Debates of Dec. 13th, 2010

Situation in Haiti

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, I can assure my colleague that Canada and the other countries among the friends of Haiti and the international donor community are watching very carefully for transparency. There has been a great outpouring of charity from Canada and other countries around the world that have contributed to the short term and longer term reconstruction of Haiti.

There have been temptations. We have seen some attempts within the Haitian community to resort to previous forms of involvement which unfortunately has resulted in the shrinkage of international assistance.

When we held the Montreal conference in February last year and subsequently followed that up with the donors conference in New York, we made it clear that while the ultimate decisions will be made by the government and the people of Haiti, the United Nations interim reconstruction commission will ensure that the money is disbursed transparently and effectively.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to take part in this emergency debate today on the situation in Haiti, which is extremely disturbing indeed. By way of background and to give some idea of the problems the country faces, I will quote some statistics concerning the earthquake in Haiti.

The earthquake on January 12 caused damage on an unprecedented scale. Estimates put the number of dead at 222,570 and the number of injured at 300,000. Approximately 1.3 million people are living in temporary shelters in the Port-au-Prince area, and 600,000 have left the earthquake-damaged areas to take refuge elsewhere.

The Haitian government was severely crippled by the earthquake. It is estimated that more than 60% of government, administrative and economic infrastructure was destroyed. Haiti does not have a large government, yet one-third of the 60,000 public servants were killed in the earthquake. Half of Haiti's 8,500 prison inmates escaped. One hundred and one UN employees who were in the country when the earthquake struck lost their lives.

The court house, the justice department, the public security department and the legislature were destroyed. More than 105,000 homes were destroyed and more than 208,000 were damaged. One and a half million people found themselves homeless. Nearly 4,000 Haitian students died, 1,234 schools were destroyed and 2,500 were damaged. The damage is estimated at $7.9 billion, and 70% was suffered by the private sector.

It is estimated that Haiti needs $11.5 billion, including 50% for social services, 17% for infrastructure and housing, and 15% for the environment and risk management. The Red Cross is working to help Haitians: 80,000 households have received temporary accommodation, 95,000 patients have received medical care and 90,000 m³ of water has been distributed to 118 sites.

I wanted to provide this overview to remind members of how serious these events are. In our era, we live with the ever-present media, online, in real time and on the news networks. We are touched and struck by events, and after that, whether we like it or not, they dissipate and we stop thinking about them. That is the risk for any crisis in the world and it is also the case for Haiti. I think it is a good idea to remind ourselves of the seriousness of what has happened there. Then, there is what came after: the recent cholera outbreak, which is another problem for the people of Haiti, as though they needed that. Then there are the issues and considerations pertaining to the legislative and presidential elections, as well as the unrest and climate of violence they have caused.

I will quote Dany Laferrière. You may know of him, Madam Chair. He is a Quebec author of Haitian origin. He is famous in Quebec and throughout la Francophonie. He said that Quebec has everything except for independence and that Haiti has nothing, except for independence. This turn of phrase reminds us that Haitians took charge of themselves long ago. They are an independent people who can decide their own destiny.

This independence is meaningless unless they are truly masters of their own destiny, which requires that they choose their leaders. In my opinion, this need to choose one's leaders is the very essence of democracy and independence for a country.

In light of all of Haiti's current difficulties, I cannot help but send my best regards to the Haitian people, who are the brothers and sisters of the Quebec people. More than 90% of Haitian nationals and the Haitian diaspora in Canada live in Quebec. It is the only nation in the Americas, together with Quebec, that has French as its common public language and official language.

The current problems surrounding the presidential election must not overshadow the fact that democracy and the governance of the Haitian state do not rest solely with the president, or rather, should not rest solely with the president, as is currently the case.

As I mentioned earlier today, in 2006, I had the opportunity to take part in a parliamentary mission to meet with Haitian parliamentarians in the context of legislative elections. At the time, I noted that the difference between the magnificent presidential palace, on a beautiful green lawn, and the legislative building, an old tourism office where parliamentarians were crammed in on top of one another, illustrated the importance given to the presidency in the minds of many Haitians, or at least in the spirit of how that country engages in politics at this time, in other words, the disproportionate importance given to the presidency.

Basically, all we are hearing about is the Haitian presidency, the three candidates who are fighting for it and the problems this is causing for the second round. I hope that current events will not keep us from thinking about the fact that legislative elections are also taking place, and that parliamentarians also need to have some legitimacy. They must represent their constituents, and this must be a fundamental part of the democratic process in Haiti, especially when the country is going through a crisis, as it is right now.

