[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Tuesday, May 16, 1995
.1530 
[English]
The Chairman: I'll call the meeting of the committee to order. We're here today to speak on the estimates. We have with us the Hon. André Ouellet, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, accompanied by Deputy Minister Gordon Smith and Madame Labelle from CIDA.
Minister.
[Translation]
Hon. André Ouellet (Minister of Foreign Affairs): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm delighted to be here with you today, and to have the opportunity for the second time since the beginning of the year to meet with you as a group and answer your questions.
I know that you've met with the Deputy Minister, Mr. Smith; the Associate Deputy Minister, Mr. Lavertu; the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Corporate Services Branch, Mr. William L. Clarke; and you also know the President of CIDA, Ms. Labelle, and her Vice-President of Corporate Affairs, Mr. Holdsworth.
I've noted that the very frequent exchanges between the Department and the committee are going very well and I congratulate you for this because I attach great importance to the advice that we may receive from the committee and its members. I hope that this degree of cooperation will continue to exist.
I'd like to briefly point out that the government policy statement, Canada in the World, would not have been possible without the excellent report of the special joint committee reviewing Canadian foreign policy.
The Department has also contributed fully to the program review, but quite obviously this review would not have been possible without the exceptional contribution and assiduous work of your parliamentary committee to achieve a review and a policy statement that won broad general approval.
As you know, the objectives outlined for international action aimed to support the recommendations of the joint committee of course, but these objectives are mutually re-enforcing. I may remind you that our first objective is the promotion of our prosperity and employment; the second objective is inspired by the great canadian tradition, namely the protection of our security in a stable global environment; and lastly the third objective of the policy statement is the projection of our values and our culture.
Needless to say, in order to fulfill these objectives we will have to fully utilize all our foreign policy instruments, including international trade and international aid.
The program review calls for reductions within our department of 5, 10 and 15% over the next three years. We have tried to implement these reductions in a way that will minimize the impact on program delivery and on the provision of our services to Canadians.
.1535
I think that we will fulfill our objectives first by reducing corporate services, secondly by increasing costs payable by clients, and thirdly, by making reductions in the grants and contributions paid to non-governmental organizations. Unfortunately, we will also have to reduce some staff in our major missions, where we have the largest delegations abroad.
We shall also fulfil our objectives through other administrative means, such as reinvesting profits from certain property sales in order to reduce rental costs.
One of the decisions our government made and that was very important for the prime minister was to not close missions abroad. Not only do we not want to close missions abroad, but we are interested in the possibility of finding innovative ways of extending our representation abroad. For example, we are thinking of creating micro-missions, with one or two Canadian employees supported by a larger mission located elsewhere as well as by local staff, employees hired on site who can provide support services to Canadians sent the micro-mission.
I have said and I repeat: we are also considering new possibilities of joint leases with other countries. We have already identified possibilities with Australia but we are also thinking of other countries that may join efforts with us to pool resources in order to reduce administrative costs.
The main estimates for the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade for 1995-1996 total $1.3 billion, a reduction of $104 million from last year. In spite of the budgetary restraints we face, we must make an effort to continue to fulfil our foreign policy objectives.
Therefore, we must exercise stricter control measures and constantly improve our management practices. Already the key objectives of the Department's employees are responsibility, cost reduction and better financial control.
One of the important aspects of our objective as a government is employment and prosperity. In order for Canada to remain a prosperous country, we must have a capacity to help Canadian companies export their goods and services in order to conquer new markets and maintains existing markets abroad. More than half of the Department's staff abroad are dedicated to the delivery of trade, economic and investment programs. My colleague, Mr. MacLaren, ordered a review of international trade practices by a committee headed by Mr. Red Wilson, who tabled a report and who I believe appeared before your Committee.
.1540
I can tell you that the recommendations of this Committee are currently being implemented by the department. We will restructure our program for export market development so that main beneficiaries are the small and medium-sized enterprises, as recommended in the Wilson Report. This restructuring alone will enable us to make savings in the order of $7 million over three years.
I know that some of you are interested in the SMEs and are following with interest the new initiatives we've taken concerning them. We must not forget that the SMEs make up over 90% of our clientele, and thus deserve increased support on our part.
Very often, it is believed that for a small business to succeed on the international market, it needs unlimited resources. Such is not the case. What's important is to have a good product that's in demand. Often, with very little effort, we can penetrate foreign markets and develop a very interesting market, especially since foreign trade does not necessarily have to be done very far, in Africa or in Asia. Foreign trade can also occur with our neighbours to the South. That's very close by.
The efforts that may be deployed to help small and medium-sized enterprises develop markets can be focused on the United States, Central America or South America. Thus, within NAFTA, there are enormous opportunities for small and medium-sized Canadian enterprises that our department will try to exploit to the maximum over the coming months and years in order to support Canadian business in its efforts.
The Department has been working with the Export Development Corporation, the Canadian Commercial Corporation and the banks in order to increase the financing available for small exporters. New programs have been or are being set up, including the CCC's progress payment program and the EDC's guarantee mechanism for accounts receivable.
I'm pleased to note that the EDC and the banks have also agreed to share the risk in the case of medium-term financing for SMEs whose export sales do not exceed $10 million.
We have opened the Canada Business Centre in Mexico City. This centre offers exhibition space and temporary offices for Canadian businesses, especially SMEs. It is a pilot project that could serve as a model for similar future initiatives elsewhere.
