Evidence of meeting #8 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pandemic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
I think you were about two minutes into your remarks, if that's helpful.
Director, Public Policy, Canadian Foodgrains Bank
That is helpful. I apologize for the unstable connection.
Some of the initial problems that we saw with the food system have been resolved. Our partner organizations have changed the way they do food assistance to reduce COVID risk, but they're still distributing food. As in Canada, they've shifted from in-person meetings to communication by telephone and other means, but they're still keeping in touch with the people who need help.
Nevertheless, the economic impact continues to be experienced by many households. From surveys of multiple African countries, we know that nearly 80% of households have lost income because of COVID. For example, that could be an Ethiopian man who used to work in Saudi Arabia and send money home, but his job disappeared with the lockdown. It could be a female small-scale trader who used to buy in Uganda and sell in Congo, but can't now because of the border restrictions. It could be a pastoralist who normally sells animals to people celebrating festivals, but the festivals have been cancelled.
This loss of income has increased food insecurity. For many who were struggling to eat before COVID, it has pushed them to crisis level. It's often worse for women, because their jobs in the informal sector have been harder hit.
COVID has brought another layer of stress on families, on communities and on countries that were already facing multiple stresses, including conflict, which is the primary driver of food insecurity in many contexts, or the desert locusts and weather extremes. People who were already vulnerable now face another big shock.
The economic downturn is having significant impacts on government finances. This will increase the debt burden, slow economic activity and constrain the ability to reduce hunger in the coming years. COVID may be a short-term crisis, but it will have a very long tail, as many millions of people are pushed into extreme poverty.
To respond to COVID, here are three recommendations for what Canada could do. The first is, don't think of this pandemic as a stand-alone crisis. The people dealing with COVID impacts are also dealing with other stresses. Our support should help them deal with as many of those stresses as possible. That means better linkages between humanitarian and development programming. Knowing how much hunger is caused by conflict, Canada should also seek ways to support both humanitarian and development work, with an eye to reducing conflict and building peace.
Second, Canada should support programming through local partnerships. This is important now, when travel is restricted, but it's also important over the long term to build local capacity to ensure robust and ongoing support to respond to acute hunger in conflict and crisis contexts.
We know that Canada has already committed over $1 billion in new aid spending to respond to COVID impacts. We applaud this action, but we also recognize it's not nearly enough. At the same time, Canada has re-profiled hundreds of millions of dollars that were already in the aid budget for the COVID response. While this quick pivoting of aid resources was appropriate, Canada's aid budget is at its lowest point in 50 years, and the other needs have not diminished.
My third recommendation is that Canada should ramp up aid to help people overcome the crises that they were dealing with before COVID and commit new and additional resources to the COVID response.
Thank you for your attention. I would be happy to deal with any questions from the floor.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Mr. Hagerman, thank you very much.
We will now go into our first and what may end up being our only round of questions. They are six minutes each.
The first round goes to Mr. Diotte, please.
The floor is yours.
Conservative
Kerry Diotte Conservative Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you.
Thanks to all the folks for being here and doing the good work that they do.
Mr. Hagerman, I just want to talk about your remarks right off the top.
Everybody on this committee knows that Canada has a great reputation internationally, but you did bring up the issue, as did Mr. Messenger and Ms. Mirza, that we could do better. Right now we know that foreign aid has declined 10% under our current government, but we also know that there are great demands on finances right now for this country.
To any and all of you, what do you think would be the benchmark we should be meeting?
Mr. Hagerman, you could lead off since you had the last word.
Director, Public Policy, Canadian Foodgrains Bank
Well, I think we know that the gold standard is 0.7% of GNI. Canada is far from that now. We're at around 0.26%, at around a third. We're at about half the level of other OECD countries.
I'm not suggesting that we should go to 0.7% next year, but I would love to see a timetable and a commitment to reach that over time. I think it's certainly reasonable that Canada should try to be at least average within the OECD in the next couple of years.
Conservative
President and Chief Executive Officer, World Vision Canada
I'm happy to weigh in, Mr. Chair.
