Foreign Affairs Committee on Dec. 11th, 2023

[Dr. Balkan Devlen]

I would say it's not so much the loss of independence as an increasing irrelevance in the sense that, unless we address the needs and concerns of our allies and bring the capabilities and resources to the table, we're not going to be asked for our opinion. Our influence will decrease, and we will not necessarily be top of mind when allies come together to address common challenges.

It's not so much the loss of independence as the loss of influence, I would say.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Aboultaif.

We'll now go to MP Longfield.

Welcome to our committee. You have the floor for three minutes.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to spend my time with Mr. Devlen.

Your title of director of transatlantic programs stood out to me.

I've been a member of a discussion group among Germany, Canada and the United States on climate change and the opportunities it brings from a clean-technology point of view. I was president of the Guelph Chamber of Commerce. Our mayor was involved in this dialogue with Berlin and the United States. We met at our consulate office in our embassy in Berlin. To add to Mr. Bergeron's list, there's also environmental diplomacy and opportunities. Our embassy brought together some businesses and municipalities to look at how we're reacting to the opportunities that climate change brings. We were able to attract a business from Denmark. It's located in Guelph because of our diplomatic efforts at our embassy.

COP28 just wound up. There are a lot of opportunities coming out globally. Canada is in a leading role, in terms of clean technology.

Could you talk about how our diplomatic service needs to be able to respond to these new opportunities that climate change brings to Canada?

[Dr. Balkan Devlen]

Thank you very much. I think that's a very important point.

I was, together with some other colleagues, in Berlin in October. We had a chance to talk to some stakeholders there and to engage with our embassy. One of the key topics was how Canada can contribute to European energy security, including clean energy and technology.

What is very clear to me, from our European allies and friends, as well as from our Pacific allies and friends, is that there is a demand for Canadian energy—Canadian clean tech—to be part of it. Here, I include the nuclear part, too, which is an increasingly important part of the energy mix. It is being recognized by the world, by our European allies and others. We need to be able to provide it. We have the technology. We have the resources in northern Saskatchewan, for example. The same goes for other technologies.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

We have very limited time.

On clean tech, when I look at Germany and what they've done on district energy.... We are at the very early stages. They've pretty much tapped out some parts of their market.

Looking for international opportunities, if we took on district energy as a theme, would that be something we could develop?

[Dr. Balkan Devlen]

I'm not necessarily an expert in that particular technology, so I won't be able to comment on it.

What I can say is this: One amazing thing our German allies did was to move very fast when they needed to adapt. That included setting up an offshore LNG terminal within 18 months. Doing something like that here in Canada takes years.

I think we need to be much more agile in getting those resources out. Our allies show it can be done.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Mr. Bergeron.

You have a minute and a half.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

First of all, I'd like to point out to my colleague Mr. Longfield that public diplomacy can include environmental groups.

Mr. Théberge, my understanding is that the Canadian government decided to withhold $3 million of its funding for the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie because of internal organizational issues.

Do you know how this money is being spent and whether the cutback is permanent?

[Martin Théberge]

Thank you for that excellent question.

Three million dollars were withheld from Canada's voluntary contribution to the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, the OIF, for the governments own reasons. It's known that a small portion of this amount, about $100,000, was transferred to a number of partners. To our knowledge, the$2.9 million still remains but has not been allocated. It's money that Canada has earmarked for diplomacy.

The money could be transferred on the basis of the "by, for and with" principle for Canada's communities and it could still be used for that purpose. I will return to what I was saying earlier: Just imagine what the Société nationale de l'Acadie could do in its diplomatic work if it had funds.

Is this withholding of funds from the OIF permanent? We don't know. We'd like it to be allocated in the future. It could return to the OIF, but it could also be given to public diplomacy organizations like the Société nationale de l'Acadie in recognition of the impact of their work on Canadian diplomacy.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

Next, we'll go to MP McPherson. You have a minute and a half.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Devlen, very quickly, when I asked you questions earlier, you were talking a bit about coming to the table with something concrete. We know that developing our relationships with emerging economies is key.

Could you, in the very short time we have, talk a bit about the steps Canada should be taking to develop those relationships with emerging economies and the role that those three pillars of diplomacy, trade and development play?