Ever since that mission in 2006 during which I met Haitian parliamentarians, I have been concerned about the need to strengthen the parliamentary system in Haiti. Of course the Haitians themselves must be the ones to reflect and to work on this, and to do something.

Personally, I am trying to do my part. I thought it might be helpful to create a friendship group, an association that might not be entirely official or recognized by the House, but an association nonetheless of Haitian and Canadian parliamentarians who wish to create ties and reflect on how the Canadian Parliament and Canadian MPs and senators can help Haiti, and how to support Haitian parliamentarians to give that institution more prominence.

To that end, three colleagues—from three different political parties—and I founded such an association a few months ago: the Canada-Haiti Parliamentary Group. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the three other co-founders: the hon. members for Bourassa, Outremont and Edmonton East.

I hope that our association, our supporters and our policies will be able to improve the situation in Haiti substantially.

I would like to speak in more detail about immigration, which I followed closely as the Bloc Québécois immigration critic.

In the wake of the 2010 earthquake, the federal government announced special measures to fast-track the processing of family reunification applications. In January 2006, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration announced extraordinary measures for Haitians directly affected by the earthquake, including fast-tracking the processing of applications in the family reunification category.

Here is a list of the measures: consular assistance and evacuation of Canadian citizens who were in Haiti when the earthquake struck; priority processing of applications in various categories—including family reunification applications from Quebec—for those directly and seriously affected by the earthquake in Haiti; evacuation of adopted Haitian children coming to Canada, which happened very quickly—it should be said that the process was already quite advanced in these cases; lifting of fees and consideration of other relevant factors related to the difficulties faced by temporary residents in Canada; lifting of visa requirements for aid workers and evacuees coming to Canada; temporary lifting of all removals to Haiti, which seems obvious to me; and information sessions that took place all over.

I would like to talk about Quebec's humanitarian sponsorship program in detail. In Canada, it is the federal government's responsibility to determine who can sponsor, who can be sponsored and for which family members the guarantor is required to prove their financial capacity. Since the 1991 Canada-Quebec agreement, Quebec alone deals with the integration of immigrants within its borders.

Given that family reunification is a key component in integrating immigrants into Quebec society, the Bloc Québécois feels that family reunification should be handed over to Quebec, since it is already responsible for all family-related issues. In addition, this measure would allow for more efficient processing of family reunification applications and would mean that most procedures would be concentrated within Quebec's immigration and cultural communities department, while still giving Ottawa the right to monitor security issues.

The Government of Quebec has the expertise to do this and has demonstrated it by moving ahead with its own selection system to reunite Haitians affected by the disaster, 90% of whom live in Quebec, as I mentioned earlier.

In response to an exceptional situation, the Government of Quebec decided to adopt special immigration measures. On February 3, it announced the creation of the special humanitarian sponsorship program, which was effective from February to the end of July 2010 and which temporarily helped reunite families by allowing Quebec residents to sponsor brothers, sisters and children over the age of 22.

Through this initiative, Quebec welcomed 3,000 Haitians, in addition to the 1,900 sponsorship applications that were already awaiting approval from Ottawa. Furthermore, another Quebec resident, a relative or not, could act as a co-guarantor for the five-year financial commitment, to make it easier to meet the financial requirements.

As of November 4, the Government of Quebec had received 8,354 applications through this measure. In addition, 2,400 Quebec selection certificates were issued. The majority of the applications from Quebec are still awaiting approval from Ottawa, which only deals with issues of health and safety.

On August 30, at the last minute, the Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration quietly issued a reminder that the special measures for Haiti would come to an end on September 1, practically the following day. After the announcement of the end of the so-called special measures, an operational bulletin was published to give instructions regarding the processing of applications for Haitian nationals.

What does all of this mean? The new timeframe to complete the eligibility assessments for sponsorship applications will be 40 days as opposed to 10 days.

Applications that were to be processed as a priority within a 12-week deadline will now be processed as quickly as possible. We do not really know what that means in terms of a deadline. Fees will be charged again. What is more, if I can make an editorial comment, it is particularly questionable to try to resolve our deficit problems with permanent residency applications from Haiti.

Haitian citizens in Canada applying for a work visa will now have to get a valid labour market opinion and pay the applicable fees. I will come back to that because I think it is very important. Eligibility for the interim federal health plan no longer applies to the new applications. CIC's priorities will change.

Although the department says it is very open to Quebec's right to have its own program that, among other things, broadens the definition of family reunification beyond immediate family, and even though it recognizes that possibility, in fact the choices made by Quebec are a second priority. Only people who correspond to the traditional definition of the family class established by the federal government are entitled to be top priority. It should be noted that the expression “second priority” is a euphemism, because it is not in fact a priority.

