAIT. I'm an ex-CIDA wonk. Maybe they have the exact breakdown of the numbers.

[Mark Gwozdecky]

In very rough terms, it's about fifty-fifty Canadians versus locally engaged staff. I think the reason for this is that we employ local employees where possible. It's much more economical to do so when we can find qualified people who understand the country and who can provide continuity over years and years, compared to diplomats who rotate in and out. We're constantly looking at that balance of Canadian diplomats versus locally engaged diplomats from the standpoint of what's more operationally effective and what's more economical.

[Jati Sidhu, Liberal, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

I think that in our country we have Canadians from all walks of life and from everywhere in the world. We should be focusing actively on employing more Canadians. I do understand your issue and that it's more economical to hire local people, but as I said, there's unemployment in our own country. For youth, it's 14%, and the regular unemployment rate is 7%. We need to keep that in mind when we employ people.

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you.

Is there anything further on the Liberal side?

Mr. Housefather.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Again, thank you for your presentation.

On a follow-up, I'd like to move to your comments about the UN Human Rights Council. I understand that Minister Dion is going to be going to the UN Human Rights Council, that we're going to be speaking to that body, and that we're illustrating again our desire to engage in that multilateral level and at the UN.

Of course, the UN human rights commission has been a body that has singled out Israel in a disproportionate way and has adopted resolutions passed by countries whose human rights records themselves are despicable. In the process of re-engagement, what is Canada's intention for holding that commission to account for its disproportionate singling out of Israel?

[Mark Gwozdecky]

If I may, I'll try to respond to your good question.

I think Minister Dion said yesterday pretty clearly that we don't see the United Nations through rose-coloured glasses. It's an imperfect institution, but it is the only institution we have, and we have to work within it.

You can be sure that our representatives to the various human rights bodies, including the human rights council, are constantly advocating to make changes where necessary, because we do see, as you've pointed out, the imbalance that from time to time unfortunately appears on the agenda of the human rights council. We do advocate, and we speak openly and firmly about that when we see it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Are there further questions?

We're now into the new round, so it's still the Liberals, and then the Conservatives.

Mr. Miller.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their presentations. I have a question that can be either simple or complex, depending on the answer.

Almost all of you are deputy ministers. You gave us a good overview of the situation and described your mandate letters clearly. I'd like you each to take turns and tell me how this committee and the government can have an impact on your work. We won't necessarily follow, but what direction would you like this committee to take in its dealings with you?

We have made a commitment to unmuzzle you—perhaps that isn't the best word. As deputy ministers, you have an opportunity to introduce policies. Since we have a limited amount of time, I'd like you to discuss two or three points as they relate to international development.

Any of you can answer that.

Thank you.

[Vincent Rigby]

As you say, it's an easy question, depending on how you answer it and whether it's going to be career-enhancing or not.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

I'm sure you'll do a good job.

[Vincent Rigby]

First of all, I'll clarify. We're assistant deputy ministers, two directors general, and one acting assistant deputy minister. I'm not quite at the deputy minister level; you have ministers, deputy ministers, and assistant deputy ministers.

However, that doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day we, as public officials, provide the best policy advice we can to ministers. That's what we do. We don't make policy. We provide advice. We provide policy options. At the end of the day, the government decides what to do based on those options, and then we are loyal implementers. We like to say “fearless advice and faithful execution”. That's what we do.

In terms of what the government may want to have this committee look at, that would be a decision that ministers would make at the end of the day in consultation with you and with the chair. That would be my answer.

I don't know if my colleagues want to add anything.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

I'd encourage them to be more fearless.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

It's easy from your position, that's for sure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Are there any further questions from the Liberal side?

Mr. Levitt, you can pass the questions on to your parliamentary secretary. It's perfectly legitimate.

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Yes, absolutely.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Go ahead, Ms. Gould.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Levitt, for letting me ask a question.

Thank you to all the officials for being here today.

My question is for Ms. Fountain Smith, or perhaps you, Ms. Jeffrey. Perhaps you could talk a bit about the demands on Canada for humanitarian assistance, and where we are right now.

Thank you.

[Heather Jeffrey, Director General, International Humanitarian Assistance, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

Yes, I can respond to that.

We're in what is really an unprecedented situation in terms of the demands that we're seeing globally for humanitarian assistance. The figures have tripled since 2005. The UN consolidated appeals that were just launched for 2016 are requesting $30.5 billion Canadian for this year to respond globally.

The challenges are great, but the international community is responding. Canada as well, of course, has increased its humanitarian assistance in order to respond to the increased need. This need has been driven primarily by the rise in protracted conflicts, which are not being resolved, in places like Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and South Sudan. This year we responded to over 64 country situations, ranging from natural disasters to conflict-based humanitarian demands, with over $900 million of assistance. Canada is in fact a key donor to humanitarian assistance internationally, and we are the sixth-largest country donor in humanitarian response.

We are working hard, along with our international partners and non-governmental organizations, in the lead-up to the World Humanitarian Summit, which is coming up in May in Istanbul. There, the international humanitarian system as a whole, along with all of the UN member states, will be looking at how we can work together better and more effectively to make the most of every dollar we spend in order to respond to these unprecedented challenges.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you, Ms. Gould.

Go ahead, Mr. Levitt. You have a lot of time.

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Just this past weekend, I was back in my riding of York Centre. I have a very large Latin American population, and I happened to be at several events for that population and that community. Time and time again I heard, “When are we going to start engaging again with Latin America?” No offence to the CPC guys on the other side, but this comes up a lot, so I wanted to ask a question.

I know that media coverage, both international and domestic, doesn't always focus on the important relationships that Canada has with other countries in the Americas, particularly Latin America. What are Canada's interests and priorities in that region? Can you give us an idea about how addressing democracy, trade, security, and violence kind of go hand in hand when we look at that area and our policies moving forward?

[Vincent Rigby]

I think that question is a little bit out of our remit, because none of us at this table is actually directly responsible for Latin America and the Carribean. Colleague David Morrison is the assistant deputy minister for the Americas. I was talking before, as was Alex, about the four geographic ADMs. David is responsible for the Americas, including the United States and Mexico.

Having said that, maybe I can throw out a few ideas. Hopefully David won't rap my knuckles when I get back to the office.

I think we've engaged quite heavily in Latin America and the Carribean over the last number of years. The areas you've identified—in terms of prosperity, in terms of security, in terms of projecting values, in terms of democracy promotion—have also been pursued in that region by Canada. If you look at our presence in the region, you can see it's not just in terms of government but that there is also private sector engagement, in particular in the financial sector and in extractives. I think outside of Canada, our largest presence in the world from an extractives perspective is in Latin America, in Peru and countries like that.

We have very strong relationships with key countries in the region. There's Colombia and its free trade agreement; it's a country of focus for our development. There's Peru, and there's an emerging relationship with Brazil. On the development side, we have a memorandum of understanding with Brazil on development assistance.

There's a lot happening right across the board. I think it's for the government to decide how they want to build on that and how they want to engage regionally through the OAS, as well as bilaterally through various countries and what have you.

Falling back on the mantra we've had, we'll see where the government wants to go at the end of the day. The mandate letters are very ambitious. I think we'll be playing in a lot of different places, so we'll have to see.