[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Wednesday, April 23, 1997
.1521 
[English]
The Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham (Rosedale, Lib.)): Order.
We would very much like to welcome the minister to talk on the estimates. He's accompanied by the deputy minister, Mr. Smith, and by Ms Edwards, Mr. Halpin, and Mr. Small.
Thank you very much for coming.
Minister, I think you would like to start with an opening statement.
[Translation]
The Honourable Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Foreign Affairs): I am here today to answer any questions the committee may have on the Department of Foreign Affairs estimates. I am prepared to answer any questions that committee members may have on this issue as well as on any other areas of interest to them.
However, I intend to focus my comments on issues related to child labour. As you know, my government has made children's rights a priority both nationally and internationally. Consequently, I read again with great interest the report of the subcommittee chaired by my colleague, John English.
I would like to congratulate the subcommittee for its ground-breaking report on the issue of child labour. The government's official response to this report is still being prepared, but today I will try to respond to a few important issues raised by the committee.
[English]
Mr. Chairman, I want to indicate that the basic premises and beliefs, the starting points, of the report are ones I very much share. But not all forms of child labour are necessarily exploitive. Those forms that are exploitive are both a human rights violation and a development problem. As such they require a broad response from national and international authorities, civil society, and the NGOs.
I want to take the opportunity to report that since the throne speech, in which we as a government signalled that the question of international children's rights would be a strong priority, the government has taken a number of measures.
On the first, I would like to point out, although I'm sure members are aware of it, that Bill C-27 has now received full support from both the Commons and the Senate, and as soon as royal assent has been brought forward it will be brought into law. This allows us to be one of the few countries in the world that can extend the protection of the Government of Canada and its legal system to children abroad. We will have the right to undertake prosecutions if Canadians go abroad for the express purpose of the sexual exploitation of children. In so doing, I think we add to a growing interest in developing a new covenant in this area. I'd like to take the opportunity to thank those members who I know were very interested in this measure. It's really a hallmark piece of legislation this Parliament will have passed.
.1525
We've also taken a number of bilateral initiatives, including projects funded by CIDA, which were reported to you by my colleague, Mr. Boudria, such as children's education in Africa. As some of you know, as a result of the recent trip I took to Cuba, a major workshop on the question of children's rights will be held next week in Cuba, which will involve NGOs from that country for the very first time. Also, there has been the establishment of a major children's fund in India, where we'll be able to work directly within India to establish programs relating to children's concerns.
There has been a high level of Canadian activity on the multilateral front dealing with child prostitution, pornography, and related issues. We have sponsored recently through the NAFTA secretariat of labour a child and youth seminar on labour to begin to look at the ramifications within the North American context, and in the working groups of the United Nations two optional protocols on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, one on prostitution and one on pornography. Canada is helping to draft those definitions and is working closely on the development of that covenant. We have taken a leadership role in the United Nations on this matter.
The World Customs Organization has now accepted a recommendation made by Canada dealing with child pornography as a contraband issue, including material transmitted electronically. Revenue Canada is now working on the international tracking of child pornography and pedophiles and the training of law and customs officers in Central and South America.
In February we ratified the Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. This helps prevent the international abduction, sale, and trafficking of children. We contributed $700,000 last year to the International Labour Organization's international program for the elimination of child labour for sorely needed basic research and analysis. We will participate actively in the conference planned for 1998 in developing a new convention on child labour.
In February the Secretary of State attended the Amsterdam child labour conference. Canada will also participate in the follow-up conference to be held in Oslo in October. These conferences are absolutely essential in raising awareness and understanding.
Nevertheless, as the report properly points out, much remains to be done. We need a Canadian strategy on the question of child labour. The subcommittee's report does provide a very excellent starting point from which we can develop that strategy. Having reflected on that report, I think the key considerations in that strategy should be a balance between a focus on developing countries and on our own domestic responsibilities. One cannot proceed without the other.
