FAIT Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES ÉTRANGÈRES ET DU COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, November 27,1997

• 0842

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier (Brampton West—Mississauga, Lib.)): I call to order the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are conducting an examination of the programs, expenditures, and performance report of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

We're privileged this morning to have the minister with us, the Honourable Lloyd Axworthy.

We will get right down to business. Do you have a statement, Mr. Axworthy?

[Translation]

The Honourable Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I am pleased to meet with the committee to discuss my Department's programs and expenditures. I am accompanied by my Deputy Minister, Don Campbell, and by the Assistant Deputy Minister for Corporate Services, Mrs. Lucie Edwards.

In my statement I will address the measures my Department has taken in order to face the new challenges the world presents us with and to show flexibility in serving the needs of Canadians abroad. But to begin, I would like to tell the committee that I have read its report on the mission in Bosnia. Let my assure you that I will share your recommendations with my cabinet colleagues when we next discuss the subject.

[English]

First let me indicate that as we continue to face this increasingly complex global situation, there is a real demand that we maintain continuing presence and leadership, particularly to provide a high level of service to Canadians who travel abroad and to develop the best policy advice we can for the government and for Parliament in general.

In doing so, we must face a flat or declining resource base. To use the old adage, the thin red line overseas is getting thinner all the time. I'm not talking just in dollars and cents terms. What really makes foreign policy is the human resource, the people. That's basically what we're in. We don't deliver refrigerators or make television sets; we use the strength of our people. It also means we have to reach out to Canadians to make that happen.

So the first thing I'd like to talk about as we look at estimates is the human resource strategy for the department. As members will know, I have a certain lingering interest in the subject from my previous portfolio, and that's one reason we've tried to put some emphasis recently on what's happening in terms of the personnel and the capacity to meet our demands with a smaller core group of people to work with.

• 0845

The staff of the Department of Foreign Affairs are an interesting variety. Most of the people who work for the Department of Foreign Affairs in fact are foreigners. The locally employed staff represent the single largest group, about 4,300 people. Half our staff are people who are employed locally in the countries in which we have our representation.

With our own staff, we're working very hard to make our personnel more reflective of the changing, multifaceted nature of our own society. About 32% of our people are francophones, 43% are now women, and 4.1% are visible minorities.

The area in which we have not been as effective is in hiring aboriginals, of which there are only close to 2%. Close to 3% of our workforce are disabled Canadians.

So you can see there's a long way to go. We still have a lot of effort to make.

Specific goals we've set for ourselves include better representation of women in senior management positions, and first nations people and the disabled in our department overall, and dealing with the increasing problem of attrition we're now facing. Large numbers of foreign service officers leave in mid-career simply because they find the outside world more attractive when it comes to money.

One tool we're using is increasing our recruitment process. In 1996, we took in 56 foreign service officer applicants out of a combined total of 3,600 applications. Of our 1997 recruits coming in, 33% are francophone, 45% are women, 11% are visible minorities, about 2% are disabled, 41% are bilingual, and 75% speak a foreign language. So it gives you an indication of some of the demands we make. Some of the qualifications of the new recruits are really quite remarkable.

We're working with the Department of Indian Affairs and the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs and others to develop a more specialized recruitment program for our first nations people in Canada.

Another challenge we're facing—a difficult one—concerns the spouses of our overseas staff. In an era where two-career couples are becoming the norm, it's no longer acceptable to expect spouses to, as they say in the foreign service, “pay, pack, and follow”, which is basically to go somewhere else while forfeiting their own careers and pensions and other entitlements while acting as unpaid representatives of Canada abroad.

It's not an easy solution to provide some support, but I'm making it a real intention of mine to see what we can do to take measures to assist spouses. For example, we signed reciprocal employment arrangements with about 49 countries. We're opening up the Public Service Commission inventory to foreign-service spouses. There is a series of in-house measures we're taking to assist with employment, from a résumé data bank for non-permanent positions to letting spouses compete on an equal footing for jobs at missions.

Our human resource strategy in this respect is designed to mesh with and complement the wider initiatives within the public service, which is universal by classification. At the same time, we're affected by the same overall trends as the rest of the public service. We've been dealing with a pay freeze for six years, and it's causing us some severe repercussions.

By building human resources within the department and improving their management, we basically end up improving the execution of our foreign policy. The same holds true for strengthening our efforts of public diplomacy, which is an effort that, as some of you know from my last appearance, we're attempting to reorient so that we can establish a much stronger public presence of Foreign Affairs both in Canada and abroad.

Canadians and others, perforce, are becoming increasingly engaged in areas that once were the preserve of governments. We've seen many examples of that. I guess the most obvious example is the landmine conference that will be held in the coming week. There has been a clear partnership between governments and civil groups both in Canada and around the world. We see the continuation of that growing trend, which I think is one of the most important developments in foreign policy.

I welcome this trend. I have been working to increase the stake and input of interest of Canadians in the formation and application of foreign policy.

• 0850

There are things we're working on to make that happen. We're developing a Canadian international information strategy that will allow us to have a much higher level of information presence abroad. That's being considered by cabinet right now.

We've established the Centre for Foreign Policy Development, a national forum that carries out a national annual dialogue and supports the research and publication and academic efforts of a number of Canadian groups.

We have, as you know, an annual national consultation with NGOs on the United Nations human rights forum. I think we're the only country in the world that really does that on a regular basis.

We have worked very closely with the business community to establish a business code of conduct for their performance overseas.

We've developed Department of Foreign Affairs web sites.

One area in which I take real pride is the youth internships we've established. Under the government's youth employment program we have an international youth internship program, where we fund NGOs, companies, professional associations and others to establish internships that give young Canadians valuable work experience. I think we have 400 now overseas.

