Garnett Genuis

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I thought my colleague made great points about the Office of Religious Freedom. That office was not there to just speak out publicly but to inform the government about issues of faith as they relate to politics and foreign policy, and to ensure our department could understand some of the complex interreligious conflicts so often overlaid with the inter-ethnic issues that can exist and make sure we were fully informed in advance on how to engage in those situations.

The problem in this case was that the government was slow to see the problem and slow to react. It only became fully engaged in the last few weeks in response to the current crisis. Does the member think that, if that infrastructure were in place to ensure that informing, perhaps we would have seen a faster response from the government?

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, although not all of it was directly on the topic we are discussing tonight. Nonetheless, I appreciate his participation in the debate.

When we are talking about aid, one of the important things we need to analyze is the humanitarian assistance to those who have fled, but there is also the question of Canadian aid dollars that have gone into Burma, where those dollars are going, and whether or not they are actually getting to those in greatest need. There is the problem of even getting humanitarian access to the Rakhine area.

The member spoke about the aid issue. I think the figure was about $44 million, give or take a couple of million, that was committed by the last minister of foreign affairs to democratic development in Burma. I wonder if any of that involved direct government-to-government aid, and what that money was spent on.

Does the member agree with me that we need a significant review of the aid dollars going into Burma to see if we are actually making a difference for the most vulnerable people, in this case in Rakhine, but also considering other issues of minority rights? I am curious about the member's thoughts on this specific aspect of aid to Burma.

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, one of the questions I have asked members of the government before is whether the new Office of Human Rights, Freedoms and Inclusion has been engaged at all on this issue. When that office was announced, my understanding was that dealing with issues like this, certainly any kind of issues of persecution of religious minorities, would be something that the office would at least be commenting on and engaged with in some way, and perhaps involved in the program and response to it. I would like to ask the member for his comments on that.

Second, is he satisfied with the timeline of the government response? In spite of the calls for over a year and a half for its engagement in this, the government response began only relatively recently in response to the most imminent escalation.

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see there is a lot of support for having the emergency debate and for putting pressure on the government to continue to move forward.

One of the challenges with generating a strong response to this in other countries is that there is sort of a window in which these things get attention in the media. That is the nature of news. They talk about an issue for a while, and then something else comes up. However, there is a whole run-up period to where we are now. The problem will likely continue in some form going forward for a substantial amount of time.

My question is this. We need to have sustained attention for this. The government should have had more engagement earlier on this issue. However, now we need to ensure that its engagement continues beyond just this window of time when people are paying a lot of attention to this issue. How can we maintain that pressure? How do we ensure that our government is continuing to engage in this over a long period of time? Yes, absolutely, it is in the immediate circumstances, but how can it maintain that pressure on not only the military but also the civilian government in a sustained way?

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I know that I do not always agree with my colleague, but I know that he is very thoughtful.

I would ask the member for his thoughts on the broader question of how we respond to cases of ethnic cleaning and genocide. It seems to me that if we look at the last 100 years of this repeated pattern of events, we do not really pay enough attention to them while they are happening and wring our hands after the fact and think why we did not do more. Then the same events happen again.

How can we as an international community get into a pattern of always consistently responding in the moment? How can we really anticipate these problems, respond in the moment, and address them so that we do not go through this repeated after the fact hand-wringing? How can we change the way we behave as an international community? I would appreciate his thoughts on that.

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for being here and for speaking. I want to ask her a question I had asked earlier that may not fall directly within her portfolio, which was the role, if any, the Office of Human Rights, Freedoms and Inclusion is taking in the context of Burma. I would be curious to hear her response to that at some point.

However, I would in particular like to hear from the minister with respect to the bilateral aid that Canada is giving to the Government of Burma. I have some figures that show the bilateral aid in 2016 was close to $20 million, which is a significant increase over previous years. I believe it is important for us to be engaged in that situation in a humanitarian way, but I would like to hear from the minister if she thinks it is appropriate for us to be doing government-to-government aid in light of the government's activities in this case. Also, is she willing to undertake a complete review of the aid we are giving directly to the Government of Burma, recognizing that it is very likely that it would not be going to those who are clearly the most vulnerable in this case? I would like to hear what kind of reviews have been undertaken or will be undertaken, and whether the minister thinks it is appropriate to be doing government-to-government aid in the context of the current situation.

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her work on foreign affairs issues and human rights. In particular, it is a pleasure serving with her on the foreign affairs committee.

In my speech I mentioned some specific action items that I feel the government should take, and I want to ask her to respond to see how the NDP feels about these specific action items: number one, reviewing every aspect of our relationship with Burma, especially the way in which we deliver aid; number two, forcefully raising these issues publicly and privately with military and civilian leaders; number three, prioritizing these discussions in international fora; and number four, reviewing sanctions, and certainly re-imposing sanctions, on those responsible.

Maybe there is not time to address all of those points, but I wonder if my colleague wants to address some of them.

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for her remarks, her expression of solidarity, and also her report on some of the activities she has undertaken recently. Our view as the opposition is, to be frank, that some of these activities could have, should have started earlier. However, I appreciate nonetheless what the minister has shared.

I wonder if she could report specifically about engaging the military leadership as well, because she has talked about its importance. Has she spoken with General Min Aung Hlaing, the commander-in-chief in Burma? I wonder if she could report some of the context for those discussions in terms of what happened, what was said, and what the response was. I think the House would be very interested in hearing.

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, Burma has a power-sharing government. There is the military and then there is the democratically elected component. Many people who are following this debate will know the name Aung San Suu Kyi, and I think will recognize the importance of engaging her. It is important that we underline for the government that it needs to be engaging her as well as the military leadership. It is important that we recognize that neither has been performing in a way that is consistent with the fundamental human values that we would like them to support. The government needs to engage more, and it needs to engage with both of those key elements of the Burmese regime.

I wonder if the member could talk a bit more about what we need the government to do, especially when it comes to engaging all of the different elements of Burmese leadership and putting on full pressure to bring about a change in direction.

[Situation in Myanmar, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, there is so much there that I could pick up on. I guess I will just pick up on the last point in terms of the denial of reality by the Burmese government. When the State Counsellor says things like 50% of the villages are intact, it is quite a point of denial, but it is actually a point of admission as well. When one says that 50% of the villages have not gone through these kinds of terrible abuses, it makes one ask about the other 50%.

I am not saying that comment is even correct. What satellite images show is that about 50% of villages have been absolutely brutalized. That is what we can see from satellite images in terms of the changes on the ground. Of course there has not been any kind of meaningful international access, so we just cannot see what is going on.

That this is a textbook case of ethnic cleansing is a quote we have heard before, and it just underlines the tragedy that we have seen this pattern over and over again. Unfortunately, I think there has been a pattern in terms of the international non-response to these kinds of events over and over again. The international community too often prioritizes other kinds of considerations over these issues of fundamental human rights.

This House of Commons, the government, this country have an opportunity to make that difference, to lead on this issue, and we should do it.