Allow me to briefly discuss the issue of development. You are all aware of the importance we attach to development assistance. I would like to say that, unfortunately, like all other departments and agencies, CIDA has had to contribute to the government's overall effort to reduce the deficit. CIDA will have to cope with a substantial decrease in resources allocated to the international assistance envelope.
.1545
This aid will be reduced by 381 million dollars this year and next, a decrease of 15%.
In making these cuts, care had to be taken to avoid jeapardizing CIDA's ability to apply the principles that lie at the heart of the statement on foreign policy.
Indeed, the statement gives CIDA the mandate to support sustainable development in developping countries, and more particularly in the poorest countries. To achieve this, we defined six priorities for Canadian official assistance. The six priorities are as follows: first, to meet basic human needs; second, to promote the participation of women in development; third, to deliver infrastructure services in a country to allow it to enjoy appropriate economic growth; fourth, to protect and promote human rights; fifth, to support private sector development in these countries in order to enable them to obtain an appropriate structure for adequate economic development; lastly, to protect the environment.
In terms of basic human needs, I can say that the government and the joint committee fully agree in this regard. As suggested by the committee, the government has in fact made a commitment to allocate 25% of official development assistance to meet the basic needs of primary health care, basic education, nutrition, water quality, sanitation works and housing.
Having adopted all these decisions, we can say that the official development assistance program now has a clear mandate and specific objectives.
[English]
The budgetary measures implemented by CIDA follow the principle that priority should be given to NGOs that work in developing countries. It is consequently the responsibility of these organizations to make Canadians aware of the problem of development and to support the involvement of young people in their programs.
For this reason, I have decided, following extensive consultations, and on the recommendation of CIDA, to freeze certain organizations that work only and exclusively in Canada. It is not with great joy that we made that decision, but a tough choice had to be made. Under the circumstances we felt that the money should be sent where it is most needed, to those countries that are in great need, and not here in Canada.
Let me say that because public participation is an integral part of the agency's programming priorities, steps must be taken to include this element in the regular programs of our partners, who are better equipped to forge these ties with the public by virtue of their presence in developing countries. We therefore count on the multitude; we're not short of NGOs in Canada who have extensive programs abroad and who could indeed assume the responsibility of keeping the Canadian public aware of the importance of development assistance. We will indeed count on them to carry on this important task.
.1550
Let me say that if they wish, the development education organizations whose funding has also been cut could certainly join forces and so make new proposals supporting development activities in the field by joining with other organizations that are already operating abroad.
[Translation]
In closing, let me once again express my gratitude to the members of the Committee for the interest and enthusiasm they have shown in holding this series of public hearings which have led to a very useful report for the government in preparing its Statement on Foreign Policy.
Allow me to say that these meetings between you and my public servants and myself, at this time and at a time where we're studying the department's estimates, are useful. It seems obvious to me - and this is a suggestion I'm making to you, Mr. Chairman - that for us to have even more input, these consultations should be held in the fall rather than the spring.
[English]
It is quite clear that if your committee were to ask my officials and myself to come before you before we prepare the budget, you would then have greater input in the ultimate result. As we now discuss the current budget, you have to take account of a budget that has already been presented, that is more or less locked in the blue book, and so on.
But if your committee wishes to analyse and review all expenditures, both in the department or in CIDA, to have our officials come here, look at the program, look at the expenditures, question our officials as to whether this program is worth continuing or whether this program should be amended, whether this type of expenditure is valuable or whether it should be reduced, or whether we spend enough in some areas and not enough in other areas, these are the types of questions that could be addressed in the fall, before we prepare the next year's budget and before we discuss with the Department of Finance and with Treasury Board our estimates for next year.
So I will say this. Obviously I appreciate the opportunity for exchange with you at this time, but I repeat to you what I have said earlier, that committee work could be much more productive if we were to gear the process a little differently and do the evaluations before rather than after the budget has been finalized.
So I present this as food for thought for your committee.
The Chairman: It's food for your thought, Minister; it's grist for our mill.
Mr. Ouellet: I mean, it's not for me to decide your agenda, but if you want to take up this invitation, it might relieve this problem. We would look at this as a positive, constructive involvement in the preparation of our programs and activities for the next year. Thank you.
The Chairman: Thank you, Minister.
Before I turn to questions, I'd like to say I think your suggestion is very timely. Our subcommittee has been looking at exactly how we could be more effective in terms of our budget input, and we intend to take the preparation of the plan as an opportunity to go into more detail with your officials and perhaps even to examine different sectors specifically.
.1555
The Auditor General has very kindly said that he is willing to work with our committee more closely, and we will be following up your offer.
I saw a certain nodding around the room. I think every member of the committee would be anxious to do that. This is not a committee that's ever shirked working, so we'll be quite pleased to take up your offer.
Mr. Bergeron.
[Translation]
Mr. Bergeron (Verchères): Welcome here amongst us, Minister. We're getting to be close friends.
Without wanting to seem sensationalistic or overly partisan, I'd like to come back to the matter of federal civil servants' travelling abroad.
According to the data provided by the Auditor General, very recent data, taxpayers pay federal civil servants posted abroad and the members of their families thousands of untaxed dollars each year to take vacations, on top of a transportation allowance. It costs more than $10,000 for a family of four in Europe and more than $20,000 for a family living in Asia, for example. Each member of the family receives a cash equivalent of 80% of the price of a full fare, two-way plane ticket in economy class between the city where they are posted and Ottawa or another city. The only condition is to leave the city where they are posted.
