Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 26th, 2020

[Dr. Tanjina Mirza]

Yes, education is, I would say, definitely one of the best, most powerful programs ever, not just for poverty alleviation for girls, but also for empowerment and agency.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Ms. Sahota and Ms. Mirza.

Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses.

Your presentations will once again be invaluable to this work.

As representatives of non-governmental organizations and other organizations, you're probably the best observers on the ground to report on the effectiveness of our responses. There hasn't really been a budget and we have updates, including one scheduled for next Monday. However, estimates suggest that the federal government has invested up to $800 billion to deal with the pandemic since it started. We don't know the exact amount. We're talking about four to five times more money than we invest in a typical fiscal year.

The Minister of International Development appeared before us on November 17 and told us that Canada supposedly allocated an additional $1 billion to respond to the impact of the pandemic internationally. One billion dollars is one-fifth of what the government normally spends on international development in the budget, according to the latest appropriations that we passed recently. This $5 billion also includes Canada's contribution to the United Nations system.

If Canada, in response to the crisis, invested four to five times more than what it normally invests and allocated only one-fifth more than what it usually allocates to international development, would you say—as you observe the situation on the ground—that some of the development assistance has been drained away to deal with the pandemic in developing countries?

[Paul Hagerman]

I was waiting for another to go first. I don't want to steal the limelight, but let me just start off briefly.

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron, for your question.

I agree that Canada's response to COVID, while strong, hasn't been strong enough. There has been a campaign by a number of organizations within Canada, but also in other countries, that the global response for COVID should represent at least 1% of the domestic response.

COVID has demonstrated far better than anything in the past the interconnectedness of the world. We're not going to solve this problem in Canada unless we also solve the problem around the world.

The $1 billion that has been invested so far is a very good start, but there's room for improvement. We know the needs are great, and we know that, compared to what Canada is spending domestically, it is not nearly a good mark to reach only $1 billion. It really should increase.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Do the other witnesses have anything to add?

[Michael Messenger]

We certainly think it's positive that the COVID funds that have been committed are above existing commitments, but I join my colleague Mr. Hagerman in saying that we need to do more. It's a reflection not only of the fact that it's the right thing to do, as we think about where the most vulnerable are in the world today, but also.... We are pleased to see that Canada stood up to say that we need to address things internationally as well as locally, because we are all connected.

Increasingly, as we think about the interdependence that's necessary in response, COVID is giving us an example of where our typical relief and development responses, for example, blend together. The normal kinds of responses.... It's going to require us to be agile and flexible. It's not just going to be enough to repurpose the existing funding. Additional funding is going to be necessary for us to make that kind of input that we have, always focused on what the long-term impacts are and how we are helping those most vulnerable.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I must say that I'm not surprised that you want to see more assistance to deal with the pandemic in developing countries.

My question goes a little further. Given that the additional contribution to address the pandemic was paltry and not enough to meet needs, I'm concerned that some of the usual international development assistance has been drained away to deal with the pandemic in developing countries, which has prevented the ability to meet basic needs other than the needs for which the money was originally intended.

Are you seeing this on the ground?

[Michael Messenger]

First of all, I think at the moment all of us would say, in our humanitarian development response, that the line between what is COVID response and what is not COVID response is pretty blurred, because everything is so interconnected as we think about what this looks like. It not only speaks to the need for additional funding, but I think you're actually raising a question that speaks to the way our system is built, where it's difficult sometimes to be flexible in the funding that we have allocated to be able to respond so that we can not only focus on the initial needs—and we're fairly locked into that in our agreements with governments and donors—but also be able to be agile as well.

It's both the amount, the impact, as well as flexibility within the envelope available.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Do other witnesses want to add to Mr. Messenger's response?

If not, I want to address a comment made by the director of the Canadian Red Cross, Mr. Sauvé. He told us that we should stop being firefighters and build fire stations instead. That's another way of saying that we should stop giving people fish and instead teach them how to fish. It's a matter of strengthening the local capacity for development.

In your opinion, has the pandemic made it easier to strengthen local capacity or, on the contrary, has it been an additional barrier to the growth of local capacity in developing countries?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

We have time only for a very brief answer by one of the witnesses.

[Lindsay Gladding, Director for Fragile and Humanitarian Programs, World Vision Canada]

I'm happy to jump in here, if that's okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Sure, just answer very briefly, Ms. Gladding.

Thank you.

[Lindsay Gladding]

Thanks, Mr. Bergeron.

I would say that our response to COVID-19 has highlighted the significant strength and capacity of our local partners and our local staff on the ground. We recently completed a real-time learning. We interviewed more than 3,000 local staff members, more than 500 external partners, and thousands of community members. What we are learning is that we were able to adapt to the situation on the ground very quickly, that we were able to build skills and humanitarian response in places that we would normally consider to be stable development contexts where that humanitarian capacity may not have been built.

COVID-19 and our response have enabled us to really strengthen our local capacity to respond to emergencies. I'm very confident that this work will enable us to be more responsive to the next pandemic or the next emergency that hits.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Ms. Gladding. We'll have to leave it there.

The final intervention this afternoon goes to Ms. McPherson, for six minutes.

The floor is yours.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

It's such a pleasure to have our guests with us today. I've had the great pleasure of working with all of your organizations in my previous life, so this is wonderful. I have way too many questions to ask you for six minutes, so I may call you and ask some questions later on.

To start with, I want to talk to Mr. Hagerman.