There needs to be a recognition that the root cause of much of our exploitation of children is poverty. Therefore, there are no quick fixes, but we must focus our programs increasingly on those areas. The problem is exploitive child labour, not child labour in general, and I think the assessment of that in the committee report was very helpful.
We should support the work of local actors, not substitute for them. I think that has been the strategy we've been following in several bilateral relationships.
We should be working to promote the negotiation of agreements that establish agreed international norms that will frame national legal standards and therefore give a new framework in which the question of the exploitation of children can be addressed.
Our strategy must be consistent with our approach on a wide variety of other issues dealing with development assistance and trade.
Taking those basic premises of the committee's report, I want to report that we are now working on a strategy and we will be in a position to provide an official cabinet-authorized report. But I'd like to use the opportunity today to announce several initiatives that can help direct us toward that strategy and that will give us more concrete steps in order to follow up on the recommendations made by members of this committee.
First, we're establishing what we'll call a child labour challenge fund, which will be a responsive fund to provide matching funds to companies and business associations to develop and promote their own guidelines, codes of conduct, and labelling schemes. The committee report spent a good deal of time talking about the need for the development of a business-oriented set of guidelines and codes of conduct. I think by offering this kind of incentive, up to $200,000 a year for the next two fiscal years, we will be able to give support to the business community in the development of those kinds of conduct.
.1530
The allocations will be made on the recommendations of a small steering committee, chaired by Senator Landon Pearson, who works as a special adviser to the department on children's matters. It will include two business representatives as well as one from labour and one from the NGO community to make sure the allocation is based on what can be considered to be the most appropriate the private sector needs. This responds, I believe, to the subcommittee recommendations that:
- ...the government develop and publish a set of policy guidelines for Canadian business practices
addressing the issue of child labour exploitation...with supportive involvement from the private
sector...
I want particularly to thank the committee for its recommendation. I hope this will be an important way of providing response.
In the spirit of this recommendation, the government wants to show its willingness to assist the private sector to develop and promote such schemes, but we want to challenge the private sector to develop its own guidelines rather than having the government do it for it. Corporate giants such as Levi and Reebok and the international groups can afford to develop their own codes of conduct. The aim of this challenge fund is to provide a short-term incentive to smaller Canadian businesses and business associations to undertake the up-front costs of researching, developing, and promoting guidelines and codes of conduct. We want to encourage private sector associations to work with labour, academics, and NGOs in the development of this kind of program.
[Translation]
Secondly, I'm also asking selected heads of Canadian missions abroad to provide input on the issue of child labour. I was impressed by the exchange of ideas I had with the Canadian High Commissioner to India during my visit in January. I would like to open up a dialogue with our missions in other developing countries. I hope to be able to include their recommendations in the Government's official response to the subcommittee report.
[English]
Just by way of example, many of our high commissioners and ambassadors have personally taken a very strong interest in this matter. Through their work with development projects and various kinds of trade and commercial interests they probably are almost in the best position to make assessments and evaluations country by country, locale by locale, as to what would be most appropriate, useful, and effective. By bringing them into the loop and now asking them in a sense to respond to the voice of this committee, I think we will be able to get a very practical, hands-on, pragmatic set of responses.
The deputy is here to answer questions. I think the guidelines will begin in three months or so, such that we would ask for a response so we could include it as part of the overall official response we make.
We also will be funding, through Status of Women Canada and our own department, an international conference on sexually exploited youth in the spring of 1998 at the University of Victoria. A number of young former sex-trade workers will prepare their own declarations and agenda to complement the Amsterdam conference. We will also include a number of NGOs working in this area internationally. This again I think will give us the opportunity to engage those who are directly involved and who know what the problems are. It will give us the ability to add to the international multilateral process in a way that is grounded in the very roots of the issue. I believe it will allow Canada to develop some leadership in this area.
I also intend to explore an approach suggested by the subcommittee, that we develop a series of specific bilateral partnerships with a limited number of countries in different regions to work for the elimination of exploitive child labour. As I see them, such partnerships could entail dialogue with host governments on this issue as a standing agenda in existing levels of consultations we undertake, partnerships with business organizations to promote the use of voluntary codes of conduct developed by Canadian businesses working in these areas, and where possible collaboration among our relevant human rights institutions to help strengthen protection of children's rights.
