Foreign Affairs Committee on April 10th, 2024

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses for being here today.

I'd like to go back to the Elsie initiative, because 30 seconds wasn't nearly enough time to give it its due. I went to the UN Peacekeeping Ministerial at the beginning of December in Ghana. I have to say, going outside of Canada to hear other countries talk about the Elsie initiative.... I don't think Canadians even know what it is, but other countries sure as heck do. It's been around long enough now that I noticed countries weren't even associating it with Canada. It was just a policy that was being put in place by a number of countries. Canada had a display that showed how a camp could be designed to best reflect the Elsie initiative, with washrooms close to where women are staying and very simple changes made to the layout of the camp.

Can you talk a little bit about what the Elsie initiative is and why it's so important for peacekeeping, especially for other countries? You didn't have enough time to properly respond before.

[MGen Gregory Smith]

I'll start, and maybe some of my colleagues want to jump in and say smarter stuff.

I'm at a disadvantage, because I never went on many of these visits that people make. At the same time, I have heard equally very good things about the idea of how we encourage more women in peacekeeping. As you can imagine, peacekeeping situations generally require interactions with the population. Hopefully, women make up at least 50% of the population. Rather than a bunch of people who look like me in big uniforms, who look scary, etc., we have women who can be approached. That's a very successful model. It allows dialogue. It allows interaction.

I agree with the questioner and the previous statement on some of the basic things we can do to encourage more women to be in peacekeeping in the armed forces. Allowing more women to participate in peacekeeping is a better model for successful peacekeeping.

[Caroline Delany]

I think the general covered a lot of it. Really, the goal is twofold. Partly it's with respect to the participation of women in peacekeeping and increasing the number of women who are in peacekeeping. It is also to understand what the barriers are that might be preventing them from participating.

In your question you spoke about the camp layout. That is an extremely important element in terms of the safety and security of women. When it's not taken into consideration, it might be a barrier for women deciding to participate.

At other times, like the example I gave earlier with respect to Zambia, it might also be just a training and capacity issue. With some targeted efforts looking at gaps in capacity, training could be provided to close those gaps and ensure that the women have a higher capacity to be able to pass the exams.

Of course, ultimately, all of this is about the recognition that peace and security is for all genders. If we are going to have peacekeeping missions that are best able to support the needs of women as well as men, higher participation of women is extremely important for being able to understand what their specific peace and security needs are.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

The other thing that struck me is that, really, it's not one size fits all. Each country, depending on their situation, does different things with the same goal. It's not like they all have to follow the same model, right?

[MGen Gregory Smith]

I can jump in here. The exact term is escaping me, but there's a study on the barriers to more women in peacekeeping. I agree with the statement that there could be cultural or physical reasons that are preventing that. We enabled some countries to do a study: What are the barriers to that greater participation and the attempt to remove them, and to therefore see more women in peacekeeping? As has been stated, it's a very good model for more successful operations like that.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Ms. Urban, I don't have very much time left, but in response to Dr. Fry, you were talking about women's health and the investments we've made. I had the opportunity to see one of the clinics when I was in Ghana recently. Why is it important to deal with women's health and women's reproductive health at these clinics?

[Cheryl Urban]

You can look at the statistics. The statistics are actually quite shocking when you look at women's health. Maternal mortality rates are sky-high. We know that the average birth rate in some countries in Africa is six: I just came back from Benin and Côte D'Ivoire, and the average woman had six children. This is really threatening for women. As well, 70% of global maternal mortality is in sub-Saharan Africa. That's a really shocking statistic.

Health is one of the priority areas for our investments. We invest greatly in health, especially for women and girls. This includes sexual and reproductive health and rights. It allows for family planning. It allows women to understand, even from a human rights perspective, what they are entitled to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm afraid we're out of time.

We next go to Mr. Bergeron for two and a half minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Canada is privileged to have as official languages the only two languages that are spoken on every continent on the planet.

At least 22 African countries have French as an official language, and French is the language expected to experience the strongest growth over the next fifty years.

Is Canada preparing accordingly as part of its unnamed strategy, framework or approach to Africa?

[Cheryl Urban]

I think this is one of the most important people-to-people ties and cultural ties we have with the continent. I mentioned that we are a member of la Francophonie, but we also have very important relationships.... Part of that is because of our linguistic connections.

I will use an example. I mentioned that I was in Côte d'Ivoire. In Côte d'Ivoire, our ambassador is very active working with the Government of Quebec. The Government of Quebec has a lot of cultural as well as commercial groups that go and visit Côte d'Ivoire and that are interested in doing business. Our ambassador spends time helping those companies and individuals from the province, as well as working with the government to provide briefings and information. This is just one example.

There are very concrete ways in which we can leverage our linguistic ties in order to build stronger relationships.

I will turn to my colleague.

[Marcel Lebleu]

Mr. Chair, I'd like to add that, yes, we're not just preparing, we're already implementing measures and working on this matter.

I'll give the concrete example of education. Canada works with the provinces. We have consultation mechanisms. We organize forums. Over the past 10 years, the number of visas issued to African students has increased by some 350%. That's huge.