On October 6, 2010, only 18 Haitians arrived on Quebec soil under that program. Thousands of applications had been filed and 493 applications were received by CIC, which means less than 4% of these people got as far as Quebec soil on October 6. We are quite concerned about the federal government's lack of flexibility and the fact that it often deems documents not to be credible.

I will try to be quick because I see that my time is running out and I have a lot to say about immigration. The Bloc Québécois is very concerned and believes that the temporary work visas should remain open-ended without any need for a labour market opinion. These opinions ensure that foreign nationals are not used as cheap labour to fill jobs that could otherwise be filled by Canadians. It is a process the Bloc Québécois generally agrees with. Nonetheless, we find it appropriate that this requirement be waived for Haitians who are already in Quebec or Canada, especially since there is currently a moratorium on sending them back to Haiti because the situation is difficult and it is almost impossible to do.

We therefore find ourselves in a situation where there are people who were in Canada during the earthquake for one reason or another, who now have the right to remain in Canada for an indefinite period of time and who have been told that they can, for example, continue to work temporarily to meet their needs. These people may be driven to work in the underground economy. By requiring a labour market opinion, a fairly complex procedure that sometimes does not result in employment because the opinion is negative, we are depriving these people of a way of supporting themselves and are therefore pushing them toward working in the underground economy or pushing them into difficulty meeting their needs. It is completely counterproductive.

I hope that the government will quickly remedy this situation and allow the people who cannot be sent back to Haiti as things stand to work to meet their needs.

In conclusion, although a lot of work has been done by citizens and the federal government, there is still much more to be done. It has always been said that the Haitians are a very resilient people.

They have suffered a lot and we must provide them with support. I am convinced that they have the desire to overcome this situation. They are very resilient. There are promising areas everywhere in Haiti. We spoke earlier in the House about Jacmel, a location that I had the opportunity to visit and that represents great potential for us. It is up to us to develop it.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, I know that the member is an expert in this chamber on the area of immigration issues. I know he had not quite fleshed out all of his ideas on the subject, so I want to give him an opportunity to explain a little more about the open-ended work permit and other points that he had.

In addition, I had been wanting to ask the government members about the status of the matching funds program. There is one member coming up who will probably have all the answers I am looking for. Perhaps the member who just spoke knows a little about how much was collected and how that whole system has evolved and is working.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I humbly admit that I cannot answer the part about the funds and whether the government has already paid the equivalent of what the public donated. I will leave that question for someone who knows the answer. I am flattered that my colleague called me an expert in the area of immigration and I thank him very much. I am not yet an expert, but I have been following this issue closely for over two years as critic for the Bloc Québécois. His question gives me another opportunity to speak.

There seems to be an inconsistency in the government's position on temporary work visas. If they say that an individual cannot be deported because the situation in his country is untenable, which the Bloc agrees with, then we must give him the means to work during this temporary period—which is indeterminate for the time being—that he is in Canada. We are not asking for free permanent residency for these people, but just for a way to allow them to continue to work temporarily.

The government may be afraid that by holding an official job in Canada, these people will qualify for Canadian worker programs and apply for permanent residence. I do not want to impugn the government's motives, but we get the feeling that that is what is behind the government's actions. The government, which abruptly cancelled this support measure, is telling itself that if people stay and work under the table, they will not be able to claim permanent residence later because they will not be able to prove they qualify in the Canadian experience class.

If that were so, it would be slightly convoluted and deplorable reasoning. These people need our support, and we have to keep on helping them. In all cases, the federal government could have been more flexible and granted temporary resident permits to people who just wanted to come and see their family in Montreal or elsewhere in order to catch their breath, have a change of scenery and distance themselves from the earthquake in Haiti. They had no intention of living here and going through winter in Quebec. The government showed no flexibility with regard to these people. That is something else we condemn.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, I did listen attentively to my colleague.

I just want clarification. Is the member suggesting that the Government of Canada artificially create jobs just to satisfy this need or that it just make sure that, for all the jobs that are out there, everybody has an equal opportunity to get those jobs? Is he talking about artificially creating equal results or making sure there is equal opportunity?

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Madam Speaker, I sincerely thank my colleague for his question. As I am very familiar with the file, I perhaps did not express myself well and I took shortcuts. I will explain again, from the beginning.

When the Haiti earthquake occurred, Haitian nationals may have been working or studying in Canada. They were living temporarily in Canada.

Take the example of someone working on a temporary visa. The government said that, upon the expiry of the temporary work visa, the individual could renew it or apply for a new one if they had completed their studies, for example, in order to be allowed to work in Canada and have an income. That was the government's reasoning and it was completely logical. We are not talking about an inordinate number of applicants; we are simply talking about the Haitians who were temporarily in Canada. We could not send them back to Haiti. We are simply asking why this measure was not extended.