We certainly agree. I think another aspect of that, of course, is that for us the actual numbers should be determined by the impact that Canada is hoping to have. It's key to clarify what additional funds would accomplish, in addition to just looking at standards. As just a very practical piece, sometimes it's challenging even in the current envelope, or as we look toward the future, to determine what's new funding and what's additional funding.
That's why we think that it's not only important to look for a standard that we can aspire to going forward, but also to get a crystal clear, forward-looking sense of the direction we can go in, rather than perhaps just an announcement-based approach to international assistance, and more with a direction as to where we go. Certainly, you've heard all of us mention just how an increase in aid is going to be needed as we look at the impact on extreme poverty that we've seen as a result of COVID.
Chief Program Officer, Plan International Canada Inc.
May I answer as well?
It's a great question. Thank you for that.
Following up on what two of my colleagues have responded with, it's really important that we are not doing it piecemeal. It's not just the amount. It's how we actually deliver the aid, because some of these issues are root causes that have long been festering, and this pandemic is not the last. There are more to come.
I think it's important that we look at multipronged, multi-year approaches to funding, instead of piecemeal distribution and piecemeal funding. If we want to address the root causes of systemic challenges, such as the lack of good-quality...health systems strengthening, education systems strengthening, especially with the gender lens, having a gender transformative approach so that girls especially are not left behind, we need to look not just at the amount of funding, but at how we are funding it and how can we bring a multipronged approach to it.
Hopefully, when there's another crisis, Canada will be proud to say that we were able to address the root cause and this will not happen again, because the current systems are fragile. We need something more resilient.
Thank you.
Conservative
Kerry Diotte Conservative Edmonton Griesbach, AB
I have a more specific question on COVID-19. How has it impacted your organizations? Do you have a shortage of international aid workers?
I also have just another quick question. I know that we don't have a lot of rapid testing here yet in Canada, but do you have access to it for your foreign aid workers so that they're healthy in the fight against COVID-19?
Director, Public Policy, Canadian Foodgrains Bank
Let me jump in there first with just a quick answer.
We don't actually have Canadians working overseas. We work with local partners, and we have no shortage of people, because they've been on the ground all the time anyway. We've actually seen increased resources because Canadians who donate to us have stepped up and have been very generous. We're continuing on in trying to respond to the greater needs, but the health impacts have not particularly slowed us down.
President and Chief Executive Officer, World Vision Canada
From World Vision's perspective, there's no doubt that it has affected our work internationally as well as here in Canada. Like the Foodgrains Bank, 99% of our staff are from the countries in which we're working, so they're deeply committed there and committed to their communities. Their work is going on, but, like here, they are subject to some pretty incredible restrictions. It has made logistics very challenging for us.
Here in Canada, Canadians continue to support us. We have had to stop and freeze a lot of our ongoing fundraising at the moment, so it has been a challenge for us, but Canadians are indeed generous and understand the cause.
Chief Program Officer, Plan International Canada Inc.
Do you want me to respond?
November 26th, 2020 / 5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Chief Program Officer, Plan International Canada Inc.
Like the other two speakers, I can say that our staff on the front line are all local. They have been impacted, because in the countries where the COVID cases are rising, it's quite difficult to provide aid, so there have been some restrictions. The programming oftentimes continues, then stops, and then continues, so we have to be very creative in how we reach the most vulnerable communities. We have thousands of volunteers who live in those communities. It makes it easier, but nevertheless they do have restrictions.
It has impacted many other organizations. Plan has also been impacted, because we do rely on the generosity of Canadians. They have been very generous, but the need on the ground is so much that we do need a lot of support. As we have all said, the numbers are huge. The impact, especially on the children in fragile, conflict-affected countries, has been so bad. We have the capacity to scale up, so we definitely need more resources to do much better.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Thank you very much, Ms. Mirza.
Thank you, Mr. Diotte.
The next round goes to Ms. Sahota for six minutes, please.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Thank you.
