:
I'm calling the meeting to order. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), this is a study on maternal and child health.
On March 31, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women passed the following motion:
That the Committee invite the Minister of International Cooperation, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister State (Status of Women) to appear before the Committee to present a detailed plan of the maternal and child health strategy which the Prime Minister intends to present to the other G8 leaders before their scheduled meeting in June.
This is why we're here today. Two ministers are here: the and the .
We also have witnesses who are here to support the ministers. They are: Suzanne Clément, coordinator, head of agency, Status of Women Canada, and Suzanne Cooper, research analyst, and, from the Canadian International Development Agency, Margaret Biggs, president.
Before we begin, I will let everyone know that you are each allowed 10 minutes to present. That's the rule at this committee. I will give you a signal when you have two minutes left. At the end of 10 minutes, there will be rounds of questions and we will try to get in as many rounds as we can.
We will now hear presentations. I'll begin with the Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister for the Status of Women.
Minister.
:
Madam Chair, ladies and gentlemen members of the committee, thank you for inviting me, as well as my Deputy Minister, Suzanne Clément, and Suzanne Cooper, who are here with me. It is my pleasure to participate in the current discussion on maternal and child health.
[English]
I am proud that our government is committed to helping women in Canada and throughout the world, as demonstrated by the Prime Minister's leadership on the G8 initiative for maternal and child health.
While this particular initiative falls under the purview of my colleague, Minister Oda, in my role as Minister of the Status of Women, I believe that empowering women and fighting for equality, liberty, and an end to violence against women are not only ideals that we should be striving for in Canada but blessings that should be enjoyed by all women around the world.
[Translation]
Like Canadian women, all women deserve equality, access to education, a life free from hunger, disease or violence, and the right to know that their children are safe at school. These freedoms and possibilities should not be limited to women who are lucky enough to live in western countries, they should be available to women everywhere in the world.
[English]
That is why our government, for instance, pushed for the pardon of a Saudi woman sentenced to jail time and lashings for a crime as trivial as being present with men who were not her relatives. That is why we spearheaded a resolution at the United Nations that censures Iran for its systematic violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of its citizens, including women.
And it is why our government has expressed deep concern about the unsatisfactory human rights situations in many countries, especially with respect to women's rights, and called on these countries to live up to their international obligations such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
Through the work of our brave men and women in uniform and our allies, Canada is helping to greatly improve the lives of Afghan women and their families. We have now vaccinated more than 200,000 children and more than 175,000 women of child-bearing age against measles and tetanus.
The Microfinance Investment Support Facility for Afghanistan has provided more than 418,000 Afghans--two-thirds of whom are women--with small loans to start businesses and build better lives. In a country where only eight years ago girls were denied access to formal education, there are now over two million little girls going to school. Also, our most basic and fundamental democratic right, the right to participate fully in the political life of their country, a right that Canadian women have enjoyed for over 90 years, is now enjoyed by all of Afghanistan's citizens--men and women included.
Improving the lives of girls and women around the world also includes standing up for their safety, rights, and dignity as individuals. Here at home, our government is emphasizing the equality of men and women under the law and condemning barbaric practices such as female genital mutilation, so-called honour killings, and all gender-based violence.
[Translation]
I am proud to be part of a government that is committed to ensuring that every woman is treated with respect and dignity, a government that speaks for those who have been silenced.
[English]
But our principled stands abroad never absolve us of our responsibility to address the many challenges that women face here at home.
[Translation]
Working towards eliminating violence against women and girls will remain a priority for me and for our government, as it should be for everyone in this room. We are a strong and determined voice promoting safer communities and environments for Canadian women. This is why one of the Women's Community Fund's priorities is to finance projects that support victims of violence, so as to help women and girls who are marginalized, frightened and abused and offer them real and positive opportunities, the results of which are life changing.
[English]
By providing this funding at the community level, we ensure that the needs of women in remote, rural, cultural, and urban communities are properly addressed so that we can work together to end this bane on our society.
This is in addition to some of the other measures our government is taking to protect vulnerable women, such as raising the age of consent from 14 to 16 years to protect young people, including girls, from sexual exploitation by adult predators.
We've strengthened the peace bond provisions concerning those previously convicted of sexual offences against children, and we have also improved the availability of testimonial aids for vulnerable adult victims and witnesses, including women who have experienced violence.
[Translation]
Human trafficking is an appalling crime that affects women, and particularly Aboriginal women, some of whom are not even 12 years of age.