I also want to welcome the initiative of my colleague Mr. Boudria to hold a consultation with NGOs next month on the children and development issue.
In a preliminary way, those are the steps we will be taking as a way of responding to, but also preparing for, the full response of the government. I hope committee members will take this as a statement of good faith and our intention to follow up on what I consider to be one of the signal accomplishments of the committee in providing this report to us in an area that really demands the interest of us all.
.1535
We know there are many different avenues to the pursuit of child labour. Tackling the problem remains a massive task, but I believe it can be done. The committee has provided us with an excellent starting point as we develop an integrated Canadian approach. I want to thank the members of the committee and the chairman, Mr. English, for their contribution, and I reiterate my own personal commitment to keeping Canada at the forefront of this dialogue against exploitive child labour on the international scene.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
Madame Debien.
[Translation]
Ms Maud Debien (Laval East, B.Q.): Good afternoon, Mr. Minister.
The Chairman: Before the meeting began, Ms Debien, the whip's representative informed me that there may be a vote this afternoon. If this is the case, there will be a 30-minute bell. We can therefore take our time if we hear the bells start to ring.
Ms Maud Debien: Thank you.
Mr. Minister, on page 7 of the estimates and in the document we have been handed here, reference is made to three key objectives that are linked to various business lines. Budgets for these various business lines can be found in certain figures provided in the pages following.
I would like to draw your attention to figure 12 on page 23 of the English version, which pertains to international security and cooperation. We did a quick review of all of the other figures and concluded that the votes and expenditures were more or less the same from one year to the next, with some increases or reductions in certain cases. However, and I am still referring to figure 12 on page 23, where we can see that the budgets for cooperation, development assistance and international security are constantly shrinking.
It is generally accepted that the world will be a more stable place when there's less disparity amongst the revenue levels of the various states. How can it still be said in this document that we are striving for greater stability in the world, when Canada is always reducing its assistance and cooperation budgets? That is my first question.
My second question pertains to the same document, in figure 14 on page 27, which refers to a business line linked to the projection of Canadian values and cultures, a business line called public diplomacy; this time, the budget has been increased.
Mr. Minister, if I may, I would like to make a comment on the chapter dealing with public diplomacy which, in our opinion, is a chapter dedicated to departmental propaganda on Canadian unity. I would like to know why cooperation budgets are constantly being reduced whereas there has been an increase over last year's budget for public diplomacy which, for the most part, focuses on the promotion of Canadian unity. Incidently, this reminds us of Ms Copps's propaganda bureau.
[English]
Mr. Axworthy: On the first question, in the original estimates about $134 million was projected as our contribution to UNPROFOR, which was the United Nations operation in Bosnia. There is no longer an UNPROFOR. As a result, we didn't have to make that contribution to the United Nations. It was taken over, as we know, by the IFOR, and now SFOR, so it's under NATO provisions. As a result, we did not receive the level of requirements from the United Nations that we thought we would if UNPROFOR had continued its operations. There was a reduction in our UN assessments for peacekeeping from I think $134 million to about $56 million. That was simply because the major peacekeeping operation of the United Nations ceased to exist and therefore we didn't receive the estimates.
.1540
On the question of public diplomacy, I remind the members of the committee that goes back to a major policy review undertaken by this committee where it said there were three pillars to our foreign policy: the creation of jobs and employment, the protection of security through cooperation, and the projection of Canadian values abroad. That takes place through a wide variety of means. It's mainly through the support of a number of academic programs, exchanges for young people, and scholarships in which young Canadians are given the opportunity to study abroad, to learn languages, to learn about other countries.
I don't know if the member of the Bloc is suggesting we cease and desist from sending Canadians abroad. I think that would be a little short-sighted under the circumstances. As we become more globalized and increasingly our opportunities for young people to work are going to be within the international environment, I don't think we would want to deprive Canadian young people of the opportunity to learn about that environment or to participate in it.