I'm going to start with Mr. Hagerman. All of the organizations do incredible work. I've been following your work for some time and am really amazed.
Mr. Hagerman, I know your organization's funding was renewed by Treasury Board in 2016 to previous levels of $125 million over five years. I guess next year it might be set to expire. With this funding, I know you have also done really great fundraising work. I think campaigns where the government matches the donations or quadruples the donations that you receive are always a great tactic.
How has that fundraising strategy worked? What different types have you had to use? You said your fundraising has actually gone up even through this pandemic. That's really great to hear. Have there been other tactics that you have used in order to do that?
Director, Public Policy, Canadian Foodgrains Bank
Thanks for that question.
You're correct. Our funding from 2016 will end next year. We're currently in conversations with the government about renewing that. We are optimistic about that continuing.
On the fundraising from the public, one of the great motivators for the public is to say that when they donate to us, that funding is matched by the government for the work overseas. As you said, for many types of programming it's 4:1. That is a huge motivator. Canadians are generous. They also feel motivated by the fact that the government is doing this as well. That's a strong part of our fundraising pitch.
Not all of our overseas work is matched by the government. That's mainly our humanitarian work. We also do a lot of long-term development work. Depending on the source of funding, some of that might be matched 1:1 by government, or not. That is still a key part of what we do. We just try to demonstrate the effects of how this work has made a difference in people's lives in the field, and that seems to be very effective in mobilizing people to donate.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
In your introductory remarks, you talked about supporting programs through local partners. I know you do a lot of your work in developing countries through locally based organizations.
What advantages has this given your organization or what difficulties have you had throughout this pandemic with getting food to where it needs to go? We are hearing alarming numbers. Ms. Mirza also mentioned the doubling of the need for food at this time.
Director, Public Policy, Canadian Foodgrains Bank
I'm going to ask my colleague, Stefan Epp-Koop, to answer that, because he works directly with programs and is much more familiar with the work on the ground.
Stefan.
Program Development Officer, Canadian Foodgrains Bank
Thank you, Paul.
Yes, we do almost all of our programming through local partner agencies. These local partners experience many of the same restrictions as anybody else in those societies does, but the fact that those local partners are there means that we are not dealing with international travel restrictions. They're working with local suppliers, so by and large not having to deal with cross-border transportation of food assistance, let's say, and as a result also have good relationships with their local governments, with their local health departments and so are able to get good, up-to-date information on how to best implement their programming. What we've seen is that local governments that are working across the country recognize that the food assistance that's being provided is an essential service and that there is a need that must be met, and they have been very supportive of the work of our local partners to implement that.
We've seen relatively few disruptions on the humanitarian side in terms of our ability to implement. With some more disruptions on the development side, just given restrictions on group gatherings and so on, we have also seen our partners be really innovative and learn and identify new ways of implementing their programming through text messaging, through radio, through other means to reach the target audience. They're finding new ways to implement programming because they know that context best.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
I don't have a lot of time. I do have some more questions for you, but I also want to ask Ms. Mirza about the Because I am a Girl campaign. I think it's a fantastic campaign. I've spoken to many of your young advocates for the organization before in my role. Can you speak a little bit about the results and the impacts that this program has had, and what countries have had the best impacts?
Chief Program Officer, Plan International Canada Inc.
I think our program targeting girls and women actually is everywhere, because this is our basic strategy. In the over 50 developing countries where we work, it is critical to empower girls and give them a voice and work with them to provide all kinds of empowerment overall for the girls.
Education is a big program for us. If there's one really strong program that can bring the girls out of poverty—their families and their communities—it's about girls' education. It's a tremendous motivator. It helps enable girls to get agency to fight on their own and it empowers them to do so. The girls' education program is one of the best programs that we see.
The sexual reproductive health and rights program has also been very powerful, and of course the economic empowerment for jobs creation for both girls and boys, but targeting girls.
My time is up, so I will cut it short.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
If we had to put most of our eggs in one basket, do you think it's education, since you listed it off first?