The Criminal Code is being amended again in order to enact three specific provisions that would make it illegal to participate in human trafficking for the purpose of exploitation, such as forced sexual exploitation or forced labour, to acquire financial or material gains through human trafficking, and to dispose of or keep travel or identity documents for facilitating human trafficking.
[English]
These measures are designed to protect victims, many of whom are women.
:
On the issue of protecting women from human traffickers and preventing serious crimes and human rights violations, I firmly support the bill initially brought forward by my Conservative colleague, Joy Smith, to impose a mandatory minimum penalty of five years' imprisonment for trafficking a person under the age of 18 years.
Our government's campaign to increase public awareness and encourage the reporting of suspected cases of human trafficking has been widely praised by both the legal community and victims' groups.
Some of the most important measures that our government has taken, though, are those that will help some of the most vulnerable and disenfranchised women in this country--aboriginal women. That is why we have reintroduced the Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, which will significantly improve the quality of life for aboriginal women and children living on reserves by providing them with basic rights and remedies on fair division of property.
It is frankly inexcusable that in the 20th century in Canada, aboriginal women, one of the most disenfranchised groups in Canada, do not have the same rights under the law that the rest of us are entitled to.
[Translation]
Our government has also introduced the Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act, to amend two discriminatory provisions in the Indian Act, thus enabling the grandchildren of aboriginal women who lost their status unjustly to register.
[English]
This year's budget also provides funding to address the disturbingly high number of missing and murdered aboriginal women. As you know, we will be taking concrete actions to ensure that law enforcement and the justice system meet the needs of aboriginal women and their families.
[Translation]
Madam Chair, as Minister for Status of Women, it is a privilege for me to work on improving women's lives. I am extremely proud of the work done by our government for women here and abroad.
I hope that we will be able to work together to truly improve the lives of women and children in some of the poorest countries of the world, as well as the lives of the most vulnerable women here, in Canada.
Thank you.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair, for giving me the opportunity to speak to the members of the committee.
Improving the lives of mothers and their children is key to reducing poverty levels in a real and sustainable way.
[English]
This year the international community will review the progress made towards achieving the millennium development goals before the 2015 deadline. Of all the MDGs put forward a decade ago, improving maternal health is the one that lags the furthest behind.
Madam Chair, although recent evidence indicates that maternal mortality rates are improving, progress has been uneven, not only among developing countries but within countries themselves, with mothers in rural areas and the least accessible areas always suffering the most.
It is also the MDG goal that has received the least amount of support. But more important, progress has not been fast enough, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, where maternal mortality decreased by only 2% between 1990 and 2005. According to the World Health Organization, every year more than 500,000 women die during pregnancy and childbirth from largely preventable causes, most of them in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia.
Concerning the results to date for reducing child mortality—MDG 4—the situation is equally concerning. Although mortality of children under five years has declined steadily worldwide, we have not yet achieved the results required to meet the MDG goal by 2015.
Every year three million babies die within the first week of their lives, and almost nine million children in the developing world die before their fifteenth birthday from largely preventable causes, such as pneumonia, diarrhea, malaria, severe acute malnutrition, measles, and HIV. That is why the Prime Minister chose to focus on maternal and under-five child health at the G8 summit in June.
A few weeks ago in Halifax, all G8 development ministers unanimously agreed that improving the health of mothers and children is a top priority for the G8. There was a strong consensus that our scope of action would require a comprehensive approach that includes the full continuum of care, from pre-pregnancy through pregnancy, delivery, and early childhood. This means integrating high-impact interventions at the community level, such as antenatal care, postpartum care, family planning, treatment and prevention of diseases, prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV, immunization, and nutrition.
Ministers really stressed the importance of improving and integrating nutrition into development goals. The nutrition of mothers is critical for the health of their newborns, and it is absolutely essential to early childhood development and building a healthy population in the long run.
Most important, in keeping with the Prime Minister's focus on accountability, which he has set out as a key theme of our G8 presidency, we agreed to a set of principles by which to guide our work ahead. We agreed to greater predictability, accountability, and transparency of our aid; to pay what is pledged and to fulfill commitments; to shift the focus from inputs only to sustainable outcomes; to improve coordination using country systems to reinforce the ownership and accountability of partner countries to their citizens.
Specific to our G8 priority of maternal and child health, we wanted to make sure that we are making a difference, so we agreed to the long-term sustainability of results; to build upon proven, cost-effective, evidence-based interventions; to focus upon countries with the greatest need while continuing to support those making progress; to support country-led national health policies and plans that are locally supported; to increase the coherence of our efforts through better coordination and harmonization at the country, district, and community levels; and to strengthen our monitoring, reporting, and evaluation.