The demand is growing. For example, we have a Canadian woman working with Bolivian human rights groups, lawyers' groups, providing legal support to indigenous peoples. Another intern is with the National Amerindian Council of Guyana, working on land rights and legislative reform. Another, who has a degree in economics in Chinese, is working in Beijing with the Canada-China Business Council. Two young interns are working abroad under the auspices of the Canadian Centre on Minority Affairs. In fact, they've already received offers of full-time employment when they come back.

So the internship program is really very successful. We hope we can continue to expand it, because I think young people, or many of them, will be making their living in terms of experiences abroad. If we can give them that first work experience in a variety of international locations, I think it helps them get that employment, and it provides a real service to Canadians, as well. I think many of the people in the NGO and business and public communities find the internships very valuable. We're now expanding it to include arts programs and other areas where we can support development and promotion of things abroad.

When it comes down to the estimates, I think you all have the books in front of you. We are facing severe pressures. Since 1990 the budget cuts have totalled $257 million. There will be a further $33 million reduction in the next fiscal year, which will again mean we'll have to tighten up. The result is that we've cut 30% of Canadian-based staff and 9% of our local employed staff on missions abroad.

There's been a 15% reduction in Canadian-based staff overall. There's been a 50% reduction in spending on grants and contributions, a 40% reduction in capital spending, and a 30% reduction in spending on corporate services and administration.

At the same time, we confront new spending pressures of $120 million in 1997-98 and $80 million in each subsequent year. These include major new investments in the information technology required to maintain our network abroad and to ensure health and safety of employees abroad.

I can give some examples of the additional costs we bear. One is the necessity to build a new embassy in Berlin. As you know, the capital of Germany is moving from Bonn to Berlin. We have to move with it and get a new embassy to along with it. That will be a fairly expensive item, because Berlin is not cheap.

There are extra costs borne by things like the APEC summit, the landmines convention and Team Canada, all of which add extra costs. There is the year 2000 problem, which I think you've all looked at, in terms of the computer glitch that will take place. Then there are new international conventions on environment and arms control that we have to make contributions to for verification.

We're also seeing an increasing problem of making sure that Canadians are getting full security abroad. Last year we issued 1.3 million travel documents, and 1.5 million Canadians use our consular services on an annual basis. If you do a rough estimate, there are probably about 80 million overseas visits by Canadians on an annual basis. As the world gets a little more interesting and complex, and sometimes treacherous, the need to provide services and security really increases.

The combination of reduced pressures and growing demands have put quite a bit of pressure on our staff. We want to pay tribute—I do want to pay tribute—to their response. It is also recognized that people are reaching their limits. The majority of our missions overseas now have less than five Canadian-based staff members.

• 0855

However, I think necessity is the mother of invention, as we say, so in order to maintain our role as a global middle power.... And I should point out to members of the committee that we have made a strategic choice that was decided in the foreign policy review that took place in 1994, in that unlike other countries of similar size, we have not just opted for a regional strategy.

I say a country like us. Australia has decided, basically, to pull out of large parts of the world and simply focus on Asia. We maintain an international worldwide network; as a result, it requires us to be more inventive in the way we supply it.

One of the new approaches we have taken is, as I have pointed out in the report, to replace Canadian-based staff overseas with locally employed staff. We've developed the concept of micro-missions, where we will have one officer and small facilities. Some of you who visited Sarajevo would know that we sort of work on a micro-satellite basis. There are similar kinds of offices in Zagreb and Kigali. But that means we do have a presence, and the advent of modern information technology means that these small satellite or micro-offices can maintain our presence.

We've also developed what we call a hub-and-spoke arrangement, in which we set up an administrative hub, say in Abidjan, and then use a series of small offices to surround it.

We are now using more extensively the concept of honorary consuls. We now have honorary consuls in about a hundred locations around the world. That means, again, we can take advantage of people, oftentimes Canadians, who are living abroad and who will serve their country for a small honorarium. I can tell you it's probably the best value you can get for the $3,000 or $5,000 honorarium. In many cases they put in 20-hour days.

We've also begun to experiment with co-location of embassies with other countries. For example, we share with Australia in Bridgetown, in New Zealand, and in Tehran, and we're talking with other governments about co-locating where we share the actual physical facilities and the common overheads.

One thing we are starting to do is to try to make better use of our overseas facilities to provide multiple purposes. Some of you have had the opportunity to visit the new cultural centre in Paris. As you know, we'll also be opening Canada House in May. This is an opportunity to provide a multimedia, multifaceted showcase platform for tourism, arts, culture and education, where they can not only provide a place to demonstrate Canadian excellence in these areas but also provide cheaper accommodation when Canadians go abroad to export their films or their educational programs or their tourism. We are able to provide a place where that can be located, where we use the CD-ROMs and all of the new electronic wizardry to plug in Canadians.

We will be doing the same with our new embassy in Berlin, and we are opening a similar kind of cultural centre in New York to provide that kind of outreach. It's an attempt to make our embassies more multi-purpose than they were before. So they're not simply offices; they're now becoming a broader platform for exercises.

That's really where I think the kind of reorganization and restructuring that we are doing is at. As my notes say, our staff are becoming more familiar with computers than they are with cocktail parties. To use the other adage, the mouse is becoming mightier than the sword in terms of conducting our foreign policy.

The whole point of this is to say that one of the major priorities for us is to continue to invest in human resources, and that is one way I think we can meet the growing demands and needs of the department with the resource space we have.

That constitutes my report, Madam Chair.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Thank you very much.

Mr. Mills.

Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, Ref.): Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I have a few questions. I think probably it's easier if I pose the questions, and if in whatever time you have to answer them you don't get them all answered, hopefully you can get me answers.

First of all, I congratulate you on the landmines effort. I think that has certainly helped our profile internationally, and that helps a lot.