Some of them may be able to obtain a labour market opinion, but others may not. For example, for jobs requiring fewer qualifications, it is obviously more difficult to prove that an individual is the only one qualified for the job and that there is a shortage of labour in Canada in that area.

I understand that we cannot invent jobs. That is not what I am suggesting. If a Haitian national is currently living here and cannot be deported or returned to that country because of a moratorium, he should be allowed to find a job. That will not affect the job market. The purpose of the labour market opinion is to prevent massive waves of temporary workers from destabilizing the job market and depriving Quebeckers and Canadians of jobs. We understand this measure, but it is not justified or necessary for the few workers that might be affected. I do not have the figure at hand, but I am sufficiently versed in this matter to know that the number of Haitians would not destabilize the job market.

The government understood this because it took that step, but then terminated it. The government was on the right track and should have maintained this measure, just as it is maintaining the moratorium on deportations to Haiti. When the situation is deemed to be stable enough to lift the moratorium on deportations, then we can also rescind the special measures allowing those persons, who are prisoners of sorts in Canada, to be employed.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, the government received a lot of credit for being quick off the mark on relief efforts in the Haiti earthquake situation. It matched all the funds that Canadians donated to the effort.

How would my colleague rate the government's involvement in that disaster since that initial quick start?

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am not about to give any performance ratings, if that is indeed what the hon. member was asking for.

From what I know of immigration, I would say that at first it seemed a lot was being done to impress the public. The government said it was open and that it was going to really change things. In practice, however, it seems that things are more or less “business as usual”. There seems to be a gap between what the government says in public and what it actually does.

The day after tomorrow, the members of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration will be meeting with senior officials from Citizenship and Immigration Canada for further clarification. I realize they are dealing with some major challenges and that they are very dedicated and very competent, but I think that, in terms of policy, the government could give clearer directions and allow those officials greater latitude. Thus, they could start walking the talk, and this would also ensure that the enthusiasm and desire to do things quickly and correctly, so evident immediately after the earthquake, would still be present after all this time.

This comes back to what I was saying at the beginning of my speech: unfortunately, over time, we have a tendency to forget, but we must not forget that Haiti stills needs our support.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and to the Minister of International Cooperation]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak on this important issue tonight. I want to thank the member for Bourassa for bringing forward this issue on Haiti.

Haiti is in our hemisphere and a very important development assistance partner for Canada. As a matter of fact, Haiti is the second largest recipient of Canadian aid, and Canadians have been generous in addressing many of the severe crises that have taken place in Haiti, including the earthquake, the cholera outbreak and other issues of good governance, violence and so on.

Canada has been engaged in Haiti for a very long time. As a member of the foreign affairs committee in the last Parliament, I did a special report on Haiti with my colleague from Edmonton East, who spoke earlier on this issue. This issue was brought up in the last Parliament because of the concern about what was happening in Haiti. Subsequently, of course, other tragic events took place after the earthquake, such as the cholera outbreak and the violence.

Tonight in this debate we have heard from every party. The Minister of Foreign Affairs informed us of the initiatives and other things that Canada has done, including today when he met with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the secretary of foreign affairs of Mexico. As well, the Minister of International Cooperation laid out what Canada has done as part of its humanitarian assistance, including rapid response for the cholera outbreak.

We just heard from the Minister of State of Foreign Affairs for the Americas about the total diplomatic initiative and other initiatives that Canada has taken toward addressing many of the tragedies that are taking place in Haiti. We also heard from the Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women and my colleague from Edmonton East.

This whole evening we have been speaking on this matter, which is of grave concern. Listening to the Liberals, the Bloc and the NDP, we hear that most of the concerns that have been expressed are universal on both sides. That is not to say that there is no unanimity on how to address this issue. As a matter of fact there is. All parties agree. Tonight all of us have talked about this not being a partisan issue, and we have highlighted many of the issues and strong actions that the Government of Canada is taking, has taken and will continue to take in addressing many of the issues.

I could continue, but I would be rehashing the same old facts and problems by saying what has already been stated in the House. I myself have been asking a lot of questions, but I would rather give my opposition colleagues the opportunity during this period of time to ask me questions of relevance, which they think they need to address and that I would be more than happy to answer.

A couple of very good points have been made in reference to tonight's debate. One of them, of course, was raised by a Liberal member who talked about the approach the U.K. has taken toward humanitarian assistance.