The other major program is in the area of various forms of supports for Canadian cultural organizations to go abroad and to invite the participation of groups to come here, again so we can, as Canadians, open ourselves up into the world, so we can show the best of our artistic talents. It has nothing to do with propaganda. It has simply to do with our believing in Canada. We have some of the best artistic expression, so people understand the level of excellence we have in the country, the quality of our culture, and again the ability of Canadians to get experience, whether it is a dance group from Montreal or a theatre group from Vancouver being able to go abroad and show what they can do.
For example, as we speak there are a number of groups from across Canada, including Quebec, who are in Thessalonica at a major European arts conference where hundreds of thousands of Europeans who will be visiting this year will be seeing the finest of Canadian arts groups. That of course leads to all kinds of both economic and social spin-offs - economic in the sense that many times these groups are then asked to come back to perform in these countries. We are developing a very major market overseas for Canadian culture. It's one of the large income-earners. I think last year in our film and audio-visual areas we made something like $500 million in this area.
In the intrinsic artistic sense I think it's also very important, in this age when our world has become so democratized, where relations between countries are not simply between governments but between people, between groups, between artists, between businesses, between students, that the Canadian government provide - and it's a small amount - at this time $84 million of our entire budget to help Canadians become internationalized and therefore to become very active participants in this kind of world we live in.
The Chairman: Mr. Mills.
Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, Ref.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, Mr. Minister. I have a statement and four questions to fire at you. You like me doing that, I'm quite sure.
My comments first are that the $250,000 survey that was accomplished... I could ask questions about that, but I will only add that what it has helped me do is when I speak to young Canadians I advise them, obviously, to go to Ukraine and not to France and Italy. Obviously the Ukrainians feel Canadians are very sexy and the French and Italians feel we're not very sexy. Obviously we gained that from that $250,000 study, and that's of great value to young Canadians.
I would like to ask a couple of questions. First, you know my interest in Haiti and in a long-term plan for Haiti and the illiteracy, the unemployment, and having some sort of plan other than a six-month renewal or maybe five-year renewal plan.
My second question is about Bosnian war criminals. We have the UN ambassador to Bosnia saying he would like Canadians to investigate the allegations made by CBC on a program where they identified 250 potential modern-day criminals from Bosnia. They indicated we don't have any kind of extradition treaty with Bosnia and that these people might well be able to stay in Canada as citizens of Canada. I wondered what your department is doing about that.
.1545
Thirdly, I am concerned about missions such as the Zairean mission, where the Prime Minister and his wife are watching CNN on a Saturday afternoon and see a problem, and they come up with a mission. It's just about that fast. Then when it starts falling apart, the minister - I imagine it's not wise to say anything negative about the boss - continues to support that mission over the course of a week or two, saying he's sure it's going to work out and he's sure we can do something, and yet we're building up expenses all the time. The Americans, the officials from Rwanda, people who are in the know, certainly the Germans and the British, are all saying forget it, we're not part of this.
I would like to know why when we proposed missions like this for the deployment of troops that was opposed by the government, and why when we do decide to go on a mission it wouldn't be discussed in the House and subject to a free vote.
Finally, we know about Kodak tours, we know about photo opportunities, we know about 9% unemployment, and we know about claims made about Team Canada trips. But let's examine one of them, just as an example. In January 1996 Team Canada went to Southeast Asia, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia. The trip reportedly gained us $8.8 billion in potential business. Statistics Canada says that immediately following that excursion our trade with India fell by 21.3%, Pakistan by 33.7%, and Malaysia by 6.6%.
My feeling about dealing with countries, particularly those in Southeast Asia, is that you do it by working with the people, not with TV cameras in front of you. They are not those kinds of deal-makers. In fact the way you actually promote trade is by establishing relationships outside of the view of those TV cameras. So I challenge the minister to justify Team Canada photo opportunities, which we have seen so frequently.
There are four easy questions for you.
Mr. Axworthy: I'm always entertained by Mr. Mills' four easy questions. It's like being on the Letterman show.