For instance, according to the statistics provided by the government travel service - these are not our statistics - , on April 15th last, the price of a plane ticket between Paris and Ottawa amounted to $4,441. That means that each member of a family of four people receives 80% of that amount, which is the equivalent of $3,553 or $14,212 for a family of four.
A few weeks ago, we did some checking and found out that the price of a plane ticket between Paris and Ottawa was approximately $339, which would have meant that a family of four could put aside more than $13,000 untaxable dollars, net.
You told us, Minister, during question period, that this practice, which was a result of a directive in 1993, is no longer in force. Can you tell us when this measure was eliminated and also know by which measure this provision or practice was replaced?
Mr. Ouellet: There are two parts to your question. The first part has to do with the disclosure that some of our employees claimed sums they were not entitled to. The department had been somewhat too loose in this area.
I stated at the House that measures had been taken to rectify this situation. Those who received benefits that they were not entitled to were compelled to repay them. We think that the procedures which have been set up allow us to say that what happened in the past will not happen again.
The second part of your question has to do with the sums of money given to our diplomats and their families abroad so that they can come to Canada from time to time. In that area, there's a long-standing practice which allows posted diplomats to come back to Canada with their families at certain times, which we will review. This matter will be the focus of internal reviews concerning the use of this privilege, following the Auditor General's representations.
.1600
In all countries with a significant diplomatic corps, it is accepted and recognized that representatives abroad have the right to return to their country and reimmerse in the family atmosphere.
What we have given our diplomats is neither more no less than what other countries give their own diplomats, be they French, English, American, German or any other. The matter that will be reviewed - and this is the sore point - is when a diplomat who should normally buy a ticket to come back to Canada uses his money not to vacation in Canada, but rather to go elsewhere. In our opinion, this should be the focus of a much stricter control. I don't think that it is right for a person to indirectly obtain monetary benefits that he should not normally obtain.
We will review this issue to ensure that our civil servants did not receive unjustified benefits as a result of this generally commendable program which allow civil servants and their families to return to Canada from time to time, which embassy services of other countries grant their own diplomats.
The issue of an overly favourable use of a return home program will be very carefully examined over the next few weeks and months.
Mr. Bergeron: I think that we all agree that it's normal for public servants posted abroad to be able to come back to Canada so as to remain in touch with life here and with their families. The problem is when authorities grant a lump sum to the family rather than directly buying the tickets. Perhaps we should re-assess this matter.
The question I would like to ask you, Minister, is the following. You alluded previously to sums that civil servants should have repaid, sums they had access to without being entitled to them. Are we in a position to evaluate the amounts that have been, or that must be, repaid by the public servants at fault?
Mr. Ouellet: Mr. Clarke will give you more details on what I've been talking about.
As to basic policy, I said in my opening remarks that we must constantly improve our monitoring and our management practices. Department employees' key objectives are already responsibility for reducing costs and improve financial monitoring. I spoke of this without specifying what you alluded to, but that's what I was thinking of.
Do you have the details concerning those who where told to refund, Mr. Clarke?
[English]
Mr. William Clarke (Associate Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade): As I remember, we investigated some 200-plus cases. The total amount that was refunded at the end of the day was slightly over $300,000. Every case was certainly investigated fully - I don't want to use the word prosecuted - a report was done, and a disciplinary process was carried out with an independent disciplinary board. Where any wrongdoing of any nature was found, an employee was disciplined.
.1605
As you know, the Auditor General commented very favourably on the fact that the department went through it step by step in a very clear process, investigating and carrying out discipline against all the employees. In fact, he praised the process of discipline carried out by all the foreign service departments on the issue of travel irregularities.
[Translation]
Mr. Bergeron: During Ms Labelle's last appearance before the committee, my colleague from Louis-Hébert asked her a question which she preferred not to answer and I can understand her.
I'd like to put the question to you on behalf of my colleague from Louis-Hébert. Although the overall budget of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade was reduced by about 7.5%, CIDA's budget underwent a 15% reduction. Had you explained the discrepancy between the two when you noted in your opening statement that CIDA is quite rightly expected to do its fair share in cutting back on government expenditures? When we take a close look, we see that the effort expected from CIDA is far greater than that of the Department as a whole.
Mr. Ouellet: I'm glad that you asked the question because Ms Labelle let me know that the qustion had been raised and that she declined to answer it. She was quite right because it is a policy decision.
Budgets and cutbacks are policy decisions and it is not for public servants to make decisions in such matters, even though we might be tempted at times to pass the buck to them and hold them responsible.
The budget of foreign affairs is $1 billion. CIDA's overall budget, for the development enveloppe, is $2 billion dollars. The reduction in one was 15% as ooposed to 7% in the other.
One thing is clear, the greater the budget, the more fat there is to be trimmed. When it's all pared down to skin and bones, there aren't many places left to cut. The cuts in the Department of Foreign Affairs have already been very extensive taking into account the role Canada is called upon to play on the international scene.
The Chairman: In case you have ideas, minister, I can assure you that this committes's budget doesn't have any fat at all and there is nowhere that cuts can be made. That's where it hurts.
[English]
Mr. Mills.
Mr. Mills (Red Deer): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I would certainly encourage you, and I appreciate what you said about going through things in the fall. We've discussed that idea and I think it's an excellent one. Also, I'd have to say that I'm in the process of visiting foreign missions and the ones I have visited I think are doing a good job.
I have a number of questions, but three specific ones that you haven't touched on. First of all, I'd like to know what sort of dedication you might have toward the Arctic council and the whole concept of increasing environmental problems, growth problems, and so on in those areas. What would be your thinking about that?