There's still a lot of work to be done. Many visas are still refused. This influx of students is vital.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

This is particularly the case with French-speaking African students.

[Marcel Lebleu]

Yes. I recognize this fact, and I've seen a lot of newspaper articles about it. The figures tend to show it. I'll let my colleagues at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada answer that question.

That said, we note that many Quebec educational institutions, especially in the regions, depend on this influx of students to ensure their survival. Just think of the Université du Québec à Rimouski, the Université du Québec à Chicoutimi and the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières. What's more, the Canadian government is making a special effort to bring these French-speaking students outside Quebec, where the French fact is in the minority. So there's a targeted, specific effect.

I would add that, last year, the government announced the Canadian International Development Scholarships 2030 program, an $80-million program spread over eight years. This program covers 26 countries. They are all African countries, with the exception of Haiti. All the beneficiaries are Africans. Through this program, we support not only the fellows—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm afraid, Mr. Bergeron, that your minute is over, so I'm going to have to cut you off. I apologize.

We now go to Ms. McPherson.

You have two and a half minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Two and a half minutes is very short, but perhaps, if you had more you would like to offer, you could submit it in writing for our committee.

Thank you.

I want to dig down on some of the questions Mr. Epp was asking. I was quite interested in some of those. They were excellent questions, Mr. Epp.

In terms of our ODA, I used to work within the sector. I have long been a champion of the 0.7%. I'm disappointed in Canada's level of ODA spent, overall. I think we're at 0.31%. Obviously, when I see increases in defence spending.... It's not just those increases. We're now hearing from the government—or they are signalling—that there may, in fact, be further cuts in this coming budget.

What percentage of our ODA is spent on the continent of Africa? Of that, could you give me a bit of a breakdown of how much of that goes to Canadian organizations, how much to multilateral or bilateral...and how much to FinDev or those private-public partnerships?

[Cheryl Urban]

I will send information to you in writing that will give you the breakdown, but we have some stats here.

[Susan Steffen]

We can speak to overall official development assistance—including all channels—to Africa. The reason that we often speak about sub-Saharan Africa is just the way we're organized administratively, but for the purposes of this committee, this covers all of Africa. Sixty-four per cent of ODA is going to multilateral organizations, 26% to Canadian organizations and 10% to foreign organizations, which are local CSOs, governments trusted to do that kind of work or other organizations such as that global green growth initiative I mentioned.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

If you could provide all of that in writing, that would be fantastic for us to have as part of our report.

Very quickly, if in fact we do see cuts in the budget, I would assume that would have an impact on our funding in Africa. What might some of the impacts be on our programs in Africa?

[Cheryl Urban]

I can't speculate about what they would be.

At the moment, the Government of Canada has a commitment to have 50% of its bilateral international assistance directed to sub-Saharan African. It has been increasing. In the past four years, there's been a 54% increase in the amount of development spending in sub-Saharan Africa by the Government of Canada. The trend is positive.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

If you could submit all of that in writing, that would be great.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm afraid you're out time, Ms. McPherson. You're 30 seconds over. Thank you.

Before going to the final two questions, is it the will of all committee members to do one last round of three minutes per party?

Yes? Okay. We now go to Mr. Aboultaif.

You have five minutes.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

We've heard the word “focus” a lot in this first session, and we do have big competition.

Russia and China are not knocking on the door: They're already inside. They're doing business, they're doing development and they're focusing a lot on the region for all the strategic purposes that we all know of.

In this case, Canada's role cannot be limited, but with what we are providing and what we have in hand, we must focus on certain things regionally or country by country, or in a historical relationship that we believe can give us a way in, in order to at least be effective and make a difference in light of all the activities and the different players in the region.

If the department is to choose, what do we choose? Do we choose a country, a region or an industry? What do we do to make sure Canada is effective in Africa?

[Cheryl Urban]

I think the most important thing when we're considering how Canada can have the greatest impact and achieve its interests is to do the analysis that is currently being undertaken, which is to examine Canadian strengths and then intersect that with Canadian interests and see where that leads us.

The other point I would make is that when we think about Canadian engagement on the continent, we should be thinking of it from the lens of a partner with other G7 countries. There's much we can do as a member of a broader group.

I'll give you an example. Working with the G7, Canada is a member of what's called the “PGII”, which is a working group on investment and infrastructure. You spoke about the influence of China. One of the ways in which China has influence in Africa is that they are investing in a tremendous amount of infrastructure, but G7 countries are countering that by offering their own value proposition for quality infrastructure, and Canada is a part of that initiative.

It's initiatives like that in partnership, and then looking at Canadian strengths, that will allow us to determine the best approach.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

In light of that, how do we come to be impactful again if we know the geopolitical situation is not great? Security is a factor in doing any development or in doing any business. How are we countering—or going to counter—China and Russia at this point to be able to do the business that we need to do with Africa? What I mean there by “business” is from development to an economic and business approach.

[Cheryl Urban]

think it's through strategic partnerships. Maybe I'll turn to my colleague to talk about the Sahel, because I think that's a good example of where we can turn our focus to countries that would give us the most leverage in the region.