We agreed that enduring progress does not require new mechanisms, funds, and structures. Rather, existing mechanisms and structures need to be aligned around a common set of goals and aid effectiveness principles, particularly in support of country plans and systems.
As the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon, has said,
We know how to save mothers' lives. Some simple blood tests, a doctor's consultation and someone qualified to help with the birth can make a huge difference. Add some basic antibiotics, blood transfusions and a safe operating room, and the risk of death can almost be eliminated.
Over the past months, I've met with representatives of our Canadian non-governmental partners such as CARE, UNICEF, World Vision, and Save the Children, who shared their collective experience and knowledge with me. Canada is also working closely with its multilateral partners such as the UN, the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the World Food Programme, the OECD, and the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health.
Earlier this month, I was at the United Nations supporting the new action plan on maternal and child health as well as the new plans scaling up nutrition. I have also consulted the African Partnership Forum, because, as you know, the situation on maternal and child health is most critical in Africa. I'm happy to report that many African governments, such as those in Mali and Tanzania, are making important investments and developing new partnerships to advance this important issue.
As we approach the G8 summit in June and the United Nations MDG summit in September, G8 members have taken stock and acknowledged that much remains to be done. With solidarity on this issue, Canada knows that the G8 can make a tangible difference in the lives of millions of mothers and children. As has been pointed out, “A society has little chance to thrive if it fails to keep its mothers healthy and its babies alive”.
Thank you.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Let me begin by saying thank you for coming today, Ministers. We appreciate your being here, but I must confess that I don't know where to begin. I've just read the motion passed by the committee inviting you here; it was to ask you to present a plan on maternal and child health strategy that you intend to present at the G8, and we certainly did not get that.
I'm going to speak quickly because I have some comments to make, but I really would like your responses. We know that there were briefing notes prepared for CIDA in January that were disregarded by the minister. We know that three months after the briefing it was confirmed that Canada's contribution to the G8 on maternal health and child health would not include funding for safe abortion.
My question is, what happened during this time? Did anyone at the cabinet stand up for women's rights and women's health? There seems to be a paucity of advocating for women's health.
Minister Oda, did you make the decision not to fund abortion? If you did not, who made that decision?
On my other question, the G8 is Canada's signature initiative. As you reference yourself in the brief, there will be no additional funding given to that. Can you tell us how this plan will happen with no additional funding and where the funding will come from if there won't be any additional funding?
For my other comment, I note that you referenced the African Union. I was at a breakfast yesterday sponsored by the nurses where the African Union made the point quite specifically that what they need in Africa is a full range of reproductive health, including access to abortion when and where it is legal.
I'm sorry to throw all of this at you, but my time is limited, and I'm astounded by the lack of response to the motion as it was originally passed.
:
Thank you very much for the question. I am surprised that you are not clear in your understanding of what we've laid out as our G8 initiative.
We have said that our initiative is about saving the lives of mothers and children. We have identified that MDGs 4 and 5 are not progressing as quickly as possible to meet the goals of 2015. I find it shocking that, in the past, the health of mothers and reducing their mortality have been supported least of all, particularly by Canada. Canada has done some very good work, but when you look worldwide, this area is something that has not received the kind of support that it should have.
I want to make one correction. I did not say there would be no additional funding. What I said and what was also agreed to by all of the G8 ministers, by the UN family, and by the Secretary-General of the UN, was that we do not need new mechanisms, new funds, or new structures. What we have to do is make sure that we surge our support behind maternal and child health, so that we will progress faster towards reaching the goal in 2015. We did not say that there is no additional funding.
What this government will not do, and which has been done by previous governments, is to announce a fancy name for a fund while having no intention to fulfill pledges. We're saying—and we've been told this by the World Health Organization, UNICEF, and all the agencies involved—that there is a multiplicity of funds and mechanisms that are all very good and all very effective. We don't need a new mechanism.
We have mechanisms that are effective. What we have to do is increase our support for them. Canada will be increasing its support and will be doing its part as part of the G8 initiative.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome, ministers. It is a privilege to have the two of you with us today. We have very little time, and many questions to ask. My comments will tie in what Ms. Neville was saying earlier.
Given the fact that we do not have any numbers or an action plan... You know that when we lack knowledge and are not aware of the facts, doubts can arise.
