Foreign Affairs Committee on March 21st, 2023

[Mohini Datta-Ray]

I also don't have additional information as to the second part of your question.

As to the first, absolutely, rape as a tool of war and terror is quite commonplace. There are also many instances of that being used as state terror—not just in conflict between two nations, but also as a way to suppress opposition within a state's own borders.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Dr. Natalia Kanem, Executive Director and Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations Population Fund, told the committee that one of the most affordable ways to prevent maternal deaths was to train and deploy midwives. She did specify, however, that there is currently a shortage of 900,000 midwives around the world.

In your opinion, is this part of the solutions the government of Canada should support to prevent maternity-related problems, especially in developing countries?

[Julia Anderson]

Thank you for the question.

Frontline health care workers, such as midwives, are the solution when it comes to both maternal care and SRHR in general. I think the investment in community health care workers, in trained midwives, is the most effective intervention that Canada could support in all its development projects, especially when it comes to women's and children's health.

Midwives touch on contraceptive care all the way through pregnancy and all the way through childbirth and newborns. They can be major interlocutors with communities and community leaders in order to promote women's health outcomes, so yes, I agree 100% with Dr. Natalia Kanem.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Ms. Datta‑Ray, did you want to add anything?

[Mohini Datta-Ray]

I would concur 100%.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm sorry, Mr. Bergeron, but you're over four minutes. Thank you.

We will now go to Ms. McPherson. You have four minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today and sharing this important information with us.

I'm going to ask this to both Ms. Anderson and Ms. Datta-Ray. Time and time again we've heard from witnesses that the suppression of access to reproductive services for women, the lack of access for abortion, does not stop abortion; it simply stops safe abortion. I'd like you to comment on this so that we have your testimony on the record.

I also want to talk about Canada and the role we can play in terms of advocates. Canada should be a leader, ensuring that women's rights are protected around the world. I know we've done an awful lot on the feminist international assistance policy and I think that we have done some really good things. I'd like your perspective on where Canada can be a stronger leader in advocating for SRHR around the world, and on how we're doing so far.

Perhaps I'll start with you, Ms. Anderson.

[Julia Anderson]

Thank you.

On your first point, at CanWaCH we take an evidence-based approach to our thinking on these issues. The evidence is unanimous and clear that the restriction of abortion does not stop abortion; it only increases unsafe abortion, and it loses women's lives. I'm sure my colleague will have the numbers. The data are very clear on that.

On your second question, the investments have been made. Canada has a long trajectory of investing in women's and children's health issues. I was proud to see the $1.4-billion announcement in June 2019, year over year, for a total of $14 billion.

I think the area where we can do more work is on the diplomacy side. I think it's having a cohesive approach—not standing up on global stages and always just saying things, but being in conversations.

I come from northern Alberta, from a deeply religious community, and I know that these conversations are difficult. They are to be taken with a lot of care, but health is health, and health care is health care. That is the stance we should be taking, and that is the way in which we should be working with the communities and the countries that we are in bilateral relationships with, in multilateral relationships with, etc.

I also think we can do a lot through multilateral agencies as a leader, pushing and promoting the areas such as SRHR within the Global Fund and the GFF, etc. I think we can get better at having a more coordinated approach.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

Ms. Datta-Ray, could you respond as well?

[Mohini Datta-Ray]

Absolutely.

The lack of access to abortion doesn't stop abortion; it only makes abortion very unsafe and it results in dead women, essentially. That is borne out in instance after instance throughout the globe—here, as well—and it was the big push to decriminalize abortion in Canada.

In terms of what Canada could be doing more of, I would say it's building with the feminist organizing that is happening on the ground. I think sometimes, as I've seen with witnesses, there's often a tension, a feeling like there is a western approach or there's a white saviour mentality. The way we get around that is to build relationships on the ground with feminists who are there in every instance, pushing for their basic human rights and reproductive justice.