One key point I want to make is that the Minister of International Cooperation began a new initiative about three weeks ago working with the Red Cross. This is now bringing health experts together under one umbrella so we can send a rapid response team, which will basically be made up of medical personnel, to areas where it is needed, for example, the cholera outbreak in Haiti. This is similar to DART, except that it is not run by military personnel but by Red Cross NGOs, which I believe is an excellent initiative taken by this government to address many of the humanitarian issues.

If the opposition has any questions, I would be more than glad to answer them on behalf of the government.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, I was quite pleased that the government at the time responded as quickly as it did and that it did set up a matching funds program, whereby funds donated by Canadians were matched by the government. I was only disappointed it did not give the same consideration for the Chilean earthquake, which happened on February 27, just shortly thereafter. Nevertheless it did the right thing.

I would like to know, to date, what is the quantity of the funds that have been collected and matched by the government, and what is the status of where the funds are at right now? I have read a couple of articles that indicate that this is somewhat in transition. There are people now who are wanting their tax receipts and will be expecting them fairly soon because they will be filing their income tax in another 30 days from now in some cases and they will want these receipts.

Could the member update me as to where things are at with the matching funds program?

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am happy to answer that question.

First and foremost, it is important to recognize that Canadians opened up their wallets to address this humanitarian crisis. There was a generous outpouring of support by Canadians and with the Government of Canada's matching funds. Those matching funds are given out on a project-by-project basis and to date the Government of Canada has given out the following. On April 8 CIDA announced $65.15 million will be provided for humanitarian assistance. Then $5 million was set aside by CIDA's climate change in October and $30 million for proposals by Canadian organizations.

As proposals are coming forward, Canada will continue to provide the money. Out of the $400 million that has been earmarked for this, $150 million has already been disbursed.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, the question I have for the parliamentary secretary is that in an emergency debate such as this, we are all of us presenting our opinions, our reflections and our concerns about a very important issue.

One of the things I was hoping to hear from the parliamentary secretary tonight in his speech, which was unfortunately cut short by him, was how exactly he feels Canadians can help in getting the Haitian people to regain their confidence in their own institutions, in their own government?

So much of their lives are taken up by international partners and international organizations that are providing, in many cases, the basic services that the state has not been able to provide, and I think one of the things we need to do going forward is to make Haitians once again believe that their own government, and therefore they themselves, will be capable of taking themselves forward through the 21st century.

I would like to hear from the parliamentary secretary on how he is hoping to achieve just that.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Madam Speaker, I do not want to get into partisan politics, but I can tell the hon. member that the debate started at 6:30 this evening and the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the minister responsible for CIDA have spoken on those issues he is talking about.

Now, when he did not hear it from me, he seems a little disappointed, but if he had given his attention to the debate, he would have got his answers. The Minister of Foreign Affairs said today is that he is very much concerned. He is absolutely right on one point, that there have to be transparent, democratic elections in Haiti. There has to be a transparent government in Haiti.

Yes, there is a concern with the way the elections have taken place. TheMinister of Foreign Affairs has called the President of Haiti and the Prime Minister has talked to them and has told them that Canada would help out to ensure that there is a free, democratic election. Good governance is the most important aspect and, as he rightly pointed out, the trust of the Haitians toward their government is a key element. If the Haitians do not have trust in their government, it will become very hard for a reconstruction process to go on and to address many of the issues.

On that we agree very much with the hon. member. The Government of Canada, including the Minister of Foreign Affairs, has talked, as I said, and we will give whatever is necessary to the Haitian government to ensure that there is a transparent, fair election. We are very happy to hear there will be a recount, and we will be sending observers to that.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, being quick off the mark is important because it is the right thing to do in the short term and it feels good. It is also important, once we are quick off the mark, to be right on the mark, and that is the longer-term challenge to make sure that things happen correctly over the next decade. I wonder if my hon. colleague can comment.

Canada has been quick off the mark and that has been acknowledged. I think we have done the right thing there. What are we doing to be right on the mark in the longer term to make sure that we develop Haiti to be an independent, self-sustaining, functioning country in the long term?

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Madam Speaker, yes, Canada has been quick off the mark. We have addressed the short-term needs of Haiti, but we also need to address the long-term needs of Haiti.

On the long-term needs of Haiti we are working with our international partners and the reconstruction commission that has been set up in conjunction with the Government of Haiti to address the very serious and important issues.

Regretfully, at the current time, due to the problem and preoccupation with the election, some of the work required to be done has not proceeded as it should proceed. The minister has talked to the president and made it very clear that the Government of Haiti has a responsibility to its citizens to work together towards the reconstruction of Haiti.

