Hélène Laverdière

[Conflict in Mali, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to discuss today the very serious situation that has developed in Mali.

I hope you will not mind if I share a personal experience. I have been to Mali several times, mainly to work with our Malian colleagues, the representatives of civil society, as part of the Forum on Human Security. Mali was part of the Forum, and Canada was an active member at the time. I met extraordinary people who were working very hard to build a better Mali, a Mali for all, a safe Mali. In light of recent events, I cannot help but think of them, their families and all Malians of course.

In recent days and weeks, there have been fairly positive developments. French forces and the forces of the African Union—mainly from Chad in recent days—are making progress. That is good news for two reasons: first, we can see the progress that is being made, and the African Union is helping. That is key.

When talking about the African Union's efforts, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs said a few minutes ago that it should be African-led. I am sorry. Maybe it is my misunderstanding of the English language, but I do not think that African-led means Africa alone. It can mean African-led but with our support. Therefore, I do not think that arguing African-led is reason enough to say that we would not support this effort through the various means available to us, as other countries have done. I am thinking of the U.S., which gave $96 million to AFISMA. The EU gave $67 million and Germany gave $20 million. The African Union itself gave $50 million to AFISMA, on top of the contribution from its member countries in time and money. Canada has given nothing.

Let us move away from the military side, especially as this is not only a military issue.

There are political, social, humanitarian and development issues associated with this situation. I will talk a little about the humanitarian aspect because that is the most urgent.

We are talking about 390,000 people who have been displaced within Mali and to neighbouring countries. We know that neighbouring countries are already in the middle of a terrible food crisis. We have to be there, we have to help these people and the organizations that are on the ground.

The government was pleased to announce a Canadian contribution of $13 million. That is a step in the right direction, and the projects funded by this contribution are beneficial, but we have to admit that it is not very much. By comparison, Japan has provided 10 times as much, or $120 million in humanitarian aid even though it is experiencing serious financial difficulties as a result of the tsunami. Unlike Canada, it does not have historic ties with Mali. Canada's contribution seems rather paltry by comparison.

The humanitarian situation is a short-term issue. We must help those in need and look ahead to the future. We need to look at the long term and ensure that this does not happen again, in Mali or in the other countries in the region. That requires development as well as social and political dialogue in Mali and the other countries in the region.

We must help these countries build democracies that create opportunities for everyone. And Canada can play a unique role in that. As I said, we have historic ties with Mali and a number of countries in the region, through our francophone population, our shared language and our expertise in democratic development in the traditional sense. But we are far removed from Africa. No matter what the members opposite say, we are far removed. Our presence is being felt less and less in the region, and this is a regional issue.

Cuts to CIDA have reached $377 million, and this is having a disproportionate impact on African countries. Embassies are closing. For example, we are pulling out of Niger, a potentially problematic country that borders Mali and that we should stand beside.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs is telling us that it is not a big deal because we have embassies in Dakar, Abidjan and so on. When I hear that, it makes me wonder if people think that Africa is the size of Portugal or Greece. But Africa is huge.

In Dakar, I was responsible for five countries. I am not afraid of hard work, but I had as much work as I could handle. I do not see how someone in Dakar or someone who is involved in the current situation on the Ivory Coast can also cover Niger and another country such as South Africa even, or Malawi and why not a few other Latin American countries while we are at it.

This lack of coverage prevents us from having people on the ground who are closely monitoring the situation. Clearly, the work people do on the ground does not produce quantifiable results. However, it gives us a presence. It allows us to show that we are partners, and it helps us to understand the situation. That is absolutely essential.

On one hand, we are moving away from Africa but on the other, we are unfortunately moving away from a sector in which we have exceptional expertise, for which we were known and which formed part of Canada's brand—if I can call it that—as a promoter of democracy.

I have heard my colleagues say that we will support a democratic Mali. However, it is not enough to support a democratic Mali or to say that we want Mali to be a democratic country and hope that it happens with the wave of a magic wand. We also have to lend a hand.

Great Britain is providing $3.1 million to support the political process. And what are we doing? We are waiting on the sidelines, waiting and watching and becoming more and more insignificant, a partner that does not count. This is preventing us from influencing events as we would like.

I would like to close with a plea for Canada to once again invest in democratic development. Why was the institute for democratic development that was promised by the Conservatives in the 2008 Speech from the Throne never set up? Why did they destroy organizations such as Rights and Democracy, which had a quarter of a century of expertise?

Instead of just saying we support Mali, Canada should really be there and really help the people of Mali.

[Conflict in Mali, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I have two quick questions.