The Chairman: Start with the Ukraine.
Mr. Axworthy: I would certainly start out by suggesting that the clearly astute judgment by the Ukrainians may or may not have something to do with the fact that I visited there three months before the survey was taken.
Mr. Bob Mills: Hey, if you've got it, flaunt it.
Mr. Axworthy: You can draw your own conclusion, seeing I haven't visited Italy yet. Nevertheless, we can make up for that.
I would like to point out, however, that the survey itself was a composite. It was paid for by a number of different sources. We did not pay for that part of the survey. We were much more interested in the questions about the attitudes both within Canada and outside Canada towards peacekeeping. I know you would be very interested to know, Mr. Mills, that there was overwhelming support for Canadians becoming involved abroad. Furthermore, about 70% or 80% of the respondents in virtually all of the countries credited Canada with being one of the major peacekeepers.
Mr. Bob Mills: We knew that before, though.
Mr. Axworthy: No, we didn't. No, I don't think so. I'd been listening to Reform Party rhetoric for a while, and I wasn't too sure. Therefore, I wanted to test it against what people out there in the country thought, and I was able to get a more accurate, analytical, scientific assessment in those areas.
I don't think there is anything wrong, particularly where so much of the cost was borne by other players, for Canada to take stock of itself and to use a planning tool to determine where we can more strategically fill the requirements and objectives for ourselves overseas, to see where we're doing well and where we're not doing well. In particular, I think it's very helpful to gain an assessment of where we are seen in the business and trade world.
.1550
For example, the perception many countries still have is of a country where we're a major resource producer. There isn't the same level of awareness of how we have made major gains in high technology, telecommunications. That clearly shows we have to do an awful lot more for promotion and development in those areas.
I could go through a lot of reasons, but I think it's very important that we be a government informed on our international standing and not simply fall prey to mythology or ideology or misperceptions. One way we can cut through a lot of that is to find out what people think.
Furthermore, I think - and I believe you would agree with me, Mr. Mills - there is a need to open foreign policy up, away from the closed rooms and simply the diplomatic enclaves and to a far broader engagement of people, to get a broader sense of opinion. That has certainly been one of my objectives - to open it up and make it far more democratic. And one way of doing that is to use the modern scientific tools of survey and analysis to gain much more of a sense of where Canadians are.
On the question of Haiti, I visited President Préval and the UN special representative and our own UN military people in Haiti about three weeks ago just to determine what they saw as their requirements. The starting point is that the Government of Haiti must make a judgment on how they see the development and evolution.
President Préval expressed very clearly that he thought the need for a major military commitment was ratcheting down and there had to be a transition. He is of the view that the original request he made to the UN, which was for a full twelve-month UN operation, would be all that was necessary. Now, as you know, the UN approved only an eight-month Security Council mandate. Taking his basic position, that another four months would allow them to complete the ongoing development work with the national police force and strengthen their own security component, I think we can use that as a basis for whatever further action the UN Security Council wishes to take.
I think it would be important to mention as well that in that context there's a real interest in shifting it much more to a civilian operation. Members of the committee have heard me talk many times about the need to be much more active in peace-building as opposed to peacekeeping, about a civilian equivalent of peacekeeping but one designed to help build institutions and build practices in which countries can stabilize their own civil society and also begin providing more democracy. That seems to be the direction President Préval would also like to move in, and again, he recommended that any continuation of international action be on the civilian side. But there may have to be an ongoing military security back-up just to make sure their own safety is protected during that period.
That's where it now stands. Until the United Nations actually comes up with a resolution at the Security Council we won't know what our commitments will be. I have said publicly we are prepared to respond to President Préval and prepared to respond to a further UN request or invitation, but the actual nature of that will now take place, because that's a decision that must be made by the UN Security Council. Of course we will be part of those discussions.
I don't expect, Mr. Mills, those will take place until mid-June. That would be my guess for when the Security Council would address that matter. Depending on what happens, we'll certainly be glad to consult the committee on whatever form or nature it takes.