As the minister of state has said, Canada is prepared and willing to work with the reconstruction commission and the Government of Haiti to address these issues. We will continue to work with them, but first and foremost it is critically important that there is good governance established there and that the issues arising out of the elections are resolved very quickly.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member indicated that $400 million had been earmarked for Haitian relief. Could the member deconstruct that $400 million and tell us how much of it was put up by Canadians in terms of donations and how much was matched by the government? Who is doing an accounting of this? When are the people going to get their tax credits for their contributions?

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Madam Speaker, overall the Government of Canada, with its matching funds and everything, has committed over $1 billion towards Haiti. Recently the government announced $400 million over two years to support the Haiti action plan for national recovery and development, out of which $150 million has been allocated. We will continue with the reconstruction process.

I want to assure the member that over $1 billion has been committed to Haiti both by Canadians and by the Government of Canada.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity to talk about an extremely important issue. I would just like to say that I will be splitting my time with the member for Honoré-Mercier.

I would like to start by paying tribute to my colleague and good friend, the hon. member for Bourassa, for all the work he has done on this issue. Throughout this crisis, since this horrendous event on January 12, he has been there for our colleagues and friends in the Haitian community in Montreal and Haiti, just as he always will be. His has been a very strong voice during this crisis, and he has always been present. It is thanks to him that we can have this debate this evening. It is important that we show our friendship for the Haitian people, and all the parties have done that this evening.

Our Haitian friends have gone through a few extremely difficult years. Their country was devastated by natural disasters, from deforestation to systemic poverty to the four back-to-back hurricanes in 2008 that caused enormous damage. Just when the country was starting to rebuild and get back on its feet again, the earthquake hit on January 12, causing over 250,000 deaths and making more than 1.5 million people homeless. They were literally in the street because they did not want to go back into their homes, which were still standing, for fear they would collapse on them.

Now, nearly 12 months later, cholera is ravaging the Haitian population. More than 2,000 people have died, and tens of thousands are at risk. On top of all that, Haiti is in the midst of a human and political crisis. The elections that were just held were rife with irregularities. Two candidates made it through the first round of voting to the run-off, which sparked a wave of violence throughout the country. Haitians do not believe or trust these results. They want a recount. They want to know that their votes will count, but they are not confident they will. With all the violence and instability in the country, the humanitarian aid so many Haitians depended on has almost stopped flowing, which is obviously making things even worse.

This country is experiencing catastrophes of near biblical proportions on many fronts, such as weakened infrastructure, epidemics, malnutrition, violence and anarchy as a result of a lack of respect for police forces. However, in my opinion, the greatest catastrophe is the total loss of the sense of community, of that essential trust that exists and must exist between a people and its leaders. That trust forms the foundation of the social contract. The people of Haiti do not believe that their government can offer them services and that it is there to help and serve them. When we talk of governance, we know that Haitians are worried about the elections that are currently underway. They cannot trust that their vote was properly counted or that the will of the people was represented by this vote. But governance problems go deeper than that. Haitians have lost all hope that their government will be there for them, that it will provide the safety and prosperity that any community should be able to expect from its leaders.

In my riding of Papineau we have a big Haitian community. Since I was elected two years ago, but even before that when I was a candidate, I have had the great pleasure of spending time with and befriending a number of members of that community. I have discovered even more than what I already knew, that Haitians are a passionate, proud people who are full of hope and full of life. They are a people who are interested in politics and in the future of their community and their society.

The people of Haiti have lost all confidence in their government's ability to provide services or even offer minimal stability. Tonight we are talking about Canada's role. We are very proud of our country, one that has always intervened with military might, whether during the first world war or the second. Our diplomacy has had an impact on the United Nations. And then there are the positions we took during the cold war and in support of nuclear disarmament. Canada has provided development aid around the world. It has always been there to spread justice and create more opportunities in the poorest countries of the world. Canada has always been there, supplying solutions to the world.

And that is why we are so proud of our country. Haiti has always been a good friend to Canada and vice versa. Because of our diaspora and our friendships, we have suffered with them throughout these difficult years. It is our duty to be there during these difficult times, and we must respond to their needs.

This evening we have spoken a lot about the desperate, essential and immediate needs. We have to be present during the elections and help find solutions to restore the public's confidence in its democratic institutions. The public needs a president who reflects the will of the country. It is important that the exemplary generosity that Canadians have shown in the months following the earthquake be validated by spending the money we promised them and targeting aid adequately.

There are many things we can do with regard to agriculture to rebuild the foundation of this country. There are things we must do with regard to civil society and the status of women. The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre spoke warmly and knowledgeably about the situation of women in Haiti and the importance of involving them. To me, essentially, this is how we will help Haitians regain confidence in their government's ability to provide services.

There are tens of thousands of different agencies working in Haiti—NGOs, local agencies, international agencies. They are all there to help Haitians. That is great, but we are creating a country that does not believe it can help itself. It has lost faith in itself.