Paul, you talked a little about the gold standard being at 0.7%. I want to make it very clear that I don't actually consider that to be the gold standard. There are many countries around the world that have ODA at 1%. The 0.7% is actually what we committed to do. As you mentioned, we have gotten nowhere near that, and it is shrinking.

One thing that I think is also important when we talk about the level of ODA is where that ODA goes. I think it's so vital that it is used to support Canadian CSOs, for a number of reasons. One is that it actually engages Canadians.

The Canadian Foodgrains Bank works a lot in Alberta, in my province. Perhaps you could talk about the value of investing in Canadian CSOs, as opposed to international multilaterals.

[Paul Hagerman]

Thank you, Ms. McPherson. I'd be very happy to talk to you about the value of investing in Canadian NGOs or Canadian civil society organizations.

I think there are a number of benefits for working through Canadian CSOs. One, of course, is that with our long-term partnerships on the ground and our strong capacity, we're working with people in the country who know deeply over generations, over long time periods, what the issues are and have their own ideas for solving them, so we get to the localized and long-term solutions.

Another is that as Canadian civil society organizations with a strong support base across Canada, we can help to educate Canadians about the causes of poverty and some of the solutions through international development and try to build support and understanding for the program. In talking with many MPs, I know they often say that Canadians just don't understand the problems of international development, and that's one of the things we try hard to overcome as we build that understanding and support.

I think we're efficient at what we do. I think the cost factor is positive in our favour, but that's not to say that all money should go through Canadian civil society organizations. I think there has to be a balance. There are certain things the UN systems do well. There are certain things that work best if they're done bilaterally, government to government, but we need that balance.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you. That's wonderful, Mr. Hagerman.

I guess that goes a little to how Canadians perceive international development and humanitarian assistance.

Mr. Messenger, we have some polling results from a poll that World Vision did at the beginning of this pandemic through Abacus Data. It talks about how 88% of Canadians agree that our world is interconnected and that until COVID is taken care of across the globe, it's going to impact Canadians. Can you talk a little about how you see Canadians recognizing this, yet we don't seem to see our government recognizing the value of investing in international development to a greater level at this point?

[Michael Messenger]

You're absolutely right that not only are we seeing anecdotally that Canadians are generous and are interested in what's going on beyond their borders, but we have data like the survey that you referenced. Canadians understand that the needs are significant, thinking about the needs of a girl in a refugee camp in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or other places. They have recognized the need and want to respond.

We have been hoping that through this moment—and this is playing out in terms of our support for the commitment that our donors are making to continue to give—Canadians are not seeing this as a moment to turn inward and just to be looking at what's on our table, or where we are, but perhaps understanding for the first time, for many, what it means to go into a grocery store and see empty shelves, understanding for a moment what food insecurity might feel like, or perhaps the lack of access to education, which so many millions of girls and boys around the world face every day, or a lack of the ability to access clean water. Things that we take for granted, like being able to wash our hands.... If you're in a Rohingya refugee camp in Bangladesh, trying to find a clean-water station is very challenging.

What we're seeing is that Canadians aren't turning inward. They are willing to expand more. The poll is showing that they understand that the world is smaller. The challenge is being able to make those connections, to say, let's understand that when we think about response, it has to.... Our understanding of neighbour or family has to extend beyond our border. It helps us in the long run. A more stable world makes a more stable Canada. It's also the right thing to do, and people are understanding what it means to walk in someone else's shoes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Perhaps it's not necessarily that Canadians don't understand the value. Perhaps it's the politicians who don't necessarily understand the value. I'll do my job to try to convince them to understand that.

I have very little time, but I do want to ask Ms. Mirza a question. I know the incredible work that Plan International does. Could you talk a little about how, during this very difficult, challenging time, your programming is aligning with our feminist international assistance policy?

[Dr. Tanjina Mirza]

We truly believe, and we are seeing from data that's come out recently, that COVID has exponentially affected girls and women much more. This is no different in developing countries. As Michael said about school closures, people can see it here, but when that can put millions of girls at risk of early marriage....

One of the biggest issues with school closures is that when the girls cannot go back, there can be early marriage. As well, access to services for reproductive and sexual health and rights is stopped. The school is not just an education system; it's a protective environment for children. I think more than ever we all understand that.

At Plan International, we have very strong gender transformative programming and measurement. We talked about accountability, not only demonstrating but also measuring and seeing the actual change happening among girls and boys, especially girls. We are able to demonstrate even during COVID that gender transformative approaches can actually be applied. We are very pleased and very happy to see the feminist international assistance policy of the Government of Canada, not only because it is the right thing to do for an NGO, but also because it is good economically for the country and for the organization.

Thank you.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Let's get a feminist foreign affairs policy now, shall we?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you so much, Ms. McPherson.

Ms. Mirza, thank you.

That brings us to the end of our scheduled time with our witnesses this afternoon.

I would like to remind colleagues that it's perfectly open to them to direct, in light of the short time we've had today, written questions through the clerk's office to witnesses. If there's any follow-up that you have or anything interesting that you would like to ask more questions on, please send them in writing. The answers then become part of the committee's work.

On our collective behalf, I would like to thank our witnesses from Plan International Canada, World Vision Canada and the Canadian Foodgrains Bank for their time this afternoon, for their expertise and, very importantly, for their incredibly important work around the world. Thank you so much for being with us.

With that, we stand adjourned until our next meeting. Thank you, colleagues.