Evidence of meeting #54 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was abortion.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much, Ms. Woroniuk, for being here. I look at you and think of you as obviously one of the pre-eminent specialists on SRHR in this country. Thank you for your work. You have literally saved women's lives by the work you've done.
I'd like to talk a bit about the feminist foreign policy that has not been provided.
As we see increased conflict around the world, you spoke about how a feminist foreign policy would advise with regard to diplomacy and trade and those relationships. I'd like you to talk about how a feminist foreign policy would inform our decisions on peace and conflict and on security building. In looking at Ukraine and what we're seeing with women in Ukraine at the moment, how would that help?
Vice-President, Policy, Equality Fund
Thank you for the question.
In the year 2000, the United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution on women, peace and security. This was absolutely path-breaking, because it acknowledged for the first time the interrelationship of the security of states with women's security.
We actually have research now that shows that one of the main predictors of whether a country will go to war with its neighbours is the status of women inside that country, so I think what a feminist foreign policy offers us is this opportunity to rethink what security means, and it gives us a chance to bring some of the insights of alternative approaches to peace and security into how we tackle some of the really pressing issues of our time.
Sometimes people say that a feminist foreign policy sounds very abstract or esoteric; I think it's really practical. I think it offers us guidance on how we can move forward on building more peaceful, more sustainable, more prosperous societies.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you.
One of the things that you talked about, and we've heard this many times, is that we need increased sustainable, predictable funding, not these ups and downs and non-transparent funding.
Would it be beneficial to have SRHR funding be legislated into law to be a set priority of this government legally? Would that help?
Vice-President, Policy, Equality Fund
I think legislation is absolutely important in terms of setting targets and meeting targets. I think it also needs to be accompanied by a broader understanding within Global Affairs Canada of what this programming is and why it's important. I think there's also public accountability, so that we have clear reporting on the actual spending, just like we've seen with other legislative requirements. They are absolutely essential, but they are not enough by themselves to move the needle forward.
NDP
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Thank you for that. I'm very grateful.
Members, I regret to inform everyone....
There might be a new development. I hear she is connecting, so she should hopefully be with us momentarily.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Hello, Ms. Vasylenko. Thank you ever so much for joining us. I understand you were experiencing some problems. We apologize for that.
We have heard from the first witness, so now we turn to you. You have five minutes for your opening remarks, after which we will go to members for questions.
The floor is yours. Please proceed.
Member of Parliament, Parliament of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada)
Thank you, Mr. Ehsassi.
Thank you, members of the committee, for hosting me. I am very happy to finally be able to serve as a witness for your committee, although it's on a topic I would much rather not have to talk about. Like many Ukrainians, I am now bound by a duty to speak the solemn truth of what is actually going on in our country.
Unfortunately, when it comes to sexual and reproductive health and the rights of women—which is the topic of this panel and the session you are hosting—there are many sad and very disturbing developments we must report from Ukraine. Over the past year, Russia's aggression against Ukraine has escalated to absolutely unthinkable measures. Everything that could be used as a weapon has been used against the Ukrainian people, including sexual violence.
Ukraine, unfortunately, has not been an exception to the rule, but rather a very sad continuation of the systematic use of various sexual crimes—rape included—and torture, assault and harassment that essentially amount to using sexual violence as a weapon of war. Russian soldiers and the Russian military have not been an exception in this.
When the Kyiv region was under occupation by Russian soldiers, we heard reports, as early as March of last year, that commands were given to military units to spare no civilians and intimidate the civilian population in all ways possible. This is why rape was endorsed and why you have accounts in the news—and probably in sessions like this, when you are talking to the Ukrainian population—of absolutely horrific stories. Women and young girls were kept captive, sometimes in the basements of their own homes, where they were subjected to hearing the conversations of the soldiers holding them hostage; they would be rape victims and would need to choose, from among themselves, who would be raped that night.
These horrific stories can be retold en masse at the moment, because there are 171 open investigations of rape and sexual violence against Ukrainian women committed by Russian soldiers in Ukraine. This number keeps growing. Several months ago, if I were to be reporting at a similar session, I would have put the number at 154 cases, but more women and more girls have been coming forward.
In Ukraine, we step away from calling them “victims”; we call them “survivors”. Today, the Government of Ukraine has endorsed many programs to help these survivors. These are headed by the first lady of Ukraine, Olena Zelenska. With the help of international donors through the programs of the special UN representative on sexual violence in conflict, almost every region has set up a whole network of survivor assistance centres, where women and girls—and males as well—can come forward to seek support and assistance. These are across the whole of Ukraine.
These survivor centres report many more cases than the 171 investigations open with the prosecutor general. The reason is that the culture in Ukraine is such that, essentially, being a survivor of sexual violence or rape is still very much stigmatized in society. It's not necessarily something you want to come forward with or be marked with for the rest of your own life and, most importantly, the lives of your children and families.