Like my colleagues from Montreal east, I have the opportunity to spend time with many members of the Haitian community. We see to what extent these people can and want to improve the situation. We have to work with the NGOs in order to make the government accountable and to provide expertise from our diaspora to encourage Haitians to count on their government and to believe in their government. It is not up to Canada, the United Nations, the United States, or the Red Cross. It is up to Haitians to stand up and restore this pearl of the Antilles to its glory days.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's speech. I am sure that virtually everyone of us in the chamber can remember where we were when we received the devastating news of the earthquake. In fact, one of the first Canadians who was recovered from the rubble was from the Kitchener—Waterloo area, and I will never forget the devastation that it caused for that family.

Now we move on to the more long-term needs, as our colleague reminded us, whether those needs be medical facilities, medical treatment, infrastructure, security or housing. I think all of us recognize as well that no government, be it the Haitian government, Canadian government or any government, can possibly meet all the needs of this situation.

I recently became aware of an NGO in my area, the Evangelical Missionary Church of Canada, that is constructing prefab homes. These homes are made of three inch foam between two slabs of galvanized steel. The panels are about 50 pounds and four people can put up one of these homes in a day.

As we help Haitians get back on their feet with a structure that is pretty well earthquake resistant, also hopefully termite resistant, these are ways we can begin to address outside of government, working in partnership with government, some of the long-term needs of our Haitian brothers and sisters.

Is my colleague aware of any NGOs in his area that do similar projects? The more these kinds of initiatives are put together, possibly working in conjunction with each other, a synergy develops. Is he aware of any similar stories from his area?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my community in Papineau is filled from La Perle Retrouvée to all the different organizations and individuals who are helping, who are offering their help, or filling containers with clothes. After the hurricanes, it was particularly noticeable. There was a huge amount of help, more help in many cases than Haitians knew what to do with. The logistics involved is often overwhelming.

Canadians and people in Montreal and in my riding have been exceedingly generous with their thoughts, with their prayers and with their money as well to try to help Haiti.

That is an important piece of it. It will help through the short term. However, it is the difference between offering someone a fish and teaching them how to fish. We need to ensure we work with the Haitian people and the Haitian government to wean them off the need for constant intervention internationally and start building a strong and proud nation that we know Haitians deserve and Haitians can create.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I was not sure whether the member was criticizing the government for not moving quick enough or whether he was making the statement, with which I would agree. As the member for Edmonton Centre said, slow sometimes can be better.

It is terrific that the government got the jump on this situation, that money has been collected, but we want to have things planned out because of the chaotic situation in which we find ourselves in that country and ensure we get good value for the dollar. Whether it is rebuilding with wood or whether it is rebuilding, as the previous member said, with a new type of construction as opposed—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I have to stop the hon. member there to give the member for Papineau enough time to respond.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a difficult challenge in getting the balance right. The difficulties are so great and the needs so pressing in the immediate, that, yes, we need to ensure we give every bit of concrete present help that we possibly can. However, we must do it in a way that we build the capacity for the long term and we get Haiti back on its feet so it has the strength of the robust infrastructure to make it through whatever the gods or nature chooses to throw at it in the coming years.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank and congratulate my colleague, the hon. member for Bourassa, for this important initiative. He has become a major expert on the situation in Haiti and, for that reason and many others, he is greatly respected and admired by Haitians, not only here in Canada but also in Haiti.

I would also like to recognize the work that the hon. member for Papineau has done for the Haitian community in Montreal. The hon. member for Papineau, the hon. member for Bourassa and I have many people from Haiti in our ridings. These are people of whom we are very fond.

I must say that I am somewhat familiar with Haiti having been there several times since 1994. It is a country for which I have a great deal of love and respect.

This emergency debate is completely necessary given the current situation in Haiti. We must gain a better understanding of and better define what is happening in Haiti. We must assess what the international community and Canada are doing on the ground, but we must also work together to determine areas in which we can improve.

What more can we do for Haiti, a country that has suffered so much and with which we have a very personal and even fraternal relationship?

Haiti has experienced difficulties throughout its history, and this year has been particularly cruel. It started with a devastating earthquake that ravaged the capital of Port-au-Prince and killed more than 250,000 men, women and children. The fallout was felt across the country. Add to that hundreds of thousands of injured and 1.5 million people who were displaced and left homeless. How many children were orphaned? We will probably never know the exact figure, but it is unimaginable.

The entire country was affected: its people, its infrastructure and even its political and organizational structure. The economic, political and human repercussions and consequences of this terrible tragedy are still frightfully evident today. I am thinking, for example, of the many displaced and homeless people who still do not have a permanent roof over their heads and who live in makeshift camps, not to mention the countless number of people and families who have been left with no income.