Minister Oda, you said that the decision to not finance abortion abroad was made by the government. There are 308 Members of Parliament, and perhaps we would have liked to be consulted on this issue. After all, we are a cross-section of our constituencies, and citizens who are Quebec and Canada's citizens, after all.
First of all, I would like to know whether CIDA consulted civil society regarding the strategy you have announced. If so, which organizations were consulted?
In addition, Madam Minister, in your speech you said that, according to the World Health Organization, more than 5,000 women die annually worldwide. That is terrible.
A voice: It was 500,000.
Ms. Johanne Deschamps: And apparently 13% of those women die as a result of unsafe abortions. We cannot forsake these women. After all, morally and socially, we have a... As a woman and a Canadian citizen, I feel obligated to support these women. Are we to leave them by the roadside to die while we take care of others whose problems are not related to abortions performed by backroom charlatans?
[English]
Let me first of all answer the question. As was indicated clearly at committees, publicly, and also within the House of Commons, CIDA has never financed abortion and does not finance abortion.
What we have done and have indicated as a G8 family is that family planning is part of contributing to the health of mothers. What family planning does is enable a woman to space her children and also have more control over the number of children she would have in her family. I just want to make sure that's clear.
I also want to make sure that...the definition used by the world agencies internationally, the multilateral organizations, was based on the Cairo program of action. If you look at paragraph 8.25.... I will read it: “In no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning”. It then goes on to say: “Prevention of unwanted pregnancies must always be given the highest priority...”.
That is the action plan we are following. That's the action plan that the UNFPA has based their definition on, as have other United Nations agencies. So we are in step with the definition of family planning. Family planning, as you would see....I hope it was provided to you with a summary of our G8 development ministers' meetings and it is in the list of possible actions that could be taken.
We have consulted. In my opening presentation, I've indicated the organizations that have been consulted. I know that the department has also extended the consultations as well. Not only that, I've met with my G8 counterparts by travelling internationally to their countries, as well as consulting with them at the Halifax development ministers' meeting.
I also consulted with the experts we have in Canada. We invited all the major children's hospitals in Canada to send representations and to give us advice, and so many of them came forward with extensive experience in developing countries to give us advice. These are scientists, academics, and doctors who are actually working and giving advice to the World Health Organization. We should be proud that so many of them are Canadians.
So we have consulted, and if you would like a fuller list, I can ask the department to provide that to you--a full list of not only those I've consulted with, but also the consultations we've had as an agency.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Minister Oda and Minister Ambrose.
This is a question for .
First of all, I'd like to congratulate you for the good work of CIDA under your leadership on behalf of Canada abroad. I just came back from the Philippines and visiting the World Vision resettlement camp in Antipolo. We donated a good chunk of money to help those who suffered in the typhoon, and I am glad to tell you that everybody there thanked Canada for all the great work CIDA has done. They are now staying in temporary camps, but they will be moving to a permanent resettlement area that all the foreign aid partners worked together to build and will be used very soon.
There is now clean water, and I'm very happy to tell you that although some of the children were not in very good health at first, on the spot our ambassador there has done a great job. He's now working with World Vision to put together a proposal to make sure the children and women will get the best health care they can. I would like to congratulate you on that.
Our government is committed to helping those who are in need all over the world, and clearly our government is also committed to assisting women and children. Our G8 initiative is on that very subject.
Can you comment on the track record this government has in meeting commitments, particularly in Africa, and doubling our aid? The opposition continually claims that we are abandoning Africa. Is there any merit in their accusations?
:
Thank you very much for the question.
We are not abandoning Africa, as you've said that others are saying. In fact, rather than rhetoric, our facts and our actions will speak louder.
Certainly, as the minister, I noted that many times countries and governments will go to conferences, will make large announcements, make pledges, etc., and not fulfill those commitments and pledges. That is why accountability is so important when you're doing development work. If you don't fulfill your commitments, it means the countries or the recipients have no way of having any predictability, and that's why in Halifax the G8 ministers decided that we would ask the OECD to do some work for us to ensure that we can increase the predictability of our aid support to all developing countries.
Regarding Africa specifically, I've said this, and I will say it again, because I'm very proud of it. It has been noted by our partners, it has been noted internationally, and it has been noted by NGOs and even in a recently released report that Canada has met its commitment to double its aid to Africa, which was part of the Gleneagles G8 commitment. We did that one year ahead of the deadline and we maintain that doubling aid level.
