Evidence of meeting #17 for Status of Women in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was countries.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Let us talk about your funding issue. Do you know of any organizations in your network that have received the bad news that they will not be funded? If so, which ones are they?
5:10 p.m.
Project Manager, Fédération du Québec pour le planning des naissances
Unfortunately, I did not bring the list with me. I know that CIAFT is one of them. It is not part of our network, but it is in our building. It is part of the Quebec women's rights network.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
5:10 p.m.
Project Manager, Fédération du Québec pour le planning des naissances
Yes, absolutely.
5:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Political Issues, Regroupement Naissance-Renaissance
There is also AFEAS and other groups, including the Table des groupes de femmes. He is right to say that we cannot expect long-term and ongoing funding all the time.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
5:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Political Issues, Regroupement Naissance-Renaissance
Yes, it would be better to talk about the international component.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
5:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Federation for Sexual Health
I was just going to comment that I think there are several examples that have been very public in the media where organizations involved in development have had their funding revoked, including KAIROS, which was one of the first examples that we understood.
That has been in the news. It's quite a prevalent example.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I still find it strange. The government lays the foundations, designs its policies and implements them too. It is unfortunate, because it must be said that all groups that have been defending human rights for a number of years have seen their funding cut off or reduced. You talked about KAIROS, but we must also recall the women's program at Status of Women Canada, where groups defending women's rights had their funding cut off. It is very disturbing.
When I hear the government speak for Canada, I do not feel included in its policies. I was born in Quebec. I live in Quebec, a province within this Canada that has made great strides socially. It is as if they pulled the rug from under my feet. This is not a menu from which you can pick and choose.
5:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Political Issues, Regroupement Naissance-Renaissance
As to funding in Quebec, we should still point out that we are ready to provide $85 million for in vitro fertilization on an ongoing basis, but we are not ready to give $1 million for a new birthing centre. There are issues and priorities to be studied. We have not addressed the questions about new technologies, in vitro fertilization and screening. I urge you to please ask yourselves these questions at some other time.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Thank you very much, Chair.
I want to get back to the issue of funding.
Monsieur La Ramée and Madame Scott-Parker, you indicated that you have existed since 1960, and we have a description of what you do. And of course funding is reviewed from time to time. The fact that your funding hasn't been renewed at this point: are you doing something differently now than you have in the past that might negatively affect your funding? What's changed?
5:10 p.m.
Director, Development and Public Affairs, Western Hemisphere Region, International Planned Parenthood Federation
We would have to answer this separately. I will answer for IPPF.
I think what has changed for us, in fact, is that we are providing more services.
And actually, we've been in existence since 1952. Our funding from Canada has been since 1960.
We continue to expand the number and range of services we provide. We also have taken great strides--the question of accountability came up--to really monitor and evaluate the quality of our services, to give an indication of the value of the investment our donors are making in IPPF in terms of what happens on the ground.
So while no organization expects to receive funding in perpetuity, and certainly not without review and evaluation, we actually go out of our way to make sure that more and more information is available by which Canada or any other donor can evaluate the quality of our work.
I am led to wonder, in the event that our funding is not renewed, in the context of a major initiative on maternal mortality, whether that would not constitute a major shift in policy rather than a judgment on the quality of IPPF's work.
5:15 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Federation for Sexual Health
If I could just clarify, the Canadian Federation for Sexual Health, which is the Canadian member of IPPF, does not actually receive funding from IPPF. We're accredited by them as an international organization, and we're certainly very proud to be associated with them, but because the majority of IPPF funding is comprised of dollars from donor governments that is really directed to the global south, we're not actually a recipient member organization, but rather considered a donor country.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Okay.
Now we've heard a great deal, and it's been very public, about the 14 organizations whose funding was revoked. Is there a common thread among those groups in terms of the services they deliver that would explain why their funding has been revoked?
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
Madam Chair, on a point of order, last week I was told by the chair that we had to focus on what we were talking about with respect to the G8 initiative to maternal care. I'm not sure how the relevance of--
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
Sorry, I'm just actually on my point of order, if that's okay.
At that point I was speaking about nutrition and food and the need for mothers and their children to receive proper food and how that would help offset a lot of this. I was told that was off topic.
I'm wondering how this relates to millennium development goal number 5, which is what I was told we were supposed to be focusing on at the last meeting. I wonder if this still falls within that mandate.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Madam Chair, I'd like to point out that it was indeed Mr. Calandra who introduced this, and I'm simply following through and expanding on the information that was provided.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
Sorry, on a point of order, then, out of that, and not to belabour the silliness of the intervention opposite, but it was actually Madam Mathyssen who introduced that.
I'd ask you to talk about the relevance.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Cathy McLeod
Thank you, Mr. Calandra.
Certainly I've been informed by the clerk, being that I'm fairly new to this role, that it doesn't actually qualify as a point of order.
There are seven seconds left. We did stop the clock during the question period, and you have seven seconds left in which to--