Also, I congratulate staff members in Foreign Affairs. I've now visited probably 40 of our embassies, and I think they're doing a pretty good job. Overall, I am pretty proud of them as Canadians and the profile they give us as Canadians.

I have a few questions. As I say, I'll go through them and you can get to as many as you can.

• 0900

There is a 1993 policy requirement that expenditures of $250,000 or more need to go through a cost-benefit analysis and so on. There are at least a couple of those that have not, as far as I can see, gone through those reviews. One is the trade development system of client tracking, which is estimated at a one-year budget of about $280,000. The other is the Internet and employee access to the Internet, which is estimated, again, considerably above the $250,000. Are those quidelines being followed, and if not, why not? That would be one thing in terms of accountability.

Secondly, I notice that we have an increase in expenditures. Does that represent staff numbers or does that represent basic increases? What sorts of salary increases have occurred, say, at senior management and that sort of...?

Third, we belong to an awful lot of organizations. Most recently we could look at APEC, we could look at la Francophonie or the Commonwealth. Those are the ones we hear about, but we belong to an awful lot more. Some of them you look at and you really wonder what possibly those organizations are and what they could possibly do when you look at the title. We have $1.5 million for observers in Liberia, and the list goes on. I wonder what sort of evaluation goes on within the department of memberships. I wonder if there's any room for consultation with parliamentarians in terms of our memberships. I wonder if all those organizations even exist any more, there are so many of them.

Fourth, we received a briefing note this morning on Haiti. My question is the status of Haiti. I look at Mr. Aristide and I see a dictator in waiting. And now that we are leaving I wonder what your feeling is about the amount of dollars we've invested in Haiti, what sorts of results we've had, and if Mr. Aristide does become the next dictator of Haiti, did we accomplish anything.

Fifth is passports. Passports are printed in boxes of 50. There was one raid that found 10 passports. Two people were arrested. In another raid 25 valid passports were found just recently and the people were arrested. These passports are coming out of secure printing facilities. They come out in boxes of 50. I am told that there are a number of boxes of 50 that are missing and that they are being used in the international drug trade as currency. That's a major concern to Canadians. Obviously the issue that came up that was of most concern was in the Israeli situation, but it might be the tip of the iceberg. I wonder what we're doing to secure those passports and nail those down.

Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): I wonder if I can get some clarification as to the time that is allotted.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): It's five minutes, Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Five minutes on the opening round, is it?

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Five minutes on the opening round. And Mr. Mills, if he doesn't stop soon, is going to have used up his five minutes on the questions.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I was just seeking clarification.

Mr. Bob Mills: Sixth, honorary consuls. You're aware of the problem in Tijuana with the consul there. I wonder if that's indicative of the sorts of consular problems we have where a consul refuses to meet with a grieving mother who's just had her son murdered.

Seventh, Maurice Strong suggests that Canada is in decline, that Canada is moving from a first nation to a middle nation, and he is in the United Nations and is there as a Canadian. We don't need to discuss him, but I guess it concerns me when someone of that profile says that we're in decline.

• 0905

I'll leave you to answer those seven questions.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Minister, perhaps you could be very brief, and perhaps the answers could be submitted in writing later on, because there are a number of people who would like their five minutes as well.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Madam Chair, I feel like a mosquito in a nudist colony. I know what I have to do, I just don't know where to begin.

Let me just deal with some of the substantive issues, and I'll ask Ms. Edwards to deal with the financial ones that Mr. Mills raised.

On Haiti, as you know, the military UN activity will come to an end on November 30. In the meantime, President Préval has made a request, which is now being considered by the Security Council, for a certain civilian police back-up that would be sponsored by the United Nations. That discussion is under way at the Security Council, and I expect there will be some decision by tomorrow.

Basically it would be a civilian police contingent that would have two components. One would be a back-up, rapid-response force to support the Haitian national police if some emergency occurred. The second component would be more a technical assistance group that would provide mentoring and forensic advice, detective advice, those kinds of things.

We've been asked if we would contribute to that. We've indicated that we would not be part of any rapid-response group but that we would be prepared to make a contribution to the technical assistance policing.

We have a bilateral program that CIDA pays for. We have RCMP officers and some officers from municipal police forces that provide direct bilateral assistance. We're prepared probably to make a contribution of up to 20 or 25 police officers for that forensic technical assistance thing, if the United Nations makes that decision.

Our view, Mr. Mills, is that at some point in Haiti itself they have to establish their own institutions. They can't continue to rely upon the large bulk of the UN, as it has been until now. That isn't to say that there won't be a continued need for assistance. That's why I think this notion of a civilian police back-up arrangement likely makes sense. If the Security Council makes this decision, we're prepared to cooperate with that.

Certainly no one would say that Haiti has reached the first rank of democratic well developed countries, but by comparison to where it was under the dictatorships that were there before, I think it's made a great deal of progress.

It does have a democratically elected government, president. The assembly works, fitfully, but I'd have to say that our Parliament isn't exactly the exemplary model of efficiency either. There is certainly a lot of development taking place. They've been able to get agreements from the World Bank to provide capital financing.

So some progress is being made, but at some point there has to be an arrangement whereby they will take on more self-sufficiency.

I commissioned an independent review of the status in Haiti by Hal Klepak, who is a Latin American expert on Central America. I'm quite prepared, Madam Chair.... Do you have copies of the report? I think they were distributed. If not, we can make sure they're all available. I think Professor Klepak does give a pretty good assessment of what's required.

I think that will be the status that we're into. What will happen in the future depends on maintaining the democratic institutions in Haiti and making sure that the judicial and police systems are able to function properly.

On the questions of the passports, let me just clarify one comment that you made, Mr. Mills. In the case of Israel, it was not a question of using Canadian passports. The passports were totally forged. They didn't take a Canadian passport either from an individual or from some other source. They simply manufactured them.