There is much work being done today by NGOs. There is much work being done today by women who survived torture and sexual violence back in 2014 and 2015, when Russia's aggression against Ukraine first started. They themselves have gone through a painful process of recovery, but they themselves can today provide a form of peer support to the survivors of these crimes that were committed and that are being committed throughout these last 12 months of this ongoing Russian aggression.
The worst situations are, of course, witnessed in the territories that are under effective Russian control, under Russian occupation. I am from Kyiv. When the northern parts of the Kyiv region were liberated from the Russians on April 1 and it was possible to go in there to speak to the population there, of course many stories were uncovered. The problem, as I have emphasized, is that it's one thing for people to come to you to share their stories or hearsay evidence, such as what they heard their neighbours say or what they heard families may have encountered or suffered in the next regions or in the next street; it's another thing to have these people come and give evidence that can be properly documented by prosecutors and be put in the format of a legal case that could open investigations and bring justice to the perpetrators.
I think that in Ukraine, the biggest challenge today is building this bridge.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Ms. Vasylenko, you're considerably over the allotted time. Can we open it up to questions? Perhaps the other issues you want to cover will emerge as the members ask you questions. Is that okay?
Member of Parliament, Parliament of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada)
Of course. I agree completely, yes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Thank you, Ms. Vasylenko.
We now go to questions from the members.
We'll first go to MP Wagantall for three minutes.
Conservative
Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate so much, Ms. Vasylenko, your testimony this morning. I had the privilege of being in Ukraine, in Kyiv, in 2017, and of visiting the hospital there and those who had come back wounded. Twenty of our emergency doctors were there working with them. It means a lot to me, also, that Canada is doing its part in Ukraine, as I too have that background in my family.
I understand, then, that basically since 2014, for nine years, Ukraine has been dealing specifically with the war with Russia and with rape being used as a weapon of war. In the House of Commons, it was brought to our attention as well by a member that in Ukraine, women who are expecting a child and are carrying it to term are also targets of this war among the Russian people who are attacking them because of, I guess, the level of fear that it would put into people as well.
Do you feel that there are things we should be doing to assist you? I know that you are an advocate for health care and that you're a member of the health committee. How could Canada do more to assist in those circumstances?
Member of Parliament, Parliament of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada)
May I answer?
Member of Parliament, Parliament of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada)
I'm actually a member of the environmental committee. I deal a lot with sustainable development. Of course, in this context, women's and girls' rights make up a large part of my work. Essentially, I think that over the last year, all Ukrainian parliamentarians have started doing whatever they can, as all the Ukrainian people have started doing whatever they can, to keep the nation alive. I think that the point you bring forward is very important because, yes, women carrying a child are a target. There have been bombings of the maternity wards. For me personally, this was the moment that shook me up the most over the last year, especially at the onset of this escalation of this invasion, when the Mariupol maternity ward was bombed. Then there were other cases in Zhytomyr, which is a city just west of Kyiv, some 200 kilometres from Kyiv, where a maternity ward was bombed again. We had many cases of maternity wards being bombed, being targeted by Russian missiles, throughout this year, which brings us to the conclusion that the tactic Russia is espousing against Ukraine and against Ukrainians is one of a genocidal nature.
We are very much aware, and we are grateful to Canada, to your Parliament, for passing the relevant acts and resolutions recognizing that Russia is essentially committing a genocide against the Ukrainian people. We would urge your assistance with spreading this idea and the understanding of what Russia's tactics and strategies are across other parliaments, across the globe. I think this is very much needed, especially in our international duty under the—
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, I'm having trouble hearing the witness. If Mr. Bergeron needs to suspend the meeting, it would be helpful, but we couldn't hear the witness, so I'd like that time to be extended because I was trying with one ear closed to listen, but I wasn't able to hear.
We need to either suspend the meeting to solve the problem or at least extend some time to the witness.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
I'm sorry about that. We will give you an additional 25 seconds to make up for that.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
I think there's a misunderstanding right now, and I'd like us to clarify it.
We had a connection issue with the second witness. To solve the problem, we collectively agreed to grant the first witness three minutes to speak.
According to our understanding, the first round was divided in two. So, six minutes divided by two would normally be the equivalent of three minutes for the first witness and three minutes for the second. There would then be a second round.
However, you decided that this second round with the second witness was the second round. I don't see why the second witness would have less speaking time than the first to answer questions.
With all due respect, Mr. Chair, I consider this our first round, which we divided in two, meaning three minutes for the first witness and three minutes for the second. That was my understanding of things. Obviously, it was not yours.
I will defer to my colleagues. I hope my interpretation is correct and that this is still the first round, divided in two.