Second, I would like to know about international conferences - and I would use as my example the Beijing conference - in terms of the choosing of people, the terms of the agenda that is being promoted at international conferences like this, and the real concern that in fact that whole process can be captured by a special interest group that can sort of bypass the Canadian people and push a specific issue, be it a lesbian issue or whatever, at a conference for women.
.1610
I heard an interesting comment today, too, that I thought should be mentioned. If you're really going to control populations and really get women's rights, you're going to have to start educating men. So possibly there should be a men's conference later on where we try to bang some sense into the male head, thus protecting the females.
Third, when we look at the budget and at some of the money distribution there, when we look at things like membership fees and see membership fees increasing, some of them by 25% and 30%, for things like the OAS and UNESCO - so much of that money is going to increased fees. I wonder at what point you're going to examine cutting back on some of the things we belong to and streamlining that process, thus having more money for the things we really believe in.
I could go on, but that gives you three to start with.
Mr. Ouellet: Let me briefly say that the Arctic council is a priority for us. As you know, we have appointed an ambassador for the Arctic. We have pursued vigorously with the Americans the concept of accepting an Arctic council. We feel we've been successful in this regard. In the early stages there was great reluctance by the Americans to accept to be part of an Arctic council.
We have promoted the idea obviously with the Nordic states and with Russia. The ambassador for the Arctic is dedicated to the establishment of the Arctic council. In fact, she has said that this is her number one task. So indeed we feel that some progress should occur in the very near future in this regard.
Dealing with your questions about international conferences, there is at these international conferences sponsored by the United Nations not only an official delegation that goes to represent every state. Over the years, starting with the first international conference on the environment in Rio and also in the conference in Copenhagen, a number of non-governmental organizations have been invited to participate in all sessions in parallel to the conference. Indeed, it is expected that accompanying the official Canadian delegation to Beijing there will be a number of representatives of Canadian non-governmental organizations who will go there for the very purpose of participating in the conference.
How are they chosen? The Canadian delegations will be led by a minister, appointed by the Prime Minister. In all likelihood it will be the minister responsible for the status of women, Mrs. Finestone. There will be a number of parliamentarians invited to participate on the Canadian delegations. I will be sending a letter to your respective whips asking them to nominate certain members of Parliament to accompany the minister.
.1615
There will probably be, as in the past, officials from the interested departments - obviously the Status of Women, Human Resources Development, Foreign Affairs, International Trade, and CIDA - will be invited to be part of the delegation.
There will also be a number of non-governmental organizations that will send delegates. I know the CLC has indicated to us that they will be sending delegations. A number of other non-governmental organizations are going to send delegations too. So those people will be chosen by these organizations; we will not have anything to say in this regard.
Canada has been asked, on top of this, to contribute through CIDA for sending a number of representatives from underdeveloped countries, people who do not have the resources to go to Beijing. We will be asking...what's the name of the organization here in Ottawa?
A voice: MATCH.
Mr. Ouellet: So we'll ask MATCH to analyse, in cooperation with CIDA, those representatives from other countries, from Asia, or from Africa more particularly, and to a certain degree some of the Latin American countries, as to which ones it is felt have something to contribute to international forums. Therefore, they will be chosen on the recommendation of this international organization called MATCH and will go there to promote women's ideas and human objectives.
But let me say that I doubt very much that one group could dominate the agenda.
Mr. Mills: Looking at the list of people who attended the pre-conference in New York, I hope that's not representative of the group that will be going, because that certainly seems to be dominated.... If you look at some of the statements that come out of that meeting, there certainly isn't a Canadian popular agenda there at this point. That's the concern.
Mr. Ouellet: Let me say that the objectives that Canada will promote there, the policies of the Government of Canada, will be publicized, will be known. We will try to have a well-represented delegation, representative of Canadian interests and certainly not dominated by any group. Indeed, if your party wants to participate, you're most welcome. We will send you the letters.
On your third point, yes, you're quite right. The participation at some of these international forums is becoming more and more expensive. The contribution has increased because of increases in costs of living in all of these organizations.
Some of the contributions are given to United Nations organizations over which we have no control. We are asked to pay a percentage. Our percentage is what?
.1620
A voice: It varies.
Mr. Ouellet: It's 3.11%. So we're supposed to pay 3.11% of the budget of the UN. So obviously we have no control over this. If the UN expenditures are higher, our contributions would be higher.
Mr. English (Kitchener): Thank you, Mr. Minister, for coming before us today. There's been some attention in the press to the recent statements in Vancouver about human rights. Mr. Broadbent of the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development, in Montreal, issued a statement, and he quoted in that statement the statement in Canada in the World:
- ...we will make effective use of all of the influence that our economic, trading and development
assistance relationships give us to promote respect for human rights.
Mr. Ouellet: No, there's no change. Our objectives are the same. Our goals are the same. Obviously there is a tendency in some quarters to try to give an interpretation to what we say. I suspect that sometimes when I speak in English I'm not as clear as when I speak in French, so I take full responsibility for maybe not giving the right tone in my remarks in Vancouver, which led to an interpretation that we have changed our policy.
We are as much committed to enhancing the human rights agenda than ever before. In fact, I spoke to a meeting here in Ottawa where Mr. Broadbent was present. He complimented me and was quite pleased by my speech. And a week later he issued a press release, obviously basing his statement on what he read in the paper. But the reality is that we have to pursue and use every advantage and influence we have to try to bring those countries that do not believe in human rights or do not respect human rights to change their minds about it and change their attitude about it.