I should tell you that, as a result of a recent trip I took to the Middle East during which I met with the Israeli government, not only did we receive assurances but we actually received a written aide-mémoire, which indicated that the Prime Minister of Israel had taken specific directives to his agencies to ensure it would not happen again. I think that clarifies the matter.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Thank you. The other questions you were saying Ms. Edwards would respond to.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Yes, I'll ask Ms. Edwards to respond.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Could you do that in writing?

• 0910

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Well, however you like, sure.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Yes, I think that would be best.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Okay.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Mr. Turp.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ): Good morning minister, Madam and gentlemen.

I would like to say first of all that I have seen your Department and its staff at work and I have noted a high level of professionalism. This has in fact been demonstrated during our visit to Bosnia-Herzegovina. Although the ambassador, Mr. Serge Marcoux, would not let us see his micro-embassy and reserved that privilege to the Chairman of our committee, Mr. Graham. Maybe you should tell your ambassadors or micro-ambassadors to show us their facilities so we can see just how frugal your department has become. It would seem that this micro-embassy has just room enough for two employees.

I would also like to join Mr. Mills in congratulating you for your efforts to ban antipersonnel landmines and for organizing next week's conference. The Bloc Québécois will be there. Indeed, we wish to participate actively. As you have seen this week, we have supported the bill banning landmines and we even attempted to improve it. I have a few questions.

Firstly, you did not touch in your statement on a question that seems important to me, that of funding for CIDA. You are the minister responsible for all aspects of foreign affairs and official development aid does come under your purview. What are you doing personally, as minister of Foreign Affairs, to ensure that Canada keeps its commitment to allocate 0.7% of its budget to official development aid? Britain has just made that commitment. Mr. Blair's government has just made the commitment in response to the United Nations request. I would like to know what you, personally, intend to do as minister.

My second question is on peacekeeping operations. They are useful. They represent an important and valuable investment and the Bloc intends to support them. I would like to know, however, if the amounts that Canada will be investing in peacekeeping operations will be reduced in years to come and what impact that will have on your department's budget. It seems that some operations will require less resources, as will probably be the case for the operation in Bosnia. So I would like to know what your estimates are in that area.

I also would like you to give me a response on cultural issues and to answer one last question regarding your party's electoral promise during the last campaign.

With regards to cultural issues, can you one again confirm that cultural grants to Quebec artists are no longer conditional upon their commitment to promote national unity? I would also like to know your plans regarding Radio Canada International. Many people are worried, particularly in Quebec where RCI is headquartered.

My last question is this: will your department be implementing the election promise that was made to set up an international institute on federalism, as was announced in the second Red Book? If so, what monies have you allocated for that purpose?

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Mr. Turp, you've also extended your five minutes, so I would ask the minister to be brief, as well.

• 0915

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Thank you, Madam Chair.

First, I appreciate Mr. Turp's comments on the landmines, as I do Mr. Mills', and I appreciate very much the support Parliament has offered. You would be interested to know the Senate has now taken this matter under advisement and it will be going to third reading today, so we should be able to get royal assent tomorrow, which I think is a great statement for Parliament.

On the question of CIDA, I share the honourable member's concerns. As you know, we've gone through a period of program review. We had to get our budgets in line. Every department was affected, and CIDA was no exception to that. Mrs. Marleau has been working very actively since coming into office, as did her predecessors, to reorient some of the expenditures so they can conserve a lot of the effort to maintain the actual presence abroad and get rid of more of the administrative structure.

As the government now looks forward to more of a dividend coming out of the fiscal rearrangements that have been made, we would be making a strong case for further support for overseas development. As you know, those matters are under discussion in the finance committees and cabinet and across the country and perhaps in this committee. It's something we take very seriously. I would like to see us improve the position of CIDA and the overseas development assistance.

In saying that, I would want to point out that it doesn't necessarily mean going back to the old ways. There are some interesting new possibilities. I mentioned earlier the development of a new international information system. We could use a lot of those techniques, for example, with distance education programs, things on which we can really focus Canadian expertise and knowledge. You don't have to have the same range of overhead costs as were there before. But I certainly agree with the sentiment you expressed.

I'll let Ms. Edwards answer the questions about peacekeeping at the end of my remarks. I'll deal just with the cultural issues.

First, the question of national unity never was a condition. It was a set of overall objectives. We have revised that simply to reflect now the statement of objectives as set out by the parliamentary committee of 1994. I think that's completed.

You asked about RCI. We have put it on a regular funding basis, but I would see it as part of the new international information strategy that RCI could take on a much more expanded role. Rather than doing just short wave radio broadcasts it would have an opportunity to use its staff and its resources, say, to go into digital-type broadcasting, with a much further reach and a much broader band. There's really a very important potential for Canada. We're working actively now, as part of our proposals for the CIIS, to incorporate RCI, maintaining its arm's-length independence as a journalistic operation but improving its technology and its reach so there can be a much stronger outreach for Canada in a variety of locations around the world.

As to the institute of federalism, that's something we're working on with Mr. Dion. No final decision has been made on that yet. We're working with the intergovernmental affairs minister.

Ms. Edwards can answer on peacekeeping.

[Translation]

Mrs. Lucie Edwards (Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade): On peacekeeping, I can confirm that there has been a substantial decrease in last year's budget of approximately $67.4 million.

This reduction is due to the fact that four major UN operations were completed: those in Rwanda, Somalia, ex-Yugoslavia, and another one. Our department is responsible for bringing together contributions requested by the Security Council. The Department of National Defence is responsible for all of Canada's expenditures related to our participation in peacekeeping missions. They receive a certain amount from the United Nations to help pay for those costs. So it is a shared responsibility between both departments.

When the UN Security Council decides to set up another peacekeeping force, we automatically become responsible for its funding. So that item in our budget tends to increase or decrease depending on events in the international community. But our government and our department are keeping their commitment to pay their share if the Security Council makes that decision.

