Mr. Speaker, in 2023, the Auditor General noted that Global Affairs Canada had failed to demonstrate whether its $3.5 billion in annual development assistance, allocated under the government's feminist policy, had improved the lives of women and girls. Furthermore, only half of the projects funded were included in the annual reports to Parliament. It was therefore impossible for the department to properly report on the results of the projects it funded.
The motion moved by my colleague from York South—Weston—Etobicoke demonstrates a desire to improve performance measurements in order to determine whether investments are producing the desired outcomes. The third paragraph calls on the Minister of International Development to table an annual report in Parliament to measure the effectiveness of international assistance and its impact at home. As we know, the Bloc Québécois is in favour of greater transparency, especially when it comes to how the money of Quebec and Canadian families is being spent.
In its election platform, the Bloc Québécois proposed investing 0.7% of gross national income in international assistance, albeit with better monitoring of investments and priority given to issues such as education, health, climate change adaptation and poverty reduction.
It is crucial to recognize that assistance is also a cost-effective investment that plays a fundamental role in global stability. It is often criticized, and rightly so, because it generates so much red tape, carries colonialist overtones and can be weaponized for political purposes. Nonetheless, assistance is still the only mechanism for transferring resources internationally and the only framework we have right now for co-operation and maintenance of international standards.
However, I must point out that, under the Liberals, the Canadian government has achieved the unenviable feat of doing worse than Stephen Harper's government in terms of international assistance. In addition, Canada failed miserably at securing a seat on the UN Security Council after mounting a last-minute campaign in 2020. Experts attribute this failure in part to Canada's abandonment of humanitarian assistance. Canada currently spends 0.3% of its GDP on international assistance. The UN asks countries like Canada to contribute 0.7%. The average for OECD countries ranges from 0.4% to 0.44% of GDP.
We are doing worse under the Liberals than we were under the Harper government. The government that has been the most stingy in terms of providing support for international human rights as a percentage of GDP is the current government, or the old government, as the Liberals like to remind us. It is six of one, half a dozen of the other.
As we know, Canada is not a military or economic power. However, it can play a role in humanitarian assistance and international development. Under commitments made by the UN in 1970, Canada must increase the amount it spends on official development assistance to 0.7% of its gross national income. By the federal government's own admission, however, Canada has no plan to reach the 0.7% target.
While international assistance is often criticized for all the red tape it generates, it is also important to acknowledge the benefits to the countries receiving and providing the aid.
My colleague's motion assumes that international assistance can—