But what I said in Vancouver, and I repeat here to be quite clear, is that by isolating someone, by refusing to speak to them or to do business with them or to have any rapport with them, is not conducive to changing their mind. Therefore, as we have a very aggressive trade agenda, we will go about it and we will do it. We feel that if we are able to become very close, very intimate, with some countries through trade activities, we might have a greater chance to influence them on the political side after having established tremendous contacts and rapport with them.
So nothing has changed. The objectives are the same. They're not in contradiction. You can have many foreign policy objectives. One of these objectives, obviously, is to promote democracy and respect for human rights. We not going to abdicate this objective. We're going to pursue it vigorously, but not at the detriment of other objectives that we have. Sometimes some people believe we should do that. However, we feel that if we compromise on other objectives, instead of helping our cause it would probably create more difficulties for us than the contrary.
.1625
Mr. English: Mr. Broadbent appeared before this committee some time ago. He spoke in the same sense, recalling historical examples from eastern Europe and Cuba where we had strongly supported trade as a way of advancing human rights. In that regard, The Toronto Star wrote on May 16:
- Canada led in criticizing, and eventually isolating, Rhodesia and South Africa. It spoke out
against brutal military regimes in Haiti, El Salvador and Guatemala. It was among the first to
condemn the Soviet Union when it invaded Afghanistan, and Iraq when it attacked Kuwait, and
Serbia when it attacked Bosnia.
Mr. Ouellet: I think you're giving examples of how we have to run our foreign policy in a pragmatic way. I believe every government has its own style in its approach. I believe previous Canadian government didn't have higher and stronger beliefs in democracy and human rights objectives than the current one does. I don't think Jean Chrétien is less convinced of human rights than Brian Mulroney or Pierre Trudeau. The approach might be different; the pragmatic approach might be different. Jean Chrétien is certainly much more honest, much more open. He will not tell you things he does not believe and will not hide facts.
The previous government, while they were talking about human rights, were increasing their trade with China. Mr. Chrétien would not have double-talk. When he went to China, he said unequivocally to the Chinese authorities that he had great reservations about their conduct in regard to human rights, but he did it in a way that probably was more effective than making a huge public debate in the limelight while in reality behind the scenes promoting commercial activities and doing the contrary of what you're preaching.
So I'm telling you that the pragmatic approach we have is one that does not mean we have abdicated any responsibility toward promoting human rights, our values, and what we believe in. We might be doing it a different way, but we think in the long run we will be more effective.
The Chairman: Mr. Patry.
[Translation]
Mr. Patry (Pierrefonds - Dollard): Mr. Minister, my question is about CIDA.
CIDA's budget shows that this organization will cut progressively the contributions it pays international financial institutions ``to a level establishing a balance between Canada's international interests and its financial capacity''. According to a story published in the Globe and Mail of May 8, CIDA has confirmed that the contributions Canada pays to several regional development banks - the African, Asian, Inter-American and Caribbean Development Banks - will decrease by $300 million over the next two years.
Since I do not have the proportional breakdown of the decrease in our contributions to the different banks I just mentioned, I would like to know, given these more than substantial reductions - and some talk about a 40% reduction - if Canada's fundamental interests are increasingly economical or if humanitarian issues are still part of your department's priorities and not relegated to a position of secondary importance.
.1630
Mr. Ouellet: Members of the parliamentary committee and several witnesses who appeared before them said that apparently the development banks take a banking approach and don't promote humanitarian projects enough.
Two representatives within these banks began to really stress that these international financial institutions hammer out their policies and start to focus on projects that meet the six objectives I mentioned to you earlier; namely, to promote basic rights, to meet primary humanitarian needs and to favour environmental projects in particular.
Our participation in these institutions certainly still is important, but we aren't the ones who control all the mechanisms and who can decide what investments these international financial institutions will make.
Because CIDA has to take a major 15% cut to its total budget, you thought that one of the programs that would be hardest hit would be the one that provides funding to international financial institutions. Why? Because we have less control over these institutions, and because we want to ensure that the funding we provide to these institutions is really being devoted to the priorities that we have set. When we have a bilateral program in a particular country, we can decide to do exactly what we want to, in accordance with our priorities, and obviously, as long as the partner nation agrees.
When we fund a Canadian governmental agency that works overseas, we give it funding for a project that corresponds to what we feel to be a high priority objective. Consequently, it is much easier to reach objectives through bilateral programs or through our programs with our Canadian partners who are working abroad. That's why we didn't cut as much in that area whereas we cut our funding to international financial institutions more. These institutions play an important role - I'm not underestimating their importance - but in a way they are beyond our control, and they don't necessarily spend money in the areas that we think are priorities.
Mr. Bergeron: Mr. Ouellet, I was somewhat surprised to hear your very logical presentation, which explained the 15% cut at CIDA and the 7.5% cut at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. I was surprised to learn that there was fat to be trimmed from the programs for the most impoverished countries and the programs for development assistance, yet there wasn't any to be trimmed, or less, from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, even though there have been reports of liberal spending within the Department.
However, I'd be interested in knowing by what percentage the budget of a department such as Human Resource Development was cut.
I would like to get back to the question that Mr. English asked about respecting human rights. The government proclaims its commitment to the protection and respect of human rights loud and clear, but this commitment that it displays is not reflected in concrete policies.