Mr. Daniel Turp: Can you tell us what you expect for 1998?

Mrs. Lucie Edwards: I hope that we will have peace everywhere in the world.

Mr. Daniel Turp: That is a great expectation.

• 0920

[English]

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Madam Chair, if I could be allowed just one supplementary comment, as Mr. Turp may know, one of the other initiatives that we have taken in the past year was to move in a sense into what we call a peace-building strategy, as opposed to peacekeeping. This strategy aims to apply resources to the conditions and factors that will enable a country in conflict that's recovering or going into its period of post-conflict development to support institutions in that country, or the processes that would lead to a building of the peace as opposed to simply the military aspects of peacekeeping. It's really a form of civilian peacekeeping that we're now working on.

I do have a list of some of the projects we've supported in the last year—everything from supporting the Central African peace negotiations to the Guatemala Truth Commission, and things of that kind. I could give the committee a full list of the peace-building projects, because I think they indicate a new thrust that we're taking.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): I'm sure we would appreciate receiving that.

Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you very much.

I want to join in welcoming the minister before the committee, and associate myself with the comments that were made by my two predecessors with respect to the staff of the ministry. Certainly any dealings that I've had with them have been exceptional. The professionalism of the staff is very much appreciated. I might say that I don't believe that's reflected in current levels of pay, particularly at the junior level. I want to make the representation that I hope the minister will be in a position to make some changes there. I think these are professionals who are not receiving the kind of recognition they deserve.

I also want to associate myself with the comments of Mr. Turp, particularly with respect to the cuts in ODA. I appeal to the minister to not only cancel the proposed 8% cut that is scheduled for next April, but also to hopefully significantly increase the level of funding. We've dropped from fifth place to eleventh place since 1995, and that's certainly going in the wrong direction.

With respect to putting my questions directly to the minister, I will follow up on the practice of my predecessors as well, and then perhaps he might respond.

The first area of questioning is with respect to human rights and APEC, particularly following up on the questions I asked in the House yesterday. The Prime Minister stated, “I don't think APEC will ever have human rights on its agenda.” The Prime Minister also said, “APEC means business.” The foreign minister, however, had earlier suggested that APEC risked irrelevance if it didn't include human rights on its agenda. I just want to ask the foreign minister about the tenability of his position now in light of the Prime Minister having slammed the door on any inclusion of human rights on the APEC agenda. It's pretty sad to see that brief moment of hope being just absolutely extinguished by the Prime Minister.

In the same light, I spoke last night with parents of a young woman who was one of the demonstrators at UBC. Their daughter had never participated in a demonstration before. She was there because she felt very deeply about the policies of Suharto in East Timor in particular, but also other human rights concerns. She was sprayed with pepper and she was in tears. Her parents then turned on the news that night—the night before I spoke with them—and they found the Prime Minister joking about this pepper spraying. Not only was he joking about it, he was joking about it in the presence of Suharto and Jiang. Frankly, they were appalled, and they asked me why the Prime Minister was doing this.

I would ask the minister about this, just in terms of the sensitivity of the concerns. These are young people who felt very deeply. How does the foreign minister respond to that mother, that woman? How does he respond to her about this really quite disgusting joke by the Prime Minister? I ask that very seriously, because that's the question I was asked by the mother of this woman.

I have a couple of questions in just a couple of other areas. One actually concerns another mother, Marilyn Lamont. The minister is very familiar with both Mrs. Lamont and the parents of David Spencer, as is the department. The Prime Minister will be visiting Brazil as part of Team Canada in January, and I would just like to make an appeal to the minister. I ask the minister whether or not the Prime Minister will be raising the issue of either the expulsion under Brazilian law of Lamont and Spencer or, at the very least, ratification of the treaty to move ahead in returning Christine and David to Canada.

• 0925

In regard to Cuba and the Helms-Burton legislation, why is Canada not at this point pursuing remedies under NAFTA? We said we were going to wait for the European Union and United States responses. Clearly the United States response is inadequate. Why are we not proceeding to file a complaint against this outrageous violation of not only Canada's sovereignty but international law, as recently overwhelmingly affirmed by the United Nations?

In that light, I would like to ask the minister about the government being in the process of negotiating an MAI treaty, a multilateral agreement on investment. How does the minister square Helms-Burton with MAI? MAI is supposed to be reducing trade barriers, as I understand it. I would suggest that Helms-Burton flies squarely in the face of that. Is Canada prepared to sign an MAI with a country that is blatantly violating those same rules through Helms-Burton?

Finally, Madam Chair, in terms of my questions, with respect to military ties with Indonesia, I understand that Indonesia has made a request for a military attaché in Ottawa and has asked Canada to assist with police training after the United States said no, and—I just obtained this information in the last week—that Canada has once again approved permits for military exports to Indonesia in the first half of this year, including permits for electronic equipment specially designed for military use and specially designed components. Why on earth does Canada continue to approve permits for military exports of this nature to Indonesia?

Those are my questions.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I'll try to answer the questions. How much time do I have?

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): The same conditions apply. Mr. Robinson has also gone over his time. You have about four minutes.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: On the first question, as Mr. Robinson knows, APEC is an economic organization. It was established for those reasons. What we were trying to do in this past year is to engage a number of groups who are involved in the economics. As you know, we had a consultation with all the international labour groups on the matter. We've had several meetings with the women's organizations and we engaged young people in discussions.

I think one has to make a distinction in this case between what you could call the questions of labour standards or labour market issues and their impact as a result of growth or liberalization of trade, the same kinds of issues that we dealt with through the NAFTA arrangement. And those discussions did in fact take place at APEC. One of the decisions by the ministerial meeting was to incorporate a human resources working group of ministers that would look at the labour-management issues and the consequences of that, and that was incorporated in the statement of the ministers. It was also incorporated in a statement made by the leaders themselves.

