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, December 4, 1997

• 0934

[English]

The Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham (Toronto Centre—Rosedale, Lib.)): I'd like to call the meeting to order. We have with us this morning the Honourable Diane Marleau, the minister responsible for international cooperation. Good morning, Minister. Welcome before the committee. She is accompanied by Huguette Labelle, president of CIDA, and one of our regular visitors before this committee, and Mr. John Robinson, who is the vice-president of CIDA's policy branch, who also I think most members know from previous meetings.

Perhaps one order of business—Mr. Robinson has given us notice that he would like to move a motion respecting CIDA funding at the end of the meeting, so we'll try to reserve time for that.

• 0935

Minister, I guess you got Mr. Robinson to put in this motion, did you? The two of you have cooked this up together somehow?

The Honourable Diane Marleau (Minister for International Cooperation and Minister responsible for Francophonie, Lib.): I thought it was my Mr. Robinson here who was part of that as well.

The Chairman: Well done, for co-opting everybody on the committee.

Mr. Turp.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ): Mr. Chairman, we also intend to table a motion with the committee.

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr. Daniel Turp: At 10:30 we will have the text of our motion on Algeria.

The Chairman: Very well. I would like to inform committee members that another committee will be sitting here at 11:00. We'll have to vacate the room for 11:00. So it all depends on what we decide to do with our visitors. We can perhaps set aside 15 minutes to discuss these two motions.

Mr. Robinson would also like to suggest the name of a witness.

Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): The new ambassador to Burma.

The Chairman: Perhaps we can discuss this at the next meeting of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Is there a meeting scheduled?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr. Daniel Turp:

[Editor's note: Inaudible]

The Chairman: As soon as possible.

Mr. Daniel Turp: It's important.

[English]

The Chairman: “When shall we three meet again? In thunder, lightning, or in rain?” as the witches said in Macbeth.

Very well. Minister, perhaps you'll be good enough to lead off. But before you do, Minister, I would like to congratulate yourself and the agency on the performance report. I think this is really a much fuller document than we have had before. At least for me, while there are obviously always questions in a document like this—you might question figures or orientation—in terms of clarity and understanding what the department is doing, I found this document very helpful. Thank you very much. I'm sure other members would agree with me.

[Translation]

Ms. Diane Marleau: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

I am happy to be here with you today to talk about CIDA and its many accomplishments throughout the world. I like to believe that the role of CIDA has facilitated things in a number of countries. We are all aware of the recent events here in Ottawa: 125 countries, I believe, signed an agreement to ban antipersonnel mines. I think this is something Canadians can be proud of.

I believe you have received a copy of the notes prepared by CIDA. If it is agreeable to you, I will go over them with you.

Ladies and gentlemen, you know that CIDA's international activities are guided by Canadian values, that is concern for the welfare of others, as well as the world's context of interdependence linking our prosperity to markets in developing countries, and at the same time threatening our security because of poverty, environmental degradation and the violation of human rights, all of these being problems that fall within the purview of international aid.

Before turning to the budget, I would like to explain briefly why the aid program is important for Canada and Canadians, how it is part of Canada's foreign policy, and the benefits it generates for the country.

Links between domestic and international issues are growing. Diseases, environmental problems, poverty and its consequences are all matters that transcend borders and affect all members of the international community.

Canada is no exception. Our welfare is increasingly dependent on our ability to solve problems here in Canada as well as abroad. That means that we must play a dynamic role in developing countries where the great majority of the world's population is concentrated. The following are some of the challenges we face.

As you can see from pages 2 to 9 of our presentation, we face enormous development challenges. Let me mention three of them.

• 0940

First of all there is poverty. More than 1.3 billion people live in appalling poverty, barely existing on less than $1 a day.

Secondly, there is overpopulation. The world population is growing at a rapid rate and 95% of this population growth is taking place in developing countries.

Thirdly, there is the environment. The industrialization of developing countries will have an enormous impact on climate change.

As we explain in our presentation, the aid program is one of the means by which the government attempts to deal with this problem in developing countries. To speed up, we can now turn to page 10.

Canadian development assistance responds to a wide range of needs with flexible, innovative programming that incorporates a variety of approaches and draws on the skills and expertise of many development partners—here in Canada, within the international community and in the developing countries themselves.