[Dr. Balkan Devlen]

We need to be paying attention to where we can leverage our resources, as I pointed out—where we can leverage our strengths. Engaging with the emerging economies that will be hungry for energy, minerals and other resources is an important step. That needs to go beyond just government engagement. We need to be able to talk to private sector and civil society organizations as well as the government in those countries.

We need to leverage our own capabilities, including civil society organizations and our multicultural ability to engage. Quebec and its experience could actually help quite a lot with the federal government when it comes to engaging in French Africa, for example. It is going to be the most populous continent in the world.

Our engagement with Africa is very limited, despite the fact that we are a member of both the Commonwealth and la Francophonie, the OIF. It is a resource with which we need to engage a lot more. We need to do it in a multi-formatted way, not only government to government but also including the private sector and civil society.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

Next, we have Mr. Chong. You have three minutes.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Devlen, for appearing.

You recently co-wrote an article indicating that the UN has shown itself to be irrelevant on things that matter. You wrote that in our current era, multilateralism has been overtaken by minilateral agreements between like-minded states, arrangements such as the quadrilateral security dialogue and AUKUS.

Global Affairs Canada, in its discussion paper, “Future of Diplomacy”, recommends strengthening Canada's presence at the UN.

Do you agree with that recommendation? Why or why not?

[Dr. Balkan Devlen]

Canada's resources can be better put to use in specific minilateral arrangements, rather than doubling down on the UN system. The UN, as we have witnessed in the past 10-15 years, is increasingly deadlocked and increasingly irrelevant in terms of solving the global problems that we have. It doesn't mean completely withdrawing or not providing resources to the United Nations. It is about identifying where we can actually make a difference and whether our services, our strengths and our interests are better served in a minilateral setting instead of getting bogged down in the UN.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

You also recommended that Canada focus its efforts internationally by withdrawing its membership in certain global institutions, such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

Would you also extend that to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank?

[Dr. Balkan Devlen]

Absolutely. We actually make the case in the piece that we should not be part of China's international development bank, which is used for communist parties.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Why do you think we should withdraw from the EBRD?

[Dr. Balkan Devlen]

The primary function of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is to engage in development aid that is right now mostly at an advanced level in developing countries. Our resources can very well be pointed out to other places, such as Africa, for example. We should engage in both digital and physical infrastructure development there, rather than continuing to fund what was initially formulated as a post-war European reconstruction organization.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Thank you.

I have no further questions, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, MP Chong.

We'll now go for the final question to MP Oliphant.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Good day, everyone.

Thank you, Mr. Théberge and Ms. Mallet.

Civil society definitely has to make its contribution. I also agree with Mr. Bergeron about the other forms of diplomacy, such as public diplomacy, parliamentary diplomacy and cultural diplomacy.

Is it only a matter of grants and money, or should a structure be recommended for global affairs?

[Martin Théberge]

I would mention two things. The study is about Canada's diplomatic capacities. As you said, public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy can provide enormous support to government diplomacy.

For us,the strategy to promote Acadian artists internationally, called SPAASI, promoted artists and their works abroad. It's a very good example of leverage.

I would also point to the France-Acadia agreement, which was renewed last October. The agreement had three main thrusts, the promotion of Acadian and French culture and language, the socio-economic component, and the youth mobility component. Under the agreement, an action plan would be developed over a ten-year period. This would enable us to come up with measures that could be assessed with a viw to identifying the impacts of the action plan.

If the Government of Canada were to agree to develop a diplomatic strategy that included civic diplomacy, public diplomacy, and cultural diplomacy, and to give us the means to develop this action plan on a firm basis as a way of supporting and complementing the Canadian government's measures, it would be a win-win situation for everyone, and not just Acadia.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Does your association, and others, have a role to play in protecting minority languages? I'm not just talking about the French language and Acadian culture, but minority languages around the world.

[Véronique Mallet]

That's an excellent question.

Your colleague spoke to us earlier about Canada's duality and the manner in which it is promoted abroad. One of Canada's strengths on the international stage is its ability to maintain this linguistic duality. Acadia is an excellent example of a civil society that has succeeded, against all odds, to exist and flourish.

We could share our organizational approach for civil society in a calm dialogue with the government. We have some very good ideas to offer the world.