Secondly, the decision was taken to sponsor a ministerial meeting on women's issues that will take place in the Philippines in the next year. So to say that APEC did not deal with them is not accurate. In fact, it did deal with them.

Mr. Svend Robinson: You're just quoting the Prime Minister.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: But I think in this case the Prime Minister is talking specifically about the question of political human rights. I think he made that distinction in his statement.

It is very difficult because APEC is an organization that works solely by consensus, and if those things are not on the agenda they're not there because some of the members do not want to discuss them. It's not a matter of Canada saying yes or no; it's a question of having a consensus that agrees or doesn't agree to do it, and those are the rules you work by under APEC.

I think an evolution has been taking place that allows the issues of the problems of the employment consequences to be dealt with more adequately now, and particularly I think we made some headway in dealing with women's issues this year in the fact that the ministerial meeting will be held.

As far as the disturbances are concerned, I think there was concern about the security arrangements. I can't comment on the police action itself. I think this was a journalist.... I haven't seen the reports, so I don't know exactly what the judgment of the police was in these cases, but in this country we always support the opportunity for groups to make their voices known. In fact we provided direct support for the People's Summit itself. Mr. Marchi and I met with them on two different occasions during the weekend to hear their representations.

I should point out that one of the things we were able to finalize during that weekend, one of the major issues raised with us by the People's Summit, was the condition of the labour leader Pakpahan, and we were able to negotiate with the Indonesians to supply direct medical assistance. A Canadian doctor and medical equipment are now on their way to Indonesia to deal specifically with his medical condition.

• 0930

These are small steps, I agree, but nevertheless it does demonstrate that if we pursue a particular policy of being active in some engagement and try to bring those countries where we disagree with them on their certain political issues but engage with them on it, we'll get some results. I think we're beginning to show that.

On the question of Lamont and Spencer—-

Mr. Svend Robinson: I asked about the Prime Minister's reference to this event.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I again was not there. I don't know the full context in which those remarks were made. I think we all regret that the demonstration took place. Like I say, I can't comment on the police action in this case.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Or the Prime Minister's response?

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Well, I don't think anybody likes to see those things happen. What we do know—and I think the Prime Minister was very clear about this in instructions to all of us—is that we should be very supportive of the involvement in the development of the people—

Mr. Svend Robinson: And make jokes about pepper spray.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Well, that's your interpretation of things.

On the question of the Brazil matter, as you know, we've set up a special envoy, Mr. Ratushny, to deal specifically with Lamont-Spencer. What we're really waiting for now is a ratification of the treaty. There is a group of countries who have similar kinds of cases. I think Chile is another one; there's a third Latin America state. I think what the Brazilian government wants to do is to bring them all in together for ratification by the congress. We're hoping that will take place very—

Mr. Svend Robinson: Will the Prime Minister be raising the issue?

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I expect he would. He has on all other occasions.

On Helms-Burton, you raise an interesting issue. One of the reasons, and this is where it comes to.... I think there's been a lot of interesting dialogue about the so-called MAI. One of the advantages of the MAI is that it would limit extraterritorial actions. One of the negotiations that's going on between the Europeans and the United States dealing specifically with Helms-Burton is part of that MAI discussion. So for those who are out on sort of the barricades demonstrating, one issue that they're not dealing with is the fact that under the MAI we could have stronger limitations on unilateral declarations such as Helms-Burton, which I think would be a major positive result if we're able to get that agreement made.

Mr. Svend Robinson: On a point of order, Madam Chair, I assume that the responses to the remaining questions will be forwarded through the chair.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Yes, I'm sure they will.

Mr. Svend Robinson: With respect to Indonesia military ties.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I can get that information for Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Brison.

Mr. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, PC): I'm going to limit my preamble.

Mr. Minister, I appreciate your being here today and again commend you on the landmines treaty. I think you personally feel very strongly about a linkage between human rights and environmental policy, and the linkage between human rights and environmental policy and foreign policy.

I was encouraged to see the business code of conduct. In a time of the declining role of the nation state in terms of its ability to impact on foreign policy, it's very important that we use every lever we can, and Canadian business is one thing we can use. Will all Canadian government agencies be signing that code of conduct?

Secondly, are there criteria for human rights environmental issues for EDC investment? What are those criteria? What projects have been turned down?

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I can't give you the specific details, because EDC doesn't fall under me. It's really the minister of trade that's responsible.

I can tell you that we're completing negotiations through the OEDC on a convention that would apply to agencies like the EDC, both in transparency and a set of criteria, and that would be the code that would be applied to those government agencies.

In addition, as you pointed out, we've been working with the business community to develop voluntary codes of conduct. Sixteen companies were able to come to an agreement on that code of conduct. They're actively recruiting others to join with them through their business organizations, and we're supporting that kind of work.

• 0935

On the specific project, I can't give you the information. I just don't have that. It's not in my immediate range of interests.

Mr. Scott Brison: About the business code of conduct, I asked the question of EDC president Ian Gillespie whether EDC would be signing that code of conduct and he indicated no.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I think he indicated he would not be dealing with the private sector but as we complete the OECD convention EDC would be part of that.

Mr. Scott Brison: That's not what he indicated at the committee meeting. In any case, the point is how can we ask private sector corporations to participate when crown agencies do not participate? I have asked that question in the House a couple of times. I think it's a glaring inconsistency. I think inconsistency is the bane of sound foreign policy.