These partners are non-governmental organizations, businesses, universities and colleges, the federal, provincial and municipal governments, and numerous partners on the international scene and in developing countries.

Canada adjusts its approach to the requirements of developing countries. In order to do so, it calls upon a wide variety of innovative and often complex programs.

In spite of these challenges, a great deal of progress has been made. On page 11 we indicate the progress accomplished in a number of important sectors: life expectancy, infant mortality, literacy and the economy.

Canada's cooperation program has been one of the elements of this success, and we are continuing to build on our experience. The case of micronutriments is a good example. Vitamin A deficiency makes children vulnerable to infection and reduces their chance of living beyond the age of five. The vitamin supplement program can reduce such rates by almost 25 per cent. Recent studies show that vitamin A supplements before giving birth can reduce the number of deaths linked to pregnancy. There are 600,000 such deaths in the course of a year. CIDA and Canada are among world leaders in promoting the use of vitamin A.

Canada plays a key role in global initiatives to reduce iodine deficiency. This problem causes serious physical and mental conditions among children. It can easily be prevented through the addition of iodine to table salt at the very low cost of $1,37 per child. The micronutriment initiative, with its headquarters in Ottawa and funded by CIDA, is one of the leading organizations in the fight against iodine deficiency. UNICEF estimates that in 1995 Canada's contribution enabled more than seven million children to avoid the mental problems associated with iodine deficiency. Our commitment along with our early investment of 20 million dollars also made it possible to attract other donors and raise additional funds for this important initiative. Total spending at the world level to combat iodine deficiency amounts to one billion dollars.

Illegal activities and corruption constitute a major obstacle to progress in many countries. They are harmful to the development process and result in the wasting of limited resources.

I recently attended a conference on corruption in Mozambique organized by the World Coalition for Africa and Transparency International. I was very impressed by the determination shown by Africans to solve this problem.

In view of Canada's experience in the management of public affairs, the private sector and legal reform, it can play a major role in this field.

• 0945

CIDA is trying to find ways to assist developing countries to combat corruption through various programs and through cooperation with organizations working in this field and with other departments.

[English]

If you turn to page 12, you can see that the international assistance program also benefits Canada and supports our three foreign policy objectives: prosperity, security, and values.

First of all, threats to human security, peace, and stability come increasingly from poverty, disease, environmental degradation, and the abuse of human rights. The aid program is an instrument that addresses each of these issues. In doing so it better assures Canadian security.

Pages 13 to 16 demonstrate the economic benefits of the aid program. Direct returns are significant and include jobs and sales of goods and services for Canadians. The greatest potential lies in the spinoff business generated by the program. The aid program connects Canadian businesses with fast-growing markets in the developing countries, often for the first time.

Page 13 provides examples of how substantial the benefits of these first contacts can be. This benefits Canadian business in all parts of the country. And make no mistake, developing countries benefit as well through the transfer of skills, technology, and investment.

The next two pages—pages 14 and 15—list just a few from across Canada. You can see they're drawn from every region and from a very wide range of sectors, but I would like to highlight just two of these.

The first one is one that benefits Canada's economy and supports us on climate change as well. CIDA is supporting a demonstration project for clean coal technology at a power station in China. The company Babcock & Wilcox of Cambridge, Ontario, is implementing this project. Now you have to realize that there are at least another thousand such coal-burning plants in China. That means potential spinoffs for Canada in a huge marketplace, with the possibility of significant follow-on work. This project also has tremendous potential to help Canada contribute to the campaign against climate change, because Canada is now so dependent on dirty coal for its energy needs. This project is one that quite literally could be repeated a thousandfold and also applied to other countries.

The second...on page 16 shows the kind of impact a CIDA contract can have for a Canadian firm that's competitive, innovative, and willing to take chances. In 1992 CIDA contracted with Agriteam Canada to implement a $9.9 million project in China. It's a lean swine project.

If you look down the page you can see just how much additional business Agriteam has since won. A lot of that has to do with Agriteam's excellence. You can see the graph on page 16. It's really something to see the kind of business they've been able to generate from that first contract.

The diagram on page 16 was in fact prepared by Agriteam and presented to CIDA at a meeting with the Alliance of Manufacturers and Exporters Canada held in British Columbia earlier this year. They have acknowledged that CIDA support was critical to their first entering this market. It's quite a success, as you can see. Many other companies like Agriteam have had the same experience in developing country markets.