In fact, we are meeting our commitment for the African education program and the African health systems program. And as far as our ongoing commitment to Africa is concerned, I want to point out that 67% of our food aid went to Africa, 60% of our agricultural support is going to Africa, and 45% of our multilateral support is being directed to Africa. One of the criteria upon which we base the provision of support is need, and it is unfortunate that there is such a great need in Africa.
I want to point out to you that 24% of the global burden of disease is in developing countries, but only 3% of the world's health workers are in those countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, they need three times the number of health workers they have currently. They need over one million new health workers.
So when we talk about providing access to qualified, trained health workers in their communities, the need is immense. That's why it's important that we, as G8 ministers, provide a comprehensive approach so that we have trained health workers who are properly equipped and properly resourced and in facilities that are closer to the most vulnerable, those women living in the most remote and the least accessible areas. When you look at the numbers of children under five who are dying and at maternal mortality, you'll see this is prevalent. The majority of cases are in Africa.
Our G8 commitment means that a lot of our support will go to Africa. We have not abandoned Africa. In fact, this government has increased its commitment to Africa. But we're making our commitment meaningful and we're going to make sure that it's going to make a difference in the lives of those mothers and children.
:
It was said loudly enough for the chair to hear. I made my ruling.
Ms. McLeod, please go ahead.
Mr. Paul Calandra: [Inaudible--Editor]...in this instance, I wasn't addressing the chair so--
The Chair: The chair is being fair to everyone. You may come and look at how everyone—
Mr. Paul Calandra: The chair...[Inaudible--Editor].
The Chair: Mr. Calandra, you're going to be taking time from Ms. McLeod.
Please, Ms. McLeod, go ahead.
Mr. Paul Calandra: Oh, I already knew that, Madam Chair, believe me.
:
Sure. Thank you for the question.
Let me say that the Status of Women department has done great work in working with women's groups across the country to promote the equality of women, to address women's full participation in political life, in social life, and in our democratic life.
Under our government, we have now increased the funding for Status of Women to the highest it has ever been in the history of Canada. It has become so successful that we have too many people applying for funding under this program, which is great news. It's fantastic news.
But what it does mean is that there are some groups that don't receive funding, unfortunately. But we continue to work with these groups. I've yet to see any group that did not receive funding that isn't doing good work. There is great work being done all across this country.
But we wanted to also, at this time, from what I understand, fund groups that have never been funded before, so 40% of this last round of funding went to groups that have never received any funding in the past. I think that's important also.
Another goal of the funding for the Status of Women community groups—
Minister Oda was in Afghanistan just this week, and I was there a few weeks ago. I think it's something that all of us, as elected women in this country, should be aware of: the kind of progress that's being made in Afghanistan thanks to our civilians and our troops on the ground. I think it's uplifting for Canadians to find out that we have made so much progress.
In terms of democratic participation, it's amazing that in a country where women weren't able to vote and where women weren't able to run for office we now have them as members of Parliament in Afghanistan sitting in their legislature. I think that as women we should all be very aware of that and very proud of the role Canada has played.
In particular, when it comes to education, Canada has done a great deal of great work, through CIDA in particular. We know that our troops on the ground are providing security so civilians and officials like the people at CIDA can do the good work, and because of their good work, we now have almost two million little girls going to school.
I think this is a legacy and a testament to the great bravery of our men and women in uniform, but also to the great work that our officials are doing on the ground. I think it's really important for this committee to think about that, and to make sure that every one of us, as elected officials representing Canada, get a chance to speak about this.
I know that when Minister Oda and I have speaking engagements we always try to make people aware of the great social, economic, and political progress that's being made by women in Afghanistan.
Ms. McLeod, I think you weren't around when the minister did not answer anything to do with maternal and child health.
Because the ministers are about to leave and we do not have another round, I would have everyone know, obviously, that we have two people left in this round. I would ask the ministers if they could please stay to accommodate that round so that everyone gets an opportunity to question them.
The two questioners to come are Ms. Demers and Ms. Mathyssen, from the Bloc Québécois and the NDP, so if the ministers would please accommodate them, for reasons of fairness, we would be glad to keep you for a few minutes.
We have two five-minute rounds, so that should take 10 minutes, if everyone tries to stay within the time. At the most, it will take 12 minutes.
But I would like to suggest, Ms. McLeod, that a letter was written according to the decisions of this committee on May 6 specifically asking the Minister for Status of Women to appear before this committee at a special meeting between the hours of 6 and 8 to present on funding.