When you have CIDA saying no to something like Three Gorges based on environmental and human rights criteria, you have the U.S. Ex-Im Bank not getting involved with Three Gorges based on the same criteria, the World Bank won't touch it, and Canada is trying to create a linkage between human rights and environmental criteria and foreign policy and we're in there with EDC for $172 million, that's the type of inconsistency that undermines what I believe to be your very good intentions in your position. It indicates to me an inconsistency of government and its foreign policy which is undermining the legitimacy of what you're trying to achieve.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Again, I'm a little at a disadvantage, in that I don't deal directly with EDC, but as I said, there is the OECD convention which is being negotiated and which would be applicable. In other cases what we use where financing is going on is the environmental criteria of the countries themselves. Mr. Robinson was just asking questions about extraterritoriality. I think we have to be conscious of or sensitive to those issues as well when a project is being developed in another country which has its own criteria for environmental assessment...that we wouldn't necessarily apply our own standards to it.

Mr. Scott Brison: Mr. Axworthy, we would never support within Canadian borders a project as environmentally egregious or offensive in terms of human rights violations. It's displacing two million Chinese. It's flooding the Yangtze. We would never support that within our own borders. Why would we support that?

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I don't know, Mr. Brison. I lived through the experience of the Churchill project in Manitoba, in which governments of other stripes went ahead and displaced the human rights of a number of native people without much compensation along the way. To say we would never do it is not reading our history accurately, unfortunately.

Mr. Scott Brison: Does that make the policy tenable?

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: No.

Mr. Scott Brison: I wasn't around, and you can't blame me for the Avro Arrow either.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Mr. Reid.

Mr. Julian Reed (Halton, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

I will make just a brief comment to Mr. Robinson on extraterritoriality. Helms-Burton really brought extraterritoriality to the surface, but it's not new. It's an old thorn in the side of Canada, where American foreign policy historically has been imposed on American-owned companies in Canada. Anything we can do to try to overcome that and make headway is going to be a very positive move.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Including a complaint at NAFTA?

Mr. Julian Reed: Right now we are doing it through the MAI.

Mr. Svend Robinson: You're not doing that.

Mr. Julian Reed: Well, the MAI will supersede....

Mr. Svend Robinson: Not if some of us can stop it.

• 0940

Mr. Julian Reed: I think all of us, Minister, are basking in the glow of the herculean effort you and your staff put forward on landmines, and the continuing effort that's going on, and the mountain you still have to climb to complete the job. I think every Canadian of whatever political stripe is very proud of that effort, and we laud you for it.

I'd like to ask about two things. One is the question of passports, and if there is any information on what may be undertaken or what's being undertaken to make Canadian passports less vulnerable to forgery or less vulnerable to copying, understanding that Canadian passports are among the most popular things in the world, so that whatever we can do is a positive move.

The other question relates to the cuts your ministry has undergone and is undergoing at the present time. You alluded to the fact that you were using as much advanced technology as possible to help replace that. There must be some point at which the law of diminishing returns enters the picture.

It's very reassuring to see the effort you are putting forward on the concern about spouses and spousal careers and so on. Certainly if Canada is going to maintain its effectiveness to the level it has in the past, there must be a saw-off point.

Those are my two questions.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Let me just say first, Mr. Reed, going back briefly to the landmines issue, my view is this is something that was really a very active partnership. The Canadian government played an active role, but it really was quite an incredible partnership with other governments, with NGOs, and with a lot of individual citizens. If there's anything to take some pride in it's the fact that we have been able to mobilize that kind of broad-based coalition of support.

I don't want to oversell the notion that somehow we were Horatios in this thing. I think it was simply that we played an important role in bringing countries together here in Ottawa for a treaty. I certainly agree that our staff of the department, our overseas staff and the people in our disarmament arms control division have played an incredible role in helping to manage the process. There have been so many other active players in it around the world that it really is quite a tribute that we were able to bring that kind of assembly together.

On the passport issue, it is important to note that we are really always engaged in trying to improve the availability and the security of the passports. We are right now looking at some of the new technologies, particularly in developing a new passport information and issuance system, which could include the development of a new passport card.

It really includes over the next couple of years three different initiatives. One is to move to an automated processing system that would use a digitized image on the passport as opposed to the present system—you know, where you get your little photo and you stick it on. We'll be moving to a digitized photo system, which will provide much higher levels of security and information processing so we can have a much better control over these. I think this will really enhance the security features of the passport itself.

Second, we're redesigning the passport book, which should be available by 1999. That would again accommodate digitized photos and signatures. So again, we would use some of the new technology to provide higher levels of security.

We're going through the testing of various new printing technologies that would be used in this new book. I think it's simply a matter of coming down with which is the most effective and cost-efficient. It would deal with some of the problems Mr. Mills raised.

Third, we are looking at an optical memory card that could be used particularly for frequent travellers—those, say, crossing the U.S. border. You'd be interested in that, Mr. Reed, considering your area. This would provide I think for a much higher level of storage capacity and also for frequency of handling, and again, a higher level of security.

We would hope that we'll be able to pull together those three initiatives and have a new passport system ready by late 1998 or early 1999.

• 0945

On the issue of how to deal with the staff issue, as I said, human resources is really a priority, and the deputy and Ms. Edwards are working actively under the direction to see what we can do. I think, as Mr. Robinson commented, that we really have to work at the attrition rate of junior and middle career officers, because they're the ones whose pay scales are simply out of line right now. We have to improve that and we're working and doing that as part of the overall government's reorganization of its remuneration levels.

One thing that I think is important as well is I feel quite strongly that we do have to do something about the family circumstances of overseas officers, particularly as it relates to spouses and sometimes their children. It's very hard and we expect an awful lot, and increasingly, as many of you who travel would know, it's harder to live overseas now. Just on the sheer questions of environment, there aren't many capital cities you go to that don't have quite severe environmental problems, which their families have to deal with. And, increasingly, the problem of just having enough wherewithal to get by at that level is important.