I listened to you tell us that your statement in Vancouver may have not fully reflected the nuance that you wanted this statement to have, given that you made it in English. That reminded me of my psychology courses, when the professor told us about slips of the tongue. We were told that slips of the tongue were a way for the dark and cloudy unconscious to come to the surface and override the conscious mind.
.1635
Mr. Ouellet, we have talked specifically about the case of China. I had an opportunity to meet with opponents to the Chinese regime who are openly opposed to this argument that if you want to change attitudes in countries, you have to maintain very close ties with these people and trade with them. We're told that that's the way to change attitudes.
We have had relations with China for a number of years now, and the regime that's in power is far from becoming more flexible. We saw a clear demonstration of this a number of years ago. In fact, our attention has been drawn to some rather troubling cases. A few days after Team Canada visited China, the government arrested 19 Chinese opponents whose only crime was belonging to opposition parties, opposition groups, and publicly demonstrating their opposition to the regime. They were sentenced to rather harsh prison terms a few days after Team Canada visited China, despite the strong protests that the Prime Minister made to Chinese authorities.
I find surprising that the government proclaims its commitment to human rights when I know that CIDA has hired as special advisor for Latin America, a former Guatamelan general who was found guilty of violating human rights. Specifically, he ordered the destruction of Maya Indian villages. I wonder, Mr. Ouellet, to what extent this policy is really grounded in reality, and I wonder just how much we can avoid examples such as these ones reoccuring within Canadian institutions, either here or abroad.
The Chairman: Perhaps it's a slip on your part, but this is the time allocated for questions, and each members only has five minutes. You have spent four of your five minutes asking your questions. I would like the Minister to respond.
Mr. Ouellet: I only have one minute to say, first of all, that the people who informed you of the arrests probably would have informed you of the same arrests whether or not Team Canada had visited China. The progress that we would like to see in China in the areas of human rights and democracy will only be possible if we can convince Chinese authorities that our democratic, legal and political systems are the best. If we don't have any contact with this people, if they are not exposed to Canadian values, and to Canadian ways of doing things, how can they accept and espouse our values? Do you think the Chinese will take an interest in our beliefs if we don't have any dealings with them?
I believe that as a country becomes more and more economically prosperous, as its people find out more about what's going on in other parts of the world and looks outward more, its leaders will not be able to prevent things from evolving.
In the old days, we used to talk about the Iron Curtain. How were the authorities in countries behind the Iron Curtain able to repress and subjugate the people? By keeping them in the dark.
.1640
Once they began to see what was going on in other places and realized that life was better on the other side of the fence, people wanted to jump over to the other side of the fence.
We respect those who hold a different opinion. I'm not saying that our position is irrevocably the best, but we believe that our approach of greater trade and economic liberalization will bring about greater respect for human rights. I hope that we will succeed. This is the approach that we wish to pursue.
As for the question about hiring a former Guatamalan general, I'm sure that Mr. Bergeron doesn't want to mislead anyone. CIDA did not hire this person. The Vice-President of CIDA held a series of consultations with a large group of stakeholders from various South American countries. A number of people attended these consultations to discuss the best programs that could be implemented so that CIDA and the Government of Canada could deliver their development programs in Central America more effectively.
Unfortunately, this person was invited to this meeting. Why was he invited? I'm sure it was because incorrect information was provided. Someone may have made a mistake about this person. He should never have been invited, and CIDA has apologized. In the future, it will not invite this general to its consultations again.
He was not hired, nor was he paid to attend and provide us with advice. His advice did not override anyone else's. One meeting was held, about 15 people were invited, and this general was among the 15 people who were there to dialogue with CIDA. Unfortunately, he shouldn't have been there. We apologize for this.
[English]
Mr. Martin (Esquimalt - Juan de Fuca): To go ahead again on what Mr. English andDr. Patry mentioned, you have more experience than any of us in international affairs.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Martin: There are a few other people around the table who are quite knowledgeable too.
I'd like to ask you this - and it is not trade isolationism. Are there not cases, as Mr. English pointed out, where we can send a clear moral message to countries that are engaging in patently self-destructive behaviours that are a threat to regional or international security or that are gross human rights abuses? Can we not employ trade as one of things we can do to try to change their behaviour?
I agree with you that trade is an excellent way to try to put out values, to try to change things within a country; but surely there are cases, as has happened before in our history, where we have used trade to good effect in order to change things within a country, as one of a number of things that we could employ to change the behaviour of a regime.
I ask that as one question, and it leads into another question that I think we've discussed before, which is the whole aspect of preventive diplomacy and conflict prevention.
One of the things you are doing is the rapid deployment force, which is an excellent initiative. But one of the other questions I have is that I think - and we've had this before - we are in a unique position to take the leadership role in conflict prevention and preventive diplomacy.
I am wondering, Mr. Minister, what specific plans you and your colleagues have towards this end. We had 40-plus major conflicts in the world last year. It's not going to change. In fact, tragically, as you know, it's going to get worse; which is going to have effects on our defence, peacekeeping requirements, and such.
.1645
Are we taking a leadership role on the world stage to defend...and if so, what initiatives do you have planned for the future to that effect?
The third question...I know you won't have a chance to answer these here, but if your colleagues could perhaps provide me with the information in the future I certainly would appreciate it. In the Cairo conference we were an active participant in that, and we were an effective participant in that. The increasing world population, I believe, is one of the greatest threats to global security, broadly defined. There have been a number of cuts through CIDA to organizations that were engaging in this.
What are our plans in the future for addressing this problem, which as an overarching problem abuts on so many different things and is going to have a hugely negative impact on the future of our country? What initiatives are we taking in family planning and education about population, particularly in developing nations?
