Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to take part in the debate on Bill C-293, an Act respecting the provision of development assistance abroad.
I have a deep interest in international development as the Bloc Québécois’ foreign affairs critic for Africa and Latin America.
I can assure the House that the Bloc Québécois takes very much to heart the effects of poverty and misery in the developing countries, especially the sub-Saharan countries.
We are lucky in the West to have been born in rich countries that have the resources to meet our basic needs, such as food, clothing and housing.
Quebec is often cited as a model on the international scene for its health, education and daycare systems, as well as its social safety net in general.
As we speak, a number of human tragedies are playing out in various parts of the world: armed conflicts, natural catastrophes, famines.
The Bloc Québécois has always supported increased international assistance that is fair and effective. Canada has the wherewithal to act and should do so. The Bloc supports Bill C-293 in principle. However, some aspects of it should be studied more extensively in parliamentary committee.
The bill proposes the establishment of a committee of experts in international assistance to be appointed by the minister responsible for this file.
I really wonder. Is it appropriate for members of the House of Commons to be on this committee?
Parliamentarians already have an opportunity to express their views and make their recommendations known in the House as well as in various committees.
Would it not be better for the members of this committee to be experts who are active in the field and can be found by the hundreds in different non-governmental organizations, religious organizations and the private sector that does business in these countries?
I have another question. Should the appointment of these specialists not be subsequent to a study of their candidacy by the members of Parliament and a vote in the House to approve the suggestions of the minister in charge?
If the minister has the ability to appoint the members of the committee, determine their remuneration, and dismiss them any time he likes, who in this House would really believe that these future committee members are impartial?
This is all the more true in view of the fact that some NGOs are very dependent on federal government funding for their work in the field and will feel obliged to keep quiet in order not to displease their funder.
Another question arises as well. Will the moneys allocated to the establishment of this committee be taken from the funds, already too paltry, that we have invested in international assistance?
Let us hope not, since Canada currently is not even able to meet its Millennium Goals commitment to invest 0.7% of its GDP in international assistance by 2015.
That is why this morning, my colleague from Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, the Bloc Québécois critic on international assistance, tabled a motion to force the Government of Canada to respect its commitments on this matter.
The motion states:
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should improve Canada's contribution to international assistance through a commitment firstly to achieving the target of 0.7% of GDP by 2015 by increasing in a stable and predictable manner amounts for government development assistance, and, secondly by enshrining in law that the mandate and purpose of government development assistance is poverty reduction based on the principles of the United Nations Millennium Goals.
Last spring, the Auditor General of Canada criticized the way Canada spends its money on international assistance.
The purpose of Bill C-293 is to enhance transparency in the department, but nothing is proposed for improving the internal management of funding at CIDA.
Perhaps the panel of experts proposed here would not be necessary if CIDA resolved its internal management problems once and for all and if the Government of Canada finally adopted a concrete and effective plan of action for the distribution of its international assistance.
In my opinion, Bill C-293 raises another problem and that is the way it defines development assistance, limiting it to poverty reduction and sustainable development.
None of the other six targets put forward by the UN in its Millennium Goals has been emphasized in terms of Canada's action for eliminating poverty in world.
It is important to recall these goals, which are all necessary to put an end to poverty in developing countries.
First is the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger. We know that more than a billion human beings live on less than one dollar a day and that 800 million of these people do not have enough to eat and cannot function day to day. One quarter of all children under the age of five in developing countries are malnourished. This starvation has long-term consequences, making these children frail and vulnerable to sickness and disease.
Next is the achievement of universal primary education, because 115 million children of school age do not have the opportunity to attend primary school.
In addition, the promotion of gender equality in developing countries is more than necessary. Here are some examples: family violence; crimes of passion; trafficking of women; female circumcision; early and forced marriage; elimination of young girls through infanticide; violence related to dowry; acid throwing; and violence related to sexual exploitation. Such is the daily lot of millions of women in the world.
In terms of the infant mortality rate, the United Nations calculates that more than 11 million children die every year in the world. Those 11 million victims equal the entire population of Ontario.
Thirty thousand children die every day from causes directly related to poverty. The loss of those 30,000 children is the equivalent of the city of Alma disappearing on a Monday, and the city of Mirabel vanishing on Tuesday, and the population of Val-d'Or wiped out on Wednesday. In other words, there are far too many victims.
There is an enormous amount of work to be done in order to improve the health of mothers in poor countries. Mothers are generally the last line of protection for children of these countries in the face of poverty. The death of mothers during pregnancy, delivery or soon after the birth of a child leaves infants in a very fragile state in the face of extreme poverty or exploitation.
HIV-AIDS is also a fierce adversary to the advancement of women in Africa. More than 60% of the people infected are women and that has countless repercussions, in particular, reduced education of children, a decrease in per capita GDP, and more food crises, because women are at the heart of the agriculture industry in those countries.
I must also mention the struggle to eradicate such diseases as malaria, tuberculosis and HIV-AIDS, which is the main cause of early death in sub-Saharan Africa, and the fourth leading cause in the world.
As for promoting environmental sustainability, Canada is truly pathetic right now thanks to Conservative inaction. Canada's withdrawal from Kyoto reveals the Minister of the Environment's lack of awareness and vision. Two weeks ago, she decided not to act on Canada's commitment to poorer countries to help them reduce their greenhouse gases. This proves that this government does not care about our planet's and our children's future.
The last goal is to establish a global development partnership that includes all countries struggling against poverty. That way, all human beings, whether they are born in Quebec or in Rwanda, would be guaranteed the basics of life.
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate my support and my party's support for bill C-293. I hope that my colleague's motion will resonate with this government that, since it came to power, has been boasting about its transparency, accountability and integrity.
This is the same government that, as soon as it came to power, tore up the Kyoto protocol, turned its back on poor countries seeking to help stop global warming despite their many social problems, spent billions of dollars on arms, but failed to keep its word on the millennium development goals, turned its back on its commitment to correcting the fiscal imbalance with Quebec and reneged on its promise to establish a new program for older worker adjustment.