We also pay a price for it. We'll spend a lot of money training a young officer in a new language and a culture, Japanese or an African language, and then all of sudden they can get snapped up by the private sector because they simply pay a lot more. We simply can't continue that kind of attrition.

Mr. Julian Reed: Thank you.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Coleen Beaumier): Thank you. In time allotment, Mr. Reed, could Ms. Augustine get, for the rest of your time, a quick question in?

Ms. Augustine.

Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a quick question with a very little preamble.

I just came from a session, with Madam Labelle, of the Association of Parliamentarians on Population and Development, and I was really distressed to hear about some of the issues around a longitudinal study we've done in Zimbabwe on HIV-AIDS: the percentage of individuals in the armed forces, the police, truckers, military, etc., the high rates of individuals who travel through the communities, the high rate of AIDS in that area. Also, she spoke about CIDA programs to increase the capacity of women, things like microcredit, a literary program, the education of girls, reproductive health issues, etc.

The question I want to ask the minister, in light of the significant cutbacks in international assistance, is in looking at the next millennium what are some of the directions, the charting of the course, whereby Foreign Affairs is really trying to manoeuvre with what seemed to be massive problems where our assistance is needed?

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: I think what Ms. Labelle was pointing to is what we've called the new generation of human security issues, that rather than the traditional, conventional, political and military issues foreign departments usually deal with, we're now dealing with things like problems of population movements and public health, terrorism, drugs, and environmental degradation. And those are the issues that in fact are far more crucial because they sit on the doorstep of many Canadians. These are things we can't avoid.

I think we still suffer, frankly, from a dichotomy. We somehow think there are domestic policies and then there is something called international, over there, which we don't have to pay much attention to. The reality is we can't afford to do that.

I always use the example.... It struck me just a few months after I took office when I visited the golden triangle that 60% of the hard drugs that end up in the port of Vancouver come from Burma. As a result, we have to deal with that issue. You can't deal with it when it gets there. It's tough. You have to start to deal with it at the source.

It's similar with environmental issues. The problems we saw in the large refugee camps that came over from Rwanda, basically because of their sheer necessity to get wood destroyed a rain forest. One of the conclusions of this was that a lot of viruses and public health problems were released as a result. Things that had been contained in that area for thousands of years were now part of the public health system around the world.

So we're dealing with a whole new set of issues that I think we're just getting our heads around, and that's the reorientation we are taking as a department. We're also trying to see that they focus more on those human security issues, so you get away from the building of the bridges and get down to more of the building of the communities, the building of a proper public health system, building women's networks.

• 0950

I can give you an example, Ms. Augustine, in the peace-building initiative we have. I think one of the most important examples is women often are the best peace-builders, and we have to give them more support in these countries to develop those kinds of networks because they're the ones who bear the brunt of the conflict but also the ones who start building community infrastructure that allows some kind of reconciliation to take place. So that's the reorientation we're taking.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Thank you.

I understand, Mr. Minister, that you have to be over at the Centre Block very shortly.

Mr. Charlie Penson (Peace River, Ref.): On a point of order, Madam Chair, we have the minister before the committee this morning according to Standing Order 108(2) for an examination of program expenditures and performance reports. It's bad enough that it was supposed to be an hour and a half, and I guess we're going to be maybe an hour and fifteen minutes, to have the minister before the committee, a committee that now comprises eighteen members, five parties, and you've seen the evidence this morning. We have five minutes to ask questions and five minutes for the minister to respond. This is from a government that says it wants to re-establish the importance of the committees. How are we to take that seriously? It's a tremendous disservice, in my view.

I have questions for the minister in light of the fact that this committee invited International Trade Minister Marchi on October 24 to the committee. He hasn't responded, so I assume that Mr. Axworthy is here to answer questions regarding trade in the department. I have questions this morning and did not have a chance to ask one. It seems to me that this is just a mockery. An hour and fifteen minutes to consider the programs for the upcoming year...?

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Mr. Penson, I was about to explain to the minister that we have a large committee here. All of us, not just from your side but from our side, have a lot of questions—

Mr. Charlie Penson: That's why he has to make more time available to us. The minister has to be here for a longer period of time to answer questions.

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: Madam Chair, I'm quite prepared to come back at some other time.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Yes.

Mr. Svend Robinson: On a point of order, Madam Chair, very briefly, certainly there are a number of outstanding questions. Five minutes! The minister has been on this side of the table as well. He knows the frustration of the situation. I wonder if we might also agree that if there are specific questions that any member was not able to put, we can submit them through the chair to the minister and perhaps we might get a response from the minister, in addition to the minister's commitment to reappear.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Would that be agreeable?

Mr. Lloyd Axworthy: That's fine.

[Translation]

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): I intended to send my questions in writing to the Minister but since President Jiang Zemin is coming today I don't suppose I will be receiving my answer in time, that is before the Chinese president leaves again. At 10 o'clock we will be receiving...

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): I'm sorry. Everyone has—

[Translation]

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: He can answer me next week...

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Mr. Sauvageau, everyone has questions they would like to be asking. Many of them are on the human rights areas and many of them have to do with the arrival today of the Prime Minister of China. It would not be fair to allow that, and it would not be fair to the minister. He does have to be over at the Centre Block.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Madam Chair, what's not fair is not having enough time to ask questions.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Yes, Mr. Penson, we have dealt with that.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I hope that's taken into account the next time the minister comes back.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Order, please.

Mr. Bob Speller (Haldimand—Norfolk—Brant, Lib.): Mr. Penson, we all sat around this table and said in fact, and you agreed, we would not spend a lot of time on the estimates. We would look at other issues—

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Order, please.

Mr. Penson, that has been dealt with. The minister has agreed he will come back to the meeting. But he is committed right now.

Minister, once again, congratulations. Thank you, and we certainly look forward to your return.

The meeting is adjourned until 10.45. We'll reconvene here with Mr. Harry Wu.