If the minister couldn't come to this meeting on funding, we would have changed the special meeting, because that meeting was being held specifically to deal with the minister and specifically to deal with the issue of funding. We only knew this on the 20th, which was in the middle of a break week, and there was no ability to call this committee together to change the date of the meeting. So here we are, with witnesses, at a meeting from 6 to 8, and the minister will not be here to answer questions on funding.
I wanted to give you the information so that everyone would be aware of the facts that we do have a meeting on funding and that is where the minister would be asked questions, but she's not going to be here.
Yes, Mr. Calandra.
Before we move into business, I would like to apologize to and that they were not allowed to have the questions they were going to ask. I had asked the ministers to stay and answer, on a point of fairness, and that did not happen, so I'm afraid we're going to have to move on now to this part of the meeting.
We have two motions, one by and one by . The first notice of motion from the Honourable Anita Neville, of Thursday, May 20, 2010, reads: “That Committee request a report from the Minister of Industry, outlining--
Order, please.
I am in the middle of reading a motion, Ms. Boucher.
Madam Neville's motion reads:
That Committee request a report from the Minister of Industry outlining: (a) departmental policies and targets concerning the recruitment and appointment of under-represented groups, specifically women, to the Canada Excellence Research Chairs (CERC); (b) whether the negotiated agreement reached in 2006 on gender representation in the awarding of Canada Research Chairs was considered during the creation of CERC; and (c) the mandate and findings of the department's internal investigation of the 2010 CERC selection process, as referred to by the Minister of Industry on Wednesday, May 19, 2010 in the Toronto Star; and that this report be received by the Committee by Wednesday, June 9, 2010.
Do you wish me to read this motion in French?
Or shall we just continue?
Madam Neville, would you speak to your motion?
:
Thank you, Ms. Neville. I will call the question now.
Hon. Anita Neville: A recorded vote, Madam Chair....
The Chair: Certainly, a recorded vote, please. Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed?
Well, we have a tie vote, so the chair will have to vote to break the tie.
I will vote in favour of the motion. It is totally appropriate for a Status of Women committee that is examining the progress of women within government, within various institutions, and in Canada in general, to ask for a report of any department's internal investigation of the 2010 CERC selection process with regard to gender representation. So the motion has passed.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)
The Chair: We have another motion now, from Madame Boucher. The motion reads:
That the Committee undertake a study to examine work that is being done in Afghanistan to improve living conditions of all women and children in that country, focusing on Canada's role in that work, and report on it to Parliament;
That the study, which has the support of the Minister for Status of Women, the Minister of National Defence, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of International Cooperation, include inviting witnesses from the departments and groups involved in that work to appear before the Committee; and
That the study take into consideration the historical situation for women in Afghanistan under the Taliban; the work being done by Canada in Afghanistan, the complementary work being done by NGOs and others in Afghanistan and the successes and setbacks as well as the lessons learned.
The motion is clear.
Madame Boucher, would you like to speak to your motion?
:
Madam Chair, this week, we will begin a study on First Nations women, and I think it is appropriate to do so. A committee will soon travel to Afghanistan to see how things work over there and how it is going in general.
I am saddened by some things that have taken place. If you remember, Madam Chair, last year, we received representatives of the Afghan government who testified before the committee. A few of those women then went to Geneva. One of my colleagues, who was with me at the committee meeting I mentioned, was also there in Geneva. One of the women sat next to her and admitted that what she had told us in committee was not true, that the situation was not as she had described it, and that they had to tell us these things because they were ordered to do so. At that time, the government was saying that it would like to remain in Afghanistan until 2011. I would really like to know what is going on over there. However, if it's what we want, should we not go there ourselves?
We know that the Department of Foreign Affairs has done away with the section in charge of status of women, the section in charge of gender equity. Since the Department has abolished this section, I was wondering how credible its information on the work done for women is. As for National Defence and International Cooperation, I do not know what more we could learn from them. I would really like us to conduct a study, a proper study though, and go and see with our own eyes how women are living, how girls are going to school. We know that girls are not going to school because they get killed if they do, and schools are being destroyed as soon as they are built.
Madam Chair, I think that it makes no sense to conduct a study if we cannot travel to Afghanistan and if we base the study on the word of the representatives of departments and organizations involved. As we have seen today, organization representatives cannot be forthright with the members of the committee because they are obligated to follow the instructions of their departments. Therefore, it is completely pointless to question them.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have a number of comments, Madam Chair. I was going to make the point made by my colleague, . Is it the intent of the mover that this committee should have the opportunity to go to Afghanistan? Because that's the only way we'll get a full and comprehensive picture.