These initiatives funded by CIDA also help Canada's young people prepare for the future. If you turn to page 17 you will see it speaks of investing in Canada's youth. In 1996-97 about 2,000 young Canadians worked overseas under CIDA-sponsored programs. This helps them develop skills and knowledge highly valued by Canadian employers. Participation in CIDA-sponsored activities offers Canadian youth an improved understanding of the developing world, the centre of the global economy in the next century. An evaluation of one CIDA youth initiative program showed 96% of former participants were employed.

• 0950

Page 18 speaks to investing in influence. The aid program increases our influence in the world. It earns us a good reputation in the world community. This opens doors and makes people more likely to listen to us. It's our main link with 50 countries and a significant part of relations with many other countries.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr. Chairman, but we have a very useful document here, which the minister is reading from, and I wonder if in the interests of time and getting in as many questions as possible, we might—

Ms. Diane Marleau: We're almost finished.

The Chairman: I noticed she was almost to her closing.

Ms. Diane Marleau: Yes, I am.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Okay.

The Chairman: It's very interesting, too.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Fascinating.

Ms. Diane Marleau: Don't you want to hear about all the good things we're doing?

It gives us a stronger voice in key international organizations such as the World Bank and the UN, and that influence helps us in other foreign policy issues.

Human rights is another area where the aid program gives us added influence. It's one of the best instruments the government has to promote human rights overseas. It allows us to work positively for change, and recently it's an area where CIDA has devoted an increasing share of resources; for example, by supporting Haiti in establishing a justice system, helping Chinese women to understand their rights, and sending more than 60 electoral support and observer missions to over 40 countries in the past five years.

Page 19 speaks to shared Canadian values.

Page 20 shows the strong support from Canadians for the aid program: 80% of Canadians support the program, and when better informed, 86% support the program, of which 65% are strong supporters.

CIDA, like all departments, has contributed its share to the government's effort to put Canada's fiscal house in order. As you can see on page 21, that contribution has been substantial.

Page 22 shows what these reductions have meant in terms of the ratio of official development assistance to gross national product.

[Translation]

In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that aid programs and our relationship with developing countries are important for Canada. The aid program enables us to create links with the developing world and to focus on increasingly important issues to Canada, and at the same time we are able to increase our influence and play a leading role in creating a world for future generations.

The Conference on Land Mines and the convention signed yesterday illustrate how Canada's reputation, partly attributable to the aid program, gives us an opportunity to play a leadership role in important issues.

Owing to our reputation, we were able to play a decisive role. Our leadership on land mines also demonstrates that Canadians wish to do something for the good of the world. Our country has never been a mine field. We have not experienced the horrors of war within our borders since the last century. Our concern about land mines is a reflection of our desire to assist others and to do something for their welfare.

The desire to improve the welfare of humanity as a whole is an important tradition of Canadian foreign policy. It reflects part of the image that Canadians have of themselves and it is at the very heart of the support provided by Canadians to the aid program.

Canadians expect to play a leading role in international co- operation and to share their good fortune with others. The needs of developing countries are clear. It is also clear that we have many responsibilities relating to development and that our participation is very much sought after.

I will be happy to answer your questions.

• 0955

[English]

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Minister. I'm sure Mr. Robinson will appreciate the extra time taken by you as advancing the purposes of his motion, which he intends to argue later, so we'll use your time to take out of his.

I think that's a fair partage de travail devant le comité.

Mr. Grewal.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal (Surrey Central, Ref.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I welcome the minister, the president, and the vice-president to this committee. I wish this report on the Canadian International Development Agency had been in our hands earlier so that we could have gone thoroughly through this wonderful report.

I have some brief questions. I ask the minister to also be brief so that all my questions can be gone through in the time allotted to me.

Mr. Chairman, the minister mentioned twice before that there would be a replacement for the immunization program. Going through the estimates in detail, I didn't find any amount allocated for the replacement program for immunization. Where is the money allotted for the immunization programs?

Ms. Diane Marleau: The money is there. It's part of our ongoing work. Right now the people at CIDA are working to develop further programs. We have some programs in place now. We have some in east Africa, and we have quite an involved program with one of the NGOs, Rotary International. We are funding them, and they are doing quite a lot of work.

We had a massive immunization program, which we funded for ten years, but the object of that program was to make it sustainable. It has become basically a sustainable program in those countries in which it was.

