Status of Women Committee on May 5th, 2010

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond, BC]

Okay. It's just a remark.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

We're going to another round. It's a three-minute round.

We will start with the Liberals, Ms. Neville.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you.

Again, thank you very much for a long afternoon here.

I'm rustling through papers here. I see the wording of the commitment made last July at the G-8 in Italy, and I see that Canada signed on to it and was clearly committed to accelerating progress on maternal aid through sexual and reproductive health care. I'm not going to read it all.

Then I have in front of me the Maputo plan of action from September 2006 in Mozambique. I see here, in the Maputo plan of action—I don't want to read it all—at number 5 in the introduction, that it “seeks to take the continent forward towards the goal of universal access to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services in Africa by 2015”. If Canada is leading this initiative and in some way its credibility is undermined by isolating a piece of what Africa is asking for, what it had signed on to a year ago, does it in fact compromise the whole initiative itself?

[Katherine McDonald]

I think if Canada goes forward and builds on the concepts and the language from last year's agreement--

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

You're talking about Italy?

[Katherine McDonald]

Yes, last year's Italy agreement.

If they adopt that again as part of the communiqué and the outcome documents of the summit, that would then lay the groundwork for others not to backtrack or international agreements to backslide. However, it's my opinion, I guess, given the statements made by the development minister yesterday at the foreign affairs committee, that Canada would probably have a restricted level of funding in terms of reproductive health. That would be problematic for Canada, but I don't think it's particularly problematic for the other G-8 leaders who will go forward strongly. What will suffer is Canada's reputation as a leader.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

We have 12 seconds, Ms. Neville.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Can anyone answer in 12 seconds?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Does anyone else want to take 12 seconds?

Mr. Fox, 12 seconds, please.

[Robert Fox]

Canada is putting itself forward as a candidate for the Security Council next year, and I think the whole world is watching our management of this question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Mr. Fox.

Now we will move on to Ms. Brown for the Conservatives.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Sorry, before we start, I want to tell you that this is a three-minute session.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you. I will do my utmost.

One of the things that Canada has done very well in a leadership role is to build partnerships with outside organizations. I use the example of how we have been able to do a lot of bridging with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Are any of you recipients of any of those funds, and can you tell us how that partnership is working?

[Dr. Sharon Camp]

Are you referring to the vaccine initiative, or something else?

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Yes.

[Dr. Sharon Camp]

No, we're recipients of funding in the contraceptive technology area, not the vaccine initiative.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

I know there are new partnerships that are being worked on. Two weeks ago, our finance minister was in Washington, and I believe it's the world hunger for children organization. Can you comment on those programs?

[Robert Fox]

There are Oxfams that receive funding from the Gates Foundation. Oxfam Canada is not one of them because it's seen as American-based, so it's Oxfam America that receives funding.

[Maureen McTeer]

I'm sure the Americans and the British have their own private funding that comes. But in the 146 countries, you are all responsible for your own funding. Fundraising has kind of taken a side step, in part because I have fundraising efforts elsewhere, but it's something we'll have to look to in the fall.

I think your point is well taken that Canada's strength has been in building partnerships. It's something we've done forever, but one of the dilemmas we're facing now in building those partnerships is to not move away from the ground norms, as they refer to them--the core principles in development, maternal health, and so on, that really are the starting points for a lot of those partnerships.

You're right that we've been able to build on partnerships, but if we wander too far from the mainstream and allow ourselves to be limited or go our own way for whatever reason--be it ideology, religion, or personal choice--we have to be aware that there will be a price to pay. That may very well be in terms of partnerships and the leadership role we have been able to play as a result of them.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

I think Canada has taken a real leadership role in starting to build these public/private partnerships. I guess you of all people, Ms. McTeer, would understand how governments have a responsibility to ensure that taxpayers' dollars are spent accountably, and that the revenue stream is a limited resource. So as we go forward, the need to continue to build these partnerships and look for private money to come in will be very important in Canada's future and how we do aid in the future, because all of these things are changing.

Mr. Fox, you indicated that there is a perfect storm going on, and we all have a responsibility to use our resources wisely. Canadian taxpayers want to see that too, so I think we're all looking for the same results at the end of the day.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I've taken my time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Now we have Madame Demers for the Bloc Québécois.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Good day. Thank you very much for being here. I apologize for my absence at the beginning of the hearing.

I would like to know from each and every one of you if you have a suggestion to make to us so that this committee can finally arrive at a common position. As you heard today, some people are for and others against. There are people who do not believe in the relevance of what you are saying, that is to say that contraception, abortion and family planning form a whole. What suggestion could you make to us so that we can act in a concrete manner and convince the government of the relevance of your recommendations and requests?

[Maureen McTeer]

I think that Ms. McDonald said it a few minutes ago: we absolutely have to follow up on the commitment made last year in Italy. That is the beginning, it is really the starting point, it is absolutely essential.

We all have to be on the same wavelength. If the government wants to change priorities with regard to international development, health in general and maternal and child health in particular, to the point of refusing a certain type of care to women for religious or ideological reasons, then this has to be debated. We have to see where the discussions will lead us. And you parliamentarians are the ones who will be in a position to change these things. That said, we have to take our current position as a starting point, the one that was adopted last year in Italy.

We also have to consider adding things. A witness mentioned agriculture, nutrition, potable water, etc. At the very least we absolutely have to follow the path that has already been traced. On the issue of maternal health, this should be comparable to the perception of a cancer. Everyone considers cancer to be a serious disease. No one should think that an individual who has cancer is only suffering in fact from a simple pain in the leg.

The definitions already exist. This is really the starting point. We cannot be playing with women's lives in this way. If the government absolutely wants to discuss refusing to allocate public funds to this type of procedure, which is sound, fine, than let's have this debate. In a way, it has nothing to do with our starting point.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

That's it. Thank you very much.

Now I will go to Ms. Mathyssen for the NDP for three minutes.