As I see it, the motion is not really calling for a study; it's a report. I'm not quite sure how to put it, but I would like the invitation list to include more than departments and groups that are involved in that work. A number of other people have been over to Afghanistan;I'm thinking of Sally Armstrong and other commentators who have been part of the discussion and the dialogue. Many Canadians have been there. I do want to raise the issue that if we're going to do a study, it has to be an appropriate study, and not a report.
I am also very concerned about the timelines. While I will support this motion, I will not support it bumping some of the other things we have identified as high priority. I think this is further down the way, and I will do it on that condition.
Madam Chair, I also have some problem.... I know that others were consulted by the minister, but I have problems with the work of this committee being directed by the executive branch of government. The committee is the master of its own agenda, so to approve or not approve this.... I guess we are to some extent, but studies, reports, whatever, are not initiated by ministers, even in this new era of ministerial cooperation that we hear about at committees.
I want to put on the record that we should not be directed by ministers in terms of the work of this committee. The ministers in government should be responding to the work of the committees, and I don't see that happening.
I think all of us have had the opportunity, both in Ottawa and in our own communities, to meet with Afghan women. We know the challenges. We know the importance of them having opportunities and we know the many struggles they're having. But I don't want this to be simply a report or a show-and-tell. If we're going to do it, we must prioritize it around the other work we're going to do, and it should be a meaningful study that includes representatives that all committee members would like. But a simple show-and-tell or an infomercial is not the agenda at play here.
:
First of all, I would like to make the comment that when I said there is no time, I meant that if the previous report, which was just passed by you casting your vote, is going to generate a lot of other work, then I wouldn't see it as that appropriate. That is my concern about time.
Also, on the remark that this was directed by the minister, that is totally wrong. I think that what Sylvie just said is with the understanding that the minister herself has gone and the other ministers have gone, and they have given us a report today, all right? We probably understand that we have done a lot in Afghanistan.
I've talked to a lot of women from that community as well, and I think this is the right thing to do. As for talking about the fact that in 2011 our troops are scheduled to leave.... However, the study right now is very timely because of all the work we've put in, and to evaluate exactly what has been done and what value we have brought to girls and women there, I think it is very timely. We'll figure out the challenge of time as we discuss this, but the principle is whether this is worth a study. I think that is, first of all, very important. Then we'll decide the details. So we have to agree on whether we're going to do it and how we're going to do it. We're going to discuss it.
If the opposition doesn't want to study the situation of women and girls, they can vote against it, but for details, and about the how-to, those should come after we have voted yes.
To Ms. Wong's point again, you did indicate that you didn't feel that our schedule had the time right now. Based on what I'm hearing about a comprehensive study, this in fact will generate a lot of work, a lot of good work, which I can certainly support, but I would want this committee to travel to Afghanistan. I don't want to sit and listen and write a report or see this committee write a report about a legacy. Whose legacy? Whose agenda? I do have a serious concern.
I share the concern of my colleague, Ms. Neville, that obviously, in listening to the minister's testimony today, this is actually being directed by the minister. I have a cause for concern on that.
But if it is going to be a substantive and meaningful study that would involve us being able to travel...while it maybe doesn't get top priority, it's certainly something that I could support.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm just going to reiterate my points. I have no problem with supporting this. I do not want it to bump the other business we have. We've identified a number of issues, so I think we have to be sensitive as to when we fit it into the schedule. I want to ensure that this is a study, not a report, and I want to put that on the record.
I also want to put on the record, Madam Chair, that there were direct requests from the minister, not only to you but also to our leader and to our critic on foreign affairs, for this study to happen, so when you talk about ministerial direction, it was certainly there. That is not how I see committees operating. Those are the ones I know of; perhaps there were others.
I will support it, or we will support it, but it's on those conditions that I do so.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Madam Chair, I think that before we undertake any study, we have to commit to working honestly and to working together. We have to make that commitment now. Even today, a person said that she drafted the motion together with the Minister because it is important for the Minister. So, it would appear that the Minister is the one behind the motion. Someone else said that it is not the Minister that's behind it. The Minister asked our caucus to undertake this study. So, the action is being spearheaded by the Minister.