And now, more recently, there has been a public health catastrophe. I am obviously talking about the cholera epidemic that is sweeping the country. This epidemic has already killed more than 2,200 people and is endangering the lives of thousands of Haitians. On a more personal note, I can say that I have seen the effects of cholera in other parts of the world and they are absolutely devastating.

To top it all off, there is now a political crisis. We know that the country finds itself in a difficult situation and is in the throes of a major crisis because of the November elections, which were rife with irregularities. When the results of the first round of voting and the names of the two candidates who made it to the January 2011 run-off were announced, it sparked a wave of violence that has not subsided. Haitians do not believe that the election results reflect the ballots cast, their choice and their will.

This is ample justification for the emergency debate we are holding. It is urgent that we reflect, it is urgent that we understand, but even more importantly, it is urgent that we take action. It is clear that, if Canada, as well as the entire international community, does not immediately address this crisis, the Haitian people will face catastrophe on several fronts: epidemics, malnutrition, violence, and civil and political instability. We must work on all these fronts at the same time.

First of all, as we have said in the past and are saying again, it is imperative that the Canadian government immediately appoint a special envoy who will have both a political and diplomatic role among the local and international authorities in Haiti.

The hon. member for Bourassa has repeatedly expressed this hope, but we are still waiting.

More specifically, politically speaking, we need to work on fixing the democratic process as quickly as possible. Indeed, urgent action is needed.

We must also focus our efforts on other key stakeholders, in order to garner their support for a peaceful resolution to this crisis. In other words, we need to shake things up. We need to show leadership and urge our allies to get moving if we want our Haitian friends to progress peacefully.

There are many ways to resolve this crisis. That being said, whatever we do, we must respect the system in place as well as Haitian laws, from both a judicial and electoral standpoint.

We are all here this evening to figure out how we can help the electoral process in Haiti, and not to take the place of that country's decision makers.

We must look at how we can work together, but we must not try to take anyone's place. What is crucial in the long term is ensuring that this never happens again. We must work with the Haitian people, with institutions and other partners to ensure that the next time Haitians go to the polls, there will be appropriate monitoring and security measures in place to make the whole process transparent. We want to make sure the new president has a credible mandate and the legitimacy needed to govern. In other words, we need to learn from all of this in order to make sure it never happens again.

Regarding health, I also believe that CIDA needs to send an assessment team immediately to work directly on the ground, to talk to the people, to doctors and other authorities, in order to maximize the effectiveness of the aid being sent to stop the cholera epidemic.

There is one other important point. Some people have already pointed this out, and it bears repeating: we must absolutely ensure that the money makes it to organizations on the ground. That is absolutely essential. Canada has promised large sums of money to help Haiti, but so far it has allocated only part of that money. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been promised, but the money has not yet been allocated. This also needs to be corrected immediately.

Members may recall that the government made a number of announcements and promised hundreds of millions of dollar in aid. The Prime Minister and the ministers responsible for CIDA spoke about funds “distributed“—the terms are important here—and funds “promised”, but unfortunately, that is very different from the funds that have actually been delivered. It takes more than promises; it takes money on the ground. This confusion makes no sense when you see the generosity extended to Haiti by Canadians from across the country.

Lack of transparency is another serious problem. There has been some cloud or shadow, and we need to know a bit more in terms of how funds have been distributed. It is nearly impossible to find relevant information about Canada's priorities, planned expenditures or commitments in Haiti. Like everything else, this must be corrected.

As I said earlier, we have historic ties with Haiti. We are more than partners, we are friends—good friends, even—because we share common values and a language and we work together in institutions such as la Francophonie and others. And then there are the tens of thousands of Canadians of Haitian origin who are here. These people are an extraordinary addition to our society. Today they are part of Canada's social fabric.

To conclude, I would like to say that I have had the opportunity to visit Haiti a number of times, and I know the strength, courage and determination of the Haitian people. These people have always been able to rise up and today they will rise once again. It is our duty to be there with them.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would refer the member to the Marshall Plan in Europe after the Second World War as an example of what can be done to achieve success. The countries got together and they were able to reconstruct the devastation from what was Europe at the time. Japan was totally reconstructed into a vibrant economy after being devastated by war.

There are examples of where things can improve. What are we doing wrong here? Are we expecting too much too quickly?

As I indicated, the government was on the file very early and we raised money but I do not think it is clear where all the money has gone or whether the money is finding its way to where it should.

Clearly these are issues, as the member indicated, that we need to sort out. It is about time something was organized here so that we can get a plan in place and one that works.