My first question relates to some remarks the parliamentary secretary just made. In committee, witnesses from CIDA told us that, even though the Mali government was not receiving any more direct support, most of that money had been redirected to grassroots non-governmental organizations. The parliamentary secretary seems to be saying something totally different. I would like some clarifications.

Also, will the parliamentary secretary admit that the last budget slashed CIDA's funding by $377 millions, and that these cuts mostly affect African countries?

[Conflict in Mali, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his speech. I noted with interest his statement that Canada will be willing to support a democratic Mali in the future.

Could my hon. colleague tell us what Canada should do, not only to support a future democratic Mali, but to help that country create a democracy and democratic institutions?

[International Development Week, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely honoured to rise today to acknowledge International Development Week. Just a few years ago, Canada still enjoyed an excellent reputation as a generous country that knew how to be very effective in the field.

But that is no longer the case. Since this government came to power, we have seen the results of the ideological cuts made to effective NGOs like KAIROS. We have seen a shift, one that favours partnerships with mining companies over helping the poorest of the poor. Last year we saw the antics of a minister who was misusing public funds. This year we are seeing the antics of a minister whose partisan opinions are expressed on the department's website and who admits that he does not understand the basic principles of effective co-operation.

This week is a time to celebrate civil society organizations in Canada. We promise them—and all Canadians—that in 2015, an NDP government will do a much better job.

[National Defence, February 1st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday's testimony contradicts what the Minister of National Defence said about how the Delisle case has not affected our ability to exchange intelligence with our allies.

The Brigadier General said that the minister was not aware of the extent of the damage when he made those comments, but the fact is that our allies are threatening to shut us out of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing community. If that is not a negative consequence, I do not know what is.

What measures will be taken to repair the relationships that have been seriously damaged by this incident?

[Ethics, January 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, in addition to setting up a $25,000 retreat, the Minister of International Cooperation forced departmental employees to take a restrictive and troubling oath of loyalty that prevents them from criticizing CIDA and its representatives.

The government must not muzzle public servants. If the government wastes money or makes potentially disastrous decisions, someone has to speak up.

Why did the minister force such a code on his employees? What exactly is he trying to hide?

[Ethics, January 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, after slashing CIDA's budget last spring, the new minister spends $25,000 on a retreat with his staff. That might have undercut his message about “being accountable for every nickel”.

He also wants employees to sign a note saying that they will never criticize CIDA or its representatives. Yet when one of his partisan letters is posted on his department website, he blames CIDA.

Is the minister trying to silence whistleblowers in his own department?

[International Co-operation, January 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have again misused government resources. A partisan letter attacking the NDP was published on the CIDA website, which is a clear breach of Treasury Board guidelines.

This is not the end of the minister’s incompetence. He has frozen financial assistance to Haiti because there is too much waste. Furthermore, he has ignored the rules of diplomacy by talking to the media before talking to the Haitians, to our allies and to our partners.

When will the Conservatives take international co-operation seriously?

[Committees of the House, December 12th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for this very interesting and essential question.

Over the past few years, when speaking about the Egyptian revolution or Tunisia or Libya for instance, we have all too often made the mistake of saying that, once the toothpaste is out of the tube, everything is resolved and we do not have to concern ourselves with it anymore. Unfortunately, Canada has been completely absent in the post-revolutionary and post-war periods in these countries, and we see that the situation is not so straightforward.

It is also urgent that we have a plan for going forward. How are we going to help Syria set up stable, democratic and equitable institutions that respect human rights in every way? If we want the country to attain stability and peace, this is the most crucial thing. Weapons, airplanes and the like are one thing, but genuine security is built on democracy and human rights. This is the only way to guarantee security over the long term.

We were active in a number of countries, such as Libya. We could have stopped earlier, but we agreed on the first stage, at least. Now, we are no longer there to help the country rebuild, even though we have experience, in terms of federalism for instance, that could be very useful to a number of these countries. Unfortunately, the government downloaded its responsibilities and took away some of the extraordinary tools that Canada had, such as Rights and Democracy, an organization that could do this work in the field, and now Canada is playing an ever-diminishing role in this regard.

[Committees of the House, December 12th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, there is a completely non-partisan aspect to this issue. We all want to help the Syrian people; we all agree on this. As I said in my statement, I was pleased to learn that Canadian aid has been increased to $22 million, but I still think that this could have been done a few months ago.

I was talking about winter, a very real situation that means that our foreign aid must be on the ground at the most crucial time.

It is also my opinion that we have to work with our partners to encourage the entire international community to contribute more. I also believe that we can do more in terms of family reunification.