Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on June 3rd, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thanks very much. We're in public session.

Monsieur Dorion, please continue to move your motion. Would you mind starting at the beginning again, please?

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This motion calls on the government to support the UN Human Rights Council and the Universal Periodic Review. It reads as follows:

That the Subcommittee on International Human Rights request that the government renew its candidacy for the UN Human RIghts Council and show its support for the Council; that the Subcommittee also request that the Government of Canada take advantage of the review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council to help strengthen the effectiveness and credibility of the Universal Periodic Review by suggesting: that more time be devoted to the review than the current three hours; that NGOs and national human rights institutions be given a broader role in interactive dialogue; and that independent experts be heard from; further, that the Subcommittee report this motion to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development to be reported to the House.

Mr. Chair, when the committee last met on Tuesday, Messrs. Sweet, Cotler and Marston all stressed that some of the witnesses's concerns about the Universal Periodic Review process should be included in part one of the report. The motion that I am moving today calls for exactly that. In my opinion, it is critically important that Canada participate in the Universal Periodic Review process recently initiated by the council. The process has reached the midway point in the first four-year cycle. In order for Canada to help make the process better, obviously it needs to become a member of the council.

Recently, I attended a roundtable along with many other experts at which the UPR process and the mid-cycle report were discussed. Many benefits and successes associated with the Universal Periodic Review were noted, along with some major shortcomings. The process works and is effective, but a number of changes could make it even better and more effective. To that end, Canada needs to renew its candidacy for council and participate in the discussions on the Universal Periodic Review. I understand why the government party sometimes call into question the very credibility of the council. According to statements made by some of the people who attended the last committee meeting, some council members are guilty of violating human rights. It should be noted that in the eyes of some countries, Canada is also guilty of violating rights, specifically those of its aboriginal peoples. Besides, the empty chair policy has never been a sound policy. We must contribute to the dialogue, not exclude ourselves from the process. We need to remember that even the United States joined the council in 2009 and that Canada should have renewed its candidacy at the time, but failed to do so.

My motion outlines the main changes that have been recommended by international experts on the subject. I have prepared a brief overview, describing these experts' backgrounds and the circumstances that led me to draft this motion. To my mind, it is critically important that Canada show leadership in the efforts to strengthen the Universal Periodic Review. If the motion is adopted, Mr. Chair, we could even incorporate certain elements of the review process in part one of our report, for instance, the renewal of Canada's candidacy for the UN Human Rights Council, so that it can participate in the mid-cycle Universal Periodic Review process and make improvements to this mechanism.

That is, Mr. Chair, the aim of this motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Are there any other comments?

Mr. Marston, please.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I just want to say, Mr. Chair, that in the discourse around the Human Rights Council we quite often hear concerns about those countries that are there that have a very questionable reputation around human rights. I think it's crucial, since this is one of the very few opportunities, if not the only opportunity, we have worldwide to confront racism, to confront the human rights abuses; a country with Canada's reputation must be at the table. It's not good enough for us to stand back and point fingers and talk about the bad actors over here. We have to set an example and we have to give guidance from the perspective we have.

We're not saintly in the area of human rights, but we do have a good record in this country. I really, strongly, ask the committee members to support this motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

I'll just remind members that because our report itself is being done in camera, we cannot deal with its.... It's no secret we're working on a report, but we can't refer to any of its details at this point in open session. Thank you.

Does anyone else wish to comment on this? Mr. Silva, please.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

I'm trying to figure out a way that I can support this. Obviously, I want Canada to renew its candidacy at the UN Human Rights Council, but I have problems as well with the council as is.

So a friendly amendment, if it's acceptable, is that after it says, “and show its support”, I would say, “and show its support for reforming and strengthening the council”. That way I could support it. Otherwise I could not support it as is, because I think the council as it is needs some serious reform. A lot of issues are going on there. It's gone into bloc voting from certain countries that have an axe to grind against certain western democracies.

Some human rights professors, including ones I've taken courses from, tell me it's worse than it was before, when it was the commission.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

So “reforming and strengthening the council”, which amounts to an amendment. We'll see if it's considered a friendly amendment by Monsieur Dorion. If it is, we can adopt it without debate. If not, we'll have to debate the amendment.

In your opinion, would that be an acceptable amendment, Mr. Dorion?

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Could we not compromise and talk instead about improving the council?

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Improving the council?

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

That would be in keeping with what Mr. Silva is proposing, but not quite as radical.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

It's not strong enough.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

I'll ask Mr. Silva, as a starting point, would that be...?

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

The word “ameliorate” is to make it better, to improve, but I'm not sure if it also means reform.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

It doesn't mean the same thing. “Reform” does not necessarily mean “improve”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Monsieur Dorion has indicated that as originally worded it's not a friendly amendment, so we're now debating the amendment.

Does anybody want to debate that or can we go to a vote on that?

Mr. Marston.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

My question is on the intent of this motion. Is this a stand-alone motion or is this something we're trying to incorporate into our report? I took this as a stand-alone motion that would be aside from the report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

It is. As introduced, it is a stand-alone motion. Nothing precludes adding something like this to the report. It would have to be done by a different mechanism.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I wasn't looking for it to be added, because my support of this motion is as a stand-alone, separate from....

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

That's currently how it's being handled.

We are now on debate of the amendment.

Mr. Hiebert.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

I'm just wondering if somebody can provide some additional information. Do we know that Canada has not renewed its candidacy? Have they given any explanation for that if they have not?

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Mr. Dorion?

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

To my knowledge, Canada has not made any such request, unless government officials know something that we don't know.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

I'd prefer to verify the accuracy of this information before voting on this motion. I think we need to have complete information. They either have done it or, if they have not, perhaps there are good reasons they have not. I'm not in a position to judge or determine that at this point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

All right. We have to deal with the issues of time that are upon us now.

From a procedural point of view, I'm going to check with the clerks.

The clerk tells me that if we halt the debate now, we have to recommence it where we left off, which means that essentially the amendment ceases to exist. It could be reintroduced, but we'd pick it up or bring the amendment.... In practice, we're out of time.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Wouldn't there be debate on the amendment?