On the question of intervention in Zaire, we've been over that ground before. I don't think it came about simply because of a weekend chat.
One thing I should point out is I did, on the request of the Prime Minister, specifically meet with your leader, Mr. Manning. I talked to Ms McDonough, Mr. Charest, Mr. Gauthier, the four leaders of the parties represented in the House of Commons, specifically to brief them on the situation in Zaire and to request their response. I'm not sure you were in the country at the time, but we did receive an indication at the time - because it was a holiday period the Commons wasn't sitting - that we should go ahead and we should try to mount a humanitarian mission. So we did make an effort to -
Mr. Bob Mills: Our committee was advised by a reporter in Germany.
.1555
Mr. Axworthy: Mr. Mills, I spoke to your leader. If your leader doesn't speak to you -
Mr. Bob Mills: Our chairman didn't know.
Mr. Axworthy: I was speaking to the leaders of the parties. I can't be responsible for interparty communications. God knows I have enough problems with my own, never mind worrying about what happens in the Reform Party.
That was the consultation we undertook, and we received a commitment that they would follow through with their respective party players on the matter.
I would take exception, though... I think the Zaire mission did play a very important role in dealing with the refugee situation. It was clearly the impending involvement of an international force that was the catalyst that resulted in the refugees returning to Rwanda. It would not have happened, in my view and in the view of many -
Mr. Bob Mills: It happened on a Friday and the decision was made on the Sunday.
Mr. Axworthy: Am I allowed to continue?
Mr. Bob Mills: Fine.
Mr. Axworthy: Everybody is allowed their own opinion, but I would suggest if Mr. Mills wants a broader opinion he should talk to many of the countries involved, because I can tell him that in my discussions with African countries, with European countries, they were certainly of the opinion that the Canadian initiative to mount a humanitarian mission was a necessary prerequisite and it really resulted in the parties, particularly the rebel groups, opening up the gates and letting the refugees go back. If there had not been the prospect of an international force coming the refugees would not have moved.
You can take my assessment of it, but I suggest you get other people's as well.
By the way, I should indicate to the committee that we will be undertaking a series of meetings where we will bring together a variety of international experts to do an assessment on what happened in Zaire, and we will certainly be making those reports public.
On the final point -
The Chairman: I wonder if I could interrupt you for a couple of points, just to help the committee understand where we are going. When we have ministers we normally break our questions into ten-minute segments. Mr. Mills' segment is now up. Normally I would just say go on and finish the last one, but we have four other members on the list.
Mr. Axworthy: Okay, I'll come back to it.
The Chairman: A vote has been called. The vote will be at 4:19, I'm advised by the clerk. I would suggest we will have to rise at 4:09 in order to get over there in time. That gives us another eleven minutes or so. I don't know what your schedule is, but you were scheduled to stay with us until 4:30. I don't know whether you're going to be able to come back here or not, or whether we'll end up adjourning at 4:09, when we leave.
Bearing that in mind, I wonder if we could go on to Mr. English. Maybe if we get back toMr. Mills we can finish the last one. Mr. English.
Mr. John English (Kitchener, Lib.): I'll try to be very quick.
I would like to thank the minister for the comments about the report on child labour on behalf of Madam Debien and Mrs. Bakopanos, who were on the committee, as well as a couple of other members. I think the items you listed are very much part of the integrated Canadian approach to child labour issues we had recommended in the report. We look forward to further recommendations in the future.
I would say in response to Mr. Mills's comment about the sexiness of Canadians in Ukraine, I know Mr. Mills was in the travel business before he came here. I would have thought this would be valuable commercial intelligence for a travel agent.
Mr. Axworthy: Do you think I should become a poster boy?
Mr. John English: Well, you could. You should ask him afterwards.
The other point I wanted to raise was that in answer to a question from Madam Debien you made reference to our culture policy, in broad terms. In our report on foreign policy a couple of years ago we talked about a third pillar. I want to ask you whether you still regard policies in that area as a third pillar of our foreign policy.