The last question, which you'll have to get back to me in the future on, if you'd be kind enough to do that -
A witness: There are so many we may have to get back to you on the first.
Mr. Martin: This is the last one. I have many more, as of course everybody else does. Figure 21, on part III of the main estimates...Ms Labelle was kind enough to answer the question on the changes that have occurred here in personnel requirements. It's on page 65. Could your people please provide us with the exact change that has occurred?
I know Ms Labelle explained that some individuals who were with Foreign Affairs were transferred over to CIDA. It made it very difficult for me to understand that. Could you perhaps provide in the future, not only for CIDA but also for the Department of Foreign Affairs, what changes have been made in personnel requirements? That would be really appreciated.
Mr. Ouellet: On your last request, indeed we will supply the chair and the clerk with this information.
About your first remark, about Canada being a leader in promoting human rights and respect for human rights, let me say Canada has played a very active role in Geneva in this regard. There's a commission where indeed we prepare ourselves very seriously.
Every year the department brings to Ottawa a number of people interested in human rights. We consult them. We go country by country where we think there are problems. We build up cases. We review with them what we, the Department of Foreign Affairs, think of violations of human rights in these countries. We discuss them with international NGOs, with representatives of Canadian NGOs who are active in these regions, and we build our case.
Then we go to the forum where these ought to be discussed, at the United Nations in Geneva, before the human rights commission. We are very active in the preparation of the report that is published every year and we promote and present resolutions and we condemn countries. We do it within the framework of the United Nations, where we feel we can make a valuable contribution within an international context.
We do this within that context because we believe we are not a superpower and we should not pretend we're one and we should not behave like one. Why Canada is so well respected and in demand to assist throughout the world to solve conflicts is that we are genuine contributors to solutions. We do not rush people; we do not impose our will. We try to influence, but we do not impose our views. We submit our views and we do it in a way that has been very helpful throughout the years, and we want to continue in this regard.
.1650
Indeed, as you say, there are some cases in which we should impose an embargo on trade and so on. There are big cases in which the UN has decided to do it, and of course we're at the forefront of it in many cases, and we have, certainly in regard to South Africa, been very active.
Let's reflect on this. Over the years, all kinds of embargoes have existed. In fact, there was one in Haiti, and we were supporting it against the military regime. But in reality it took the will of the U.S. to send troops to impress on the military people that they should get the hell out of there and bring back Aristide. Embargo itself would not have done it. It could have lasted much longer, and who would have suffered? It would not have been the military dictators but the population.
We have to analyse the case and act in conjunction with others. Acting alone is not very productive.
Briefly, about preventive diplomacy, I'm glad you raised the matter, because we have been very active in this regard. As you know, we have indicated to the United Nations that we want to help the UN to have better mechanisms to promote peace in the world. One way of doing it is obviously by preventive diplomacy - to have the UN intervene early, at the beginning of a crisis, to prevent the spreading out of the crisis. We have submitted names of prominent Canadians to the Secretary General - names of people who have long careers in diplomacy and who could assist the United Nations in solving crises. We believe the UN should have this capacity to act quickly - to send people to negotiate and bring their influence to the parties in order that they make peace amongst themselves rather than expanding the crisis.
If these measures of preventive diplomacy do not work, we feel the UN should have a second instrument - that is, a rapid intervention force to be deployed quickly into the field to insist that the parties respect peace. The crisis in Rwanda, for instance, would not have happened if the UN had had this rapid intervention capacity.
So we're working on it. We have invited representatives of other countries to come and sit with us. We have military experts and diplomatic experts who are working to prepare a document that we will submit in the fall to the UN.
Mr. Martin: I'd like to make just one small point -
The Chairman: I'm really sorry, Mr. Martin, but there are three people on the list and there are only five minutes left, and you've used about ten minutes of the five minutes we had. I don't mean to be rude, but I wonder if we could hear Mr. Lastewka, Mr. Regan, and Mr. Jackson. I don't know if we'll get to everyone, but the minister must leave in five minutes.
Mr. Lastewka.
.1655
Mr. Lastewka (St. Catharines): Mr. Minister, I'll be brief, because my other question was answered.
My question goes back to CIDA and the change in policy. My concern was what and how we have instructed the NGOs that will be doing projects abroad in terms of making sure they are informing and training our people back home, because as we heard during our various meetings across the country, that was not happening. I want to make sure we fill that gap and that Canadians are very much aware of what we are doing and how we are doing it.
Mr. Ouellet: Yes, you're quite right that we will be more proactive in this regard. There are a number of very worthwhile and very well-known organizations - CARE and OXFAM, to name just two, but you could name many others - NGOs that have the networks, that have the capacity, and that could indeed do this work of sensitizing. We have indicated to them that we count on them to do it and we will monitor what they do.
Of course, as we approve projects that they do abroad on our behalf, we will look to see what they do locally, and in reality they do it because they're not getting funds only from CIDA; they're also getting funds from Canadians. In order to get funds from Canadians, they will have to sensitize Canadians to the need of being generous to others.
The Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Regan.
[Translation]
Mr. Regan (Halifax-West): Mr. Minister, you know that we have created a sub-committee of our committee to study human rights. As you can see, we are very interested in this issue.
You said that we had to become intimate with the regimes that do not respect human rights before discussing our concerns.