We should at least stop lying to one another if we want to do decent, honest work that will yield results.This needs to stop, Madam Chair. I am saying this now. Mrs. Boucher should consider herself lucky if I vote for this motion. As long as Mr. Calandra keeps acting in this way, I will not vote for any motions moved by Mrs. Boucher. He always behaves in a disruptive manner. He disturbs the committee's work constantly, and that seems to be the only thing that he is intent on doing. I refuse to accept this type of behaviour, Madam Chair. I will tell my whip about his actions, and I will ensure that other whips are told as well. It is just not right.
We have never worked like this before. We have never felt this kind of tension in the committee before. We have always cooperated with our colleagues, but now, we can no longer do our work. We dread coming to meetings because they are unpleasant. Since Mr. Calandra has been with us, things have gotten worse.
Madam Chair, I have said what I had to say. Thank you.
:
Madame Boucher, we are not having a debate across the floor. This is a committee. I have said that I would entertain no further discussion after Madame Deschamps. I will call the question on this ow.
Before I do that, I want to let everyone know that we're completely booked up. In the week of May 31, we're travelling on violence against aboriginal women. The week of June 7, we're traveling on violence against women. On June 14 and June 16, we'll study the draft report on maternal and child health. We've completed our study on it. On June 21, we will have a study on the draft report of women in non-traditional occupations, which we have not yet accepted, whereas we did a great deal of work on that. Then the House rises. We are planning to finish our trip of travel on violence against women very early in the summer, as this committee had decided before.
That's to let everyone know that this is the status of work for this committee. The work has been decided up until the House rises.
Then, we have had a study--this is now a year and a half old for this committee--on the effects of new technologies on women and girls; a study on media coverage of women and women's issues; a study on international models of early childhood education; women and Canada's foreign policy, including the impact of changes in language in the Department of Foreign Affairs; shared parenting custody and access; and lost Canadians.
We have a ranking of future business that had already been done by this committee, so I understand that the issue for everyone is going to be when this is going to happen. We've now heard from everyone. Based on that information, I will now call the vote.
:
Ms. Wong, I will explain. We have two friendly amendments. They were accepted by the mover of the motion. I will now, therefore, propose the amended motion for this committee to vote on, one way or the other.
So the amended motion says that we expand the list made by Ms. Boucher here on the people we would invite. So under the second paragraph, we expand that list. Then we also talk about travel. We say that “the study take into consideration the historical situation for women in Afghanistan under the Taliban; the work being done...”, etc., and there we will add “and travel to that country”.
Those are the two amendments to the motion, accepted by the mover, and now I will ask that this committee vote on the motion. Those in favour? Those opposed?
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The Chair: The motion passes. Thank you.
I would like to move on, then, to some of the work we have to do here. I'll have a quick recess with the clerk.
I want the committee to know a couple of things. We have cancelled part of our trip. We were supposed to leave on May 30 to go to Resolute Bay. We cannot get anyone to meet with us in Resolute Bay. Because the community is that small, most people are very concerned that it will be noticed that they came to meet with us.
In order to change from Resolute Bay to Rankin Inlet, we would have had to go back to the committee, which we could not have done, because last week was a week off. So what we can do is add Rankin Inlet when we do further travel. We'd add it to the committee and we would just go to Rankin Inlet in that leg of the travel. So the travel will start on May 31, instead of May 30. We will fly out on the Monday and then we go to the other places, without Resolute Bay involved.
The next thing we have to talk about is for you to okay our bringing some witnesses when we go to Labrador. It's a very long, thin province, and it has a lot of people living in very remote areas who have to come down. I just need you to okay $38,000 for the travel of certain witnesses who have to come down to meet us in Labrador. Do I have an okay on that?
:
So that's it. Do I get an okay on this? I haven't had a vote. Does everyone agree to that travel cost?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Finally, I think that's all we need to do today, so if anyone wants to entertain a motion to adjourn.... Yes? Thank you. We have a motion to adjourn.
We will be back after the vote to this very same room. There will be dinner served here, at the meeting. It is unfortunate, as I mentioned earlier on, that we will not have the minister who was key to this coming to this funding meeting; we only found out about three days ago that the minister cannot come. We got that on the weekend. It was very difficult for us to change this, given--
Excuse me. Order. There is a tendency when the chair is speaking for people to carry on conversations. I would appreciate it if we could at least pay attention during this part of the meeting.
Thank you very much, Madame Boucher. Okay.
Tonight we are going to be meeting only with witnesses. We will not have the benefit of the minister's ability to explain some of her funding cuts; it would have been a good opportunity for her to do so.
We will now adjourn. We'll see you back here after the vote.
The meeting is adjourned.