Mr. Axworthy: Let me answer in two ways. One thing that has been particularly clear to me in the time I've been in this office is that as the international agenda shifts much more into new areas, matters dealing with drug trafficking or terrorism or children's labour exploitation, we need a different set of tools. The traditional tools of diplomacy aren't of themselves sufficient. We need to add to the arsenal a bit, and the most effective way is to promote, through the new technologies of information systems and other areas, the opportunity to develop a much more integrated network of communication.
.1600
That includes particularly using what I call the ``value-added'' in our foreign policy, which is our people. We have a highly trained, experienced group of diplomats, but also people in the universities, people in the NGOs, people in the business community, journalists, and others, who are probably in many cases the most effective contacts in trying to come to grips with these new issues. Whether it's UN conferences on developing women's rights or coming to grips with the issue of drug trafficking, if we don't have this kind of much broader, more extensive, inclusive exchange between Canadians and the rest of the world we're going to shrivel up and we won't be able to maintain our niche as an active international participant.
So the third pillar becomes a matter of enlightened self-interest. It's absolutely essential that we try to promote as broadly and as actively as possible that if we don't have a highly educated, conscious group of young Canadians who understand the way the world is working and the way the world is changing we won't be able to do the things we have to do overseas. One way we can ensure they happen is by making sure they have the opportunities to become educated overseas and bringing international students here at the same time.
The Chairman: Mr. LeBlanc.
Mr. Francis LeBlanc (Cape Breton Highlands - Canso, Lib.)): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Minister, the Conservative Party is not here around the table, but they have released their platform, and part of their platform is a proposal to cut some $325 million from the foreign affairs department and another $473 million from CIDA as part of a government expenditure reduction program of $12 billion. I wonder if you could share your views on the impact such a proposal would have on the operations of your department.
Mr. Axworthy: I was interested in looking at that. We have been through a number of program review assessments. The kind of proposal contained in that document would mean almost 25% of the Department of Foreign Affairs would be cut. If most of that came, as they say in the document, from overseas missions, it would mean we would have to close between sixty and eighty of our missions abroad. That would be almost half the total of our overseas presence, which means we would basically wipe out Canada's presence in Latin America, Africa, and large parts of Asia. The ability of Canada to be a global player in trade, development, human rights, and political security would basically be non-existent in large parts of the world.
I would also suggest that even with some of the things we talked about today, the opportunity to have an active presence on the question of children's rights, on drug trafficking, we would simply not have the ability to maintain that kind of active federal presence. There's a fundamental contradiction in the idea that Canada should be more actively involved and yet at the same time, by shutting down almost half our overseas missions and completely eliminating the various contributions and grants programs that allow us to be in the United Nations, to work on children's rights, to promote the development of programs in Cuba, to develop democracy in those countries, peace-building, information systems, wiping all that out.
We would probably have to do what the Australians do, which is to retreat into one region, as they decided to do three or four years ago. We would simply have to give up being prepared to be an active international global player and relegate ourselves to being a regional player. I think that would be the end result of those proposals.
The Chairman: Madam Bakopanos.
Mrs. Eleni Bakopanos (Saint-Denis, Lib.)): Actually, Mr. English asked the first part of my question. I just want to congratulate the minister for taking into account and responding to the report on child labour.
I do have a second question, a quick one on the Albanian election in June. I don't know if it's appropriate, but are we going to be sending observer participants to the election?
Mr. Axworthy: Yes, we've already indicated we would be prepared to support any democratic developments in the OSCE, and if that included a request for observers or monitors for the election we would be prepared to support it.
.1605
We have, as you know, established this new peace-building strategy, with a small fund that goes with it, and we are now working on a number of proposals in which we offer to aid and assist in reconciliation issues in various countries where there are major disruptions, such as in Albania, using Canadian skills in conflict resolution, mediation, and brokerage. I think these are areas where we want to increasingly put emphasis, and we will certainly keep the committee informed on the initiatives we're taking in those areas.
The Chairman: Mr. Assadourian.