[English]
I guess I'm concerned about the level of intimacy we feel we have to have. Obviously the minister spoke to the Chinese about the issue. But, for instance, when we're dealing with people in Myanmar or Indonesia, at what level in those cases do we have to have intimacy?
It seems to me that while we have different values from those values the regimes and those people who are running the country have, there are international values that are encased in international conventions about human rights. Let's say that, for example, nowhere in the world is it okay to have disappearances, torture, executions, arbitrary arrests, or those kinds of things. I think we have to make it very clear that the difference in values is only between us and those regimes.
I note that The Vancouver Sun reported that one of your officials, in a briefing, said we can't just do trade but we have to understand the social side, and that there are different values in different countries. That may be true, but I'm not happy with that statement in the sense that it fails to recognize that in terms of basic human rights, we have international values. I hope we will constantly, whenever possible, advance those concerns with countries.
Mr. Ouellet: The third pillar of our foreign policy is to promote our values and our culture. It is through this third pillar of our foreign policy program that we will indeed very diligently and constantly promote our values to all those who do not share the same understanding of the advantages of the respect of human rights, democracy and so on.
.1700
But let me say that what we have to do is help some of these countries establish judiciary systems that will allow the people to take advantage of their rights, because if in a country you don't have the systems that protect the rights of individuals, you're nowhere. I prefer to be actively promoting specific projects with some of these countries and assisting them in establishing legal systems that will eventually be the protectors of the rights of individuals.
Mr. Regan: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to say that I agree with the foreign mission that our number one objective in our foreign policy is the development of prosperity and employment for all Canadians. The problem is that in many of these countries the development of employment and prosperity for all the people isn't the key objective. We have to be aware of that and try to urge them to go in that direction.
Mr. Ouellet: It was presented as one, two, three, but it could be in reverse. We have three main objectives. We could start by saying that we first of all promote our values and our culture, then we could say that we promote our jobs and prosperity; but we could equally say that our number one priority is to promote peace and security in the world. I think there are three dimensions, but they're all on the same level. They're all equally important, and I believe they are all complementary to each other.
The Chairman: Can you do it in 30 seconds, Mr. Jackson?
Mr. Jackson (Bruce - Grey): Yes. Mr. Chairman, I'm not going to ask for a response from the minister. I just want to give an accolade.
I had the privilege of going to South Africa to see the foreign policy of Canada at work. Despite the fact that I sometimes feel that Canada's the nice guy who courts the girl and gives her all the roses and flowers and helps out at chores.... Then when she wants to get married, the rough-looking, ugly guy comes up and takes her away. There's no question that in this world they happen to have a certain perception of us.
You're right, each country has its own nuance and each approach is different, but when it comes to the judiciary or the rule of law or the civil service - and heaven forbid we take our values there for the civil service; but no, they are good people. Those are things that people respect and want.
I know that my presence on the ground in South Africa will be to help. The NGOs are there to help them build homes. They're there to tell people how to care for their babies. They use our whole election system, and they have trust in Canadians. That is very important as we do our job around the world. I think that despite the fact that the missions and members of the government have to be mindful and watchful of these human rights, you do things well.
I want to say that you do do some things well, both you and your officials. Thank you very much for your time.
Mr. Ouellet: Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chairman: Mr. Minister, on behalf of the Committee members, I thank you very much for your presence here. You were kind enough to allude to our last report in your comments.
I want to tell you that we are going to table tomorrow, in the House, our fourth report, regarding the reform of the international financial institutions. This is a unanimous report. We have worked a lot on that report and I hope that the government will act or, at least, will accept the recommendations on which we have all worked very hard for several months.
Moreover, you were kind enough to tell us you were studying the problem of Canadian small and medium-sized firms access to the international markets. It is of the utmost importance for the government.
.1705
It is also a concern for our committee. As a matter of fact, our next study will deal precisely with small and medium-sized businesses access to funding and their place in the international economic order. I think that as far as this goes we both are on the same wavelength. Committee members are looking forward to government support.
We would like to thank you for coming to answer our questions.
Mr. Ouellet: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We read your report with a great deal of interest. I'm sure it will be very useful to us for the G-7 Summit.
[English]
The Chairman: I wonder, members, if I could just quickly announce that after the meeting tomorrow and after the deposit of the report in the House at 3 p.m., a press conference in which all parties will be represented will be held at 3:15 p.m. in the national press theatre, which is across the road on Wellington Street. There are a limited number of tickets available for other members of the committee. Please speak to the clerk if you would like to come. That conference will be televised on one of the parliamentary channels.
The next meeting of the committee is tomorrow at 4:30 p.m. It is not an official meeting; it's sub-group two, which will be receiving Mr. Jiacomelli, who is the director general of the United Nations office in Vienna. He's a second-ranking officer of the United Nations who will be here speaking to the committee.
I would remind you that on Thursday at 9 a.m. we have the IDRC as part of our budget review, and at 5 p.m. we have Mr. MacLaren, Minister of International Trade.
Mr. Martin: What's the topic?
The Chairman: Mr. Jiacomelli has several responsibilities at the United Nations, but it is my understanding that tomorrow he wishes to bring us up to date on the problems of the international control of the drug trade.
Mr. Martin: Good.
[Translation]
Mr. Bergeron: You also mentioned Mr. MacLaren.
The Chairman: Mr. MacLaren will appear on Thursday at 5 p.m.
Mr. Bergeron: Is that something new?
The Chairman: No, it was decided last week.
Mr. Bergeron: And how long will he be with us?
[English]
The Chairman: We will adjourn until tomorrow or Thursday. Thank you very much.