Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on March 10th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Sameer Zuberi]

Is it that the interpretation isn't working?

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

That's not it.

I'd just like to remind my colleague that the study is about women's rights and freedoms around the world, including women in Afghanistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. To my knowledge, Yemen is part of the world.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sameer Zuberi]

Thank you.

That's a very significant observation.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Obviously, there is a translation problem because I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't be talking about Yemen. I'm just wondering if the witness can clarify. I am aware, but for the general public, what is the interplay between the countries we have listed in our study and the situation that's happening in Yemen?

[Léa Pelletier-Marcotte]

Yes, I will clarify.

The topic was not limited in terms of how it was phrased. It was the decline of rights of women worldwide, including in Iran, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. As we know, many witnesses will talk about these other countries. We chose to focus on one country in the same region that was also affected. That covered all of the other areas mentioned, including the involvement in peacebuilding, cyber-intimidation and politics.

We chose Yemen as a case study because we have boots on the ground there.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Yes, I know. I'm not concerned about your including Yemen, but I'm just wondering if you can comment a little bit about the interplays. I think particularly with Iran and Saudi Arabia, there's an interesting interplay with Yemen.

[Léa Pelletier-Marcotte]

Absolutely.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

If you can explain that a little bit better.... I'm somewhat familiar with it. All of these things are interconnected. I think I want to get that a little more on the record, the interconnectivity and perhaps how Canada can address that, because sometimes I feel we isolate these: “This is a Yemen problem. This is an Afghanistan problem. This is an Iran problem. This is a Saudi Arabia problem.”

Do you have a specific recommendation on how can Canada address the interplay?

[Léa Pelletier-Marcotte]

Thank you for the question.

The conflict in Yemen has been internationalized since 2015 and many consider it a proxy conflict between different world powers, with different governments backing different coalitions or parties to the Yemen conflict. Of course there is an interplay there, especially with Iran and Saudi Arabia.

As I mentioned earlier, everything Canada does in terms of financing, but also whom we are supporting in terms of the arms trade especially, has a great impact on the humanitarian situation in Yemen and on the conflict itself. As the conflict progresses and just lasts, the humanitarian situation becomes dire, especially for women and girls. It was very opportune to address the topic of Yemen, seeing that it interrelates with these two countries that are specifically mentioned.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sameer Zuberi]

Thank you for that, Mr. Viersen.

We'll continue to the next round.

Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe, you have the floor for four minutes.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My next questions are a bit off topic, and there are no wrong answers. I myself don't have any thoughts on this; I really need the insights of our witnesses.

For a year now, we've been pressing the executive branch of government to amend the Criminal Code to allow our humanitarian organizations to do their work in Afghanistan.

Yesterday, the government introduced Bill C‑41. We know that the devil is in the details.

Have you had time to look at Bill C‑41?

If you have, do you have any first impressions of the bill to share with us?

I don't know who the best person to answer my question would be.

[Lauren Ravon]

I can provide a very brief answer to your question.

Thank you for the question, it's a really important one.

The problem is getting worse and worse. We're going to see more and more conflict in the countries where we're trying to provide humanitarian aid. This is not an exception. I feel that on the face of it, at Oxfam, we're very happy to see that the issue is evolving.

The devil is always in the details. I believe it's going to be a work in progress, but it's a great example of international cooperation within civil society and of government listening to move an issue forward.

I wouldn't say it's all over and won, but we're certainly happy to see the issue moving forward.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Okay.

As soon as the committee starts considering the bill, you can contact us and we can talk about it again.

Ms. Ravon, I'm going to ask you my second question. As I told you, there are no right or wrong answers. I need your insight.

In your opinion, it's absolutely necessary that we go through diplomatic channels to improve women's rights abroad.

However, we have no embassy in Saudi Arabia. We have severed our diplomatic ties.

Are there more pros than cons to not having an embassy in a country?

I understand that it sent a message. However, if we want to fight for women's rights in Saudi Arabia, we have to get involved through consulates, if only to provide consular services.

So wouldn't it be better if we had an embassy?

[Lauren Ravon]

I'd be hard pressed to comment specifically on the benefits of having an embassy. I would instead go back to what I said earlier about connecting with communities in exile, to obtain intelligence, and connecting with communities in the actual countries.

Canada has a role to play in supporting human rights defenders once they are out, sometimes just across the border. For example, in Central America, there are a lot of activists in Costa Rica right now. They are doing their work from there. We don't yet have the mechanisms to properly support, equip and communicate with these activists in exile.