Mr. Sarkis Assadourian (Don Valley North, Lib.): Regarding the comments my colleague from the Reform Party made, if you need help to improve the image in Italy and France, let me know and I'll volunteer. I'm sure my colleague from the Reform Party will volunteer too.
Mr. Axworthy: I'm afraid you'd overpower them, Mr. Assadourian.
Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: On the subject of landmines, we were involved in a conference here. Can you give us the latest information as to where we are, what we are doing about this, how many countries are involved, and what difficulties we are facing, if any?
Mr. Axworthy: I think we've made very substantial progress since the meetings here. As you know, we set out a timetable for countries to return to Ottawa in December of this year for a treaty on the outright ban of landmines.
Our officials have been working very actively in developing with other countries a draft treaty. There was a meeting in Vienna three or four weeks ago where that draft was developed. It's now being circulated to a number of countries for their comments. We want to provide enough flexibility in the draft so that it can bring in the largest number of countries possible. I think to date about 50 or 60 countries have indicated their willingness to sign a treaty that outright bans them.
I'm very encouraged by the fact that a few weeks ago the South Africans, joined by Mozambique, Botswana, and other major African states, indicated they're now prepared to get involved, and the OAU is holding a major meeting in about a month's time on the whole anti-personnel landmines issue to see if Africa as a continent would come out in support of this kind of initiative. So we really have a momentum going.
On the other side of the scale, other countries are wondering if this is running counter to the process in Geneva, the conference on disarmament. We said no, that the two should be working in an interactive fashion. The problem is that at Geneva nothing is happening. They haven't even been able to agree on an agenda to put the landmines issue forward. What I think is happening increasingly with those countries, especially some of the European ones, that thought the conference on disarmament was the place to go is they are now having second thoughts and now recognizing that if we're going to keep the momentum going, the Ottawa process offers the best opportunity.
As I say, our people abroad are working very actively, and ministers are very much in direct contact. I know that a number of members of Parliament who have attended the meetings of the IPU and various other parliamentary associations have taken on this cause. I think we can do something very significant.
It was even interesting that during the Prime Minister's visit with President Clinton a week or so ago, there was very extensive discussion. We agreed, for example, there would be a meeting of officials from the United States and Canada to look at the treaty to see what could be done to accommodate some of the U.S. concerns.
So I think we're now making real headway in bringing on board some of the major countries. Just this week President Cardoso of Brazil, which is the largest country in Latin America, indicated they are now supportive of our process.
The Chairman: Thank you, Minister. I think we're going to have to -
Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Is there a timeframe?
Mr. Axworthy: December is the date.
The Chairman: We're going to have to break, but I'd just like to make three observations. The first is on Mr. Mills' point about the fact we were travelling in Germany when the Zaire mission came up.
I think, Minister, it's fair to say I don't expect to be wakened by a phone call in the middle of the night from you or the Prime Minister to tell me what you're thinking on these matters. I think it's fair to say the committee has been very thoroughly consulted since you've been the minister of the department. We've had the opportunity of full and open debates on these issues, and I think we've made a great deal of progress in being involved. I think there's a balance to be made between the need for immediate action when it's required and consultation when it can be achieved. I think that balance has been achieved by you as minister, and I think I can speak for most of the committee members in saying we appreciate that.
I'd also like to say that we've been told that Mr. Gordon Smith, who's with the minister today, will be leaving the department in the summer. Mr. Smith has had a very distinguished career and is now the senior civil servant in the department. I'm sure all of the members of the committee wish him well in his new post at the University of British Columbia.
We really wish you well, sir. You've been a wonderful deputy minister, and I know that at all our meetings with you we felt we had your full cooperation. We wish you well in your future career.
Some hon. members: Hear, hear!
.1610
The Chairman: We'll have to adjourn until 9:30 tomorrow morning because after the vote we won't have time to come back. On the agenda we have the NATO resolution, the Hong Kong vets, and the subcommittee on trade disputes, but we should deal with those items very quickly. Thank you very much.
We're adjourned till 9:30 tomorrow morning.