I think it is making sure that when we're saying “taking the leadership of local communities,” we're not turning that to mean that we go to the most conservative, anti-choice element in those communities, but rather that we find the feminists who are already working in whatever situation we are attempting to support—and it's support, not intervention, usually.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That's an excellent point. Thank you so much.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, there's a lot of interruption, and I think we have a member who's worried about his time. If the chair can make a ruling on it and he wants to challenge the ruling, it can be decided later, but to interrupt the members and witnesses here on 15 seconds of supposed lapsed time or time taken away is, I think, really rude to the witnesses and other members.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Any member of the public who wants to consider the fairness of the chair with respect to the time can make the following observation. My time for my question.... I was told I had four minutes. It started at 12:25:28. The member from the Bloc started raising a point of order at 12:27:54. That was two minutes and 26 seconds after I started speaking.

It took the chair another 11 seconds following the beginning of the point of order from the Bloc member to intervene. There was some intervening time.

The chair told the witness to proceed with answering my question at 12:28:39, but 25 seconds later, the Bloc member again began raising points of order regarding time. That was at 12:29:04.

The cumulative time that I was given was two minutes and 51 seconds. The chair is, of course, welcome to dispute this, but any fair-minded person can go and do exactly what my team just did, which is measure the amounts of time I was given. Again, from 12:25:28 until 12:27:54 is two minutes and 26 seconds. I was then given another 25 seconds from 12:29:04 to 12:29:28. That adds up to two minutes and 51 seconds.

Chair, when I pointed out that I was timing the time and I had about a minute left, you strongly contradicted me and told me that you had been timing the time. However, in fact, you were very clearly incorrect.

Respectfully, maybe you need to consult the technical aspects of your timepiece or something else there, but I hope that you will be fair going forward with respect to the time and that I will be given the one minute and nine seconds that I should have had as part of the next round.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

First of all, allow me to apologize to the three witnesses. It is truly, in my opinion, very unbecoming that we're having all of this back-and-forth regarding time.

Mr. Genuis, as you will recall when you first raised this issue, I said it appeared to me that you had 10 seconds remaining. However, out of an abundance of caution, I undertook to check and to go back and add whatever you had lost to the time that remained.

I did so. I had two people look at the timing, and those two have advised that I may have been off by 10 seconds or by 12 seconds.

Quite frankly, I will give you those additional 20 seconds, but I will not do any more than that, Mr. Genuis.

You have taken up the time of the committee. You have disrupted the committee. You have disrespected the witnesses.

As I said, I gave you my word—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Chair, you either enforce the rules or you don't.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Genuis, I'm sorry, but I am not done yet.

I gave you my word that I would look into this. I would remedy it so you wouldn't have been out of time. Two individuals have kindly and graciously taken out of their time, and they have determined that you were cut off 20 seconds short, so I think—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Any member of the public can verify this, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

You know full well, Mr. Genuis, that this is entirely at the discretion of the chair. I have taken up too much—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

No, it's not. You can't just arbitrarily cut off people that you have some personal animus against a minute and 10 seconds before their time expires.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Genuis, again let me apologize to the witnesses that you have taken up so much time and you have robbed all these witnesses of a whole lot more time.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Give me the opportunity to ask my questions. Just let me ask my questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Excuse me, Mr. Genuis. You have not been recognized. Allow me to finish what I'm saying.

Again, we extend our apologies to the witnesses.

We looked into it. If you're not happy with the 20 seconds I'm giving you, you can appeal that, Mr. Genuis, but that is what I'm giving you.

We now go to the second round.

You're being given 20 seconds in addition to what you had, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I would like to ask some additional questions, but again, the members of the public can verify the quality of the chair's timing on their own.

Ms. Anderson, I want to follow up on the issue of the Muskoka initiative specifically. I know you're quite familiar with the details of it, so maybe you could provide your reflections on its impact. You referred to it as well in your testimony in terms of accountability and mobilization of donors. I would love to hear more from you about the Muskoka initiative.