Therefore, I would encourage Global Affairs Canada to look at ways to develop trans-border programs. Right now, most programs are launched based on a country's specific needs.

There are offices overseeing bilateral cooperation, and we have a long-term program there. We don't have that flexibility, and I feel it's a way to not only support the movements, but also to obtain intelligence on what's going on inside through these activists.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

We saw what happened to the former female Afghan parliamentarians. We're part of a small group fighting for these women and their families. Unfortunately, we lost one of these women.

Doesn't Canada have a duty to help out? Canada has clearly supported Afghan women's leadership through some programs to help them take their place in the public space.

Because we've helped them become empowered, don't we have a duty to help in a situation where the Taliban is taking over again and persecuting them, no matter where they are in the world right now?

[Lauren Ravon]

Yes, that's absolutely true.

As far as Afghanistan is concerned, promises have been made to support these people in exile, but it's not enough. They have not only helped their country, but they've also worked with Canada on democracy and human rights initiatives. Too little has been done, that's for sure.

We're talking about women in politics, but Ms. Pelletier‑Marcotte and I see that our Oxfam colleagues in Afghanistan are putting themselves at very high risk, and they have no access to the programs Canada has set up. Some are still trapped in Afghanistan, while others have crossed the border and are in Pakistan but don't yet have Canada's support to ensure their safety.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

So we're talking about action to help aid workers and secure their visas.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sameer Zuberi]

Thank you, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. Your time is up.

Thank you, Ms. Ravon.

We're going to continue now for four minutes with Ms. McPherson, please.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

It's always a challenge to go after Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, because I often have the exact same questions as him.

I would like to just get a little bit more information about the response that people have to the new humanitarian carve-out. Obviously, many of us within the House of Commons were happy to see it come forward. We've been pushing for it for 18 months, but yesterday we did hear from some organizations that do not think this is sufficient.

It comes onto a bigger conversation that I want to have. Perhaps I'll ask each of you to comment on this idea that we don't have a diplomatic relationship with Iran and we don't have, obviously, a diplomatic relationship with the Taliban, but we do want to support women in those countries.

I get your point, Ms. Ravon, that we want to make sure that we are supporting them outside of the country to get them to safety.

On the role that Canada can play with regard to diplomacy, I don't want to be in a situation where we have to wait 18 months for a humanitarian carve-out in another circumstance. What can we do now? What needed to be done better with regard to the humanitarian carve-out? What does Canada's role with regard to diplomacy look like?

Perhaps I could start with you, Ms. Nivyabandi.

[Ketty Nivyabandi]

I'll actually let Oxfam respond. They're much more in depth in the humanitarian work. I can comment on what Canada can do when it comes to the multilateral systems and organizations.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Okay.

[Lauren Ravon]

The way Canada basically funds programming where there's humanitarian development needs a major shift and rethink. It's not only about carving out exceptions in certain conflict situations. It's that our aid is so compartmentalized.

I'll give you one example. We've received money from the Canadian government to support building the capacity of women's rights organizations in Pakistan. It's fantastic and much-needed work, but then we haven't had the flexibility to use those funds to support those same women's rights organizations to respond to the flooding in Pakistan that happened last fall. It's to be able to shift and say we're building up capacity, but then capacity is built and we can't use the same funds when circumstances change. This goes for humanitarian response for conflict.

It's rethinking the dividing lines between peacebuilding funds, humanitarian response funds, long-term development funding and democratic institution strengthening. The world doesn't work in those boxes. It certainly never has, but definitely doesn't now. It's rethinking channels of funding that allow for adaptive programming.

[Léa Pelletier-Marcotte]

I'm going to make a brief comment, if I may.

Even if we don't have actual diplomatic ties, we can still use our clout and influence in existing international forums, such as those at the UN, to try to get policies changed and other countries to change their attitude about this.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That's an excellent point.

Ketty, could I pass it to you?

[Ketty Nivyabandi]

Yes, I was going to comment on the same thing.

In terms of how to exercise pressure, I think international multilateral organizations—particularly the United Nations Human Rights Council and various other fora—are really critical spaces to make Canada's voice heard but also to build alliances with other countries. I really think that's where Canada has an opportunity to create groups and alliances around human rights priorities to be able to advance and counter this anti-rights movement that is coming from particular countries and is infiltrating these multilateral organizations. We hear that it's becoming increasingly difficult to even have gender-based language in those multilateral institutions. There's a lot of work that needs to be done to push back on the push-back. Really, there's an opportunity for Canada to do more there.