Now we have to look at where there are weaknesses. That's what CIDA is working on now, and when we have determined where we will best invest our money, that will happen.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: I looked for this but couldn't find it. Can you give me an idea of how much the replacement cost is?

Ms. Diane Marleau: We haven't determined how much we would invest in the program at this time. It will be in further estimates, which you will get. It will be part of the budget we have at hand. It will be determined.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: The replacement program will be implemented effective 1997-98, but it's not mentioned in the budget.

Ms. Diane Marleau: Not necessarily, because it is now the end of 1997. The people at CIDA have not come to me yet with further proposals. It may well be that the new program will not be implemented before the next fiscal year.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Madam Minister, the third phase of our commitment in this regard would ensure that the job is completely done as far as immunization is concerned. You have mentioned that we are not proceeding with the third phase, and the non-governmental organizations are also concerned about this issue.

How can we complete the job when we are not going through the third phase, which is the most crucial and important phase?

Ms. Diane Marleau: Remember we have many health programs around the world, and we work very closely with the countries. It's very important that we address their priorities. We work as well with many non-governmental organizations, such as UNICEF, who also do much work in the field of immunization.

We'll continue to see which way the dollars we do have can be used, probably to try to lever additional dollars from other areas such as non-governmental organizations or the private sector to ensure that the most possible is put into the effort. Take, for instance, polio. It's a very big issue as to see how much we will be able to allocate in our war to help eradicate polio.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Madam Minister, accountability of CIDA has been a serious issue and a big question in the past many years, not only by NGOs but also by Canadians in general. In 1994 CIDA senior officials in their performance report asked for the establishment of an effectiveness advisory committee so that the contract process, the effectiveness of aid, and the coordination of various organizations can be effective in implementing the aid programs. You denied that the aid effectiveness committee cannot be established. In response to my question the parliamentary secretary mentioned that budgetary cuts and other priorities—I don't know what the other priorities are, but they were mentioned as the reason not to establish the aid effectiveness advisory committee.

• 1000

The aid effectiveness advisory committee, when asked by senior officials in CIDA—they knew there were going to be budget cuts in 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, and in the future. Are you denying them a tool they want to use for increasing the effectiveness and accountability?

Ms. Diane Marleau: The people at CIDA are quite able to bring forward many plans, and I certainly listen to them very closely. Remember that in 1994 they might have known they would be facing some cuts, but they had no idea they would be asked to cut 30% of their budgets. As a result of some of these serious cuts that they had not envisioned, they had to rework their whole way of doing things. There are some advisory committees, I'm told, that have other ways of doing the same thing. Remember, this was in 1994 before much of this occurred, and since then they have come up with different plans. I suspect they're every bit as good as this particular advisory committee would have been.

It looks to me like it would have been another layer of bureaucracy. Frankly, with the 30% cuts that CIDA has had to endure, more bureaucracy is not what they needed. They needed to work better with those resources and better use what is there—any outside help as well—and I think they do that.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: But since there are budget cuts we should put more pressure and emphasis on increasing the effectiveness of the aid advisory committee. To increase the effectiveness, if we have established this particular committee, which will have members from inside and outside—it will not only enhance the effectiveness, it will also carefully monitor the contracting process, which is a big question in itself. I think this would be effective with budget cuts. Since senior officials in CIDA have asked for it, I think it would be an effective tool.

Ms. Diane Marleau: As I said to you before, they have taken exactly these steps but they have not called it a senior advisory committee. Right now they do results-based assessments of their projects. They use outside auditors to audit their programs and they report to Parliament with more information. They have tried to do more with the resources they have. If the senior officials at CIDA thought this was the way to go, obviously they would have brought it forward. They have since revamped their way of thinking and they have come up with other means of achieving the same thing. That's often what happens in large organizations.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Another quick question is—

The Chairman: That is your ten minutes. We have a long list. We may get back to you.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: How many minutes are left?

The Chairman: Nothing; you got your ten minutes.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: The answers are too long.

The Chairman: I know. Ten minutes goes by quickly. I hope we'll be able to get back to you, but we're doing ten-minute rounds the first time and then we'll go to five on the second.

Mr. Turp, Mr. Robinson, and then Mr. Assadourian.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: Before making my comments and observations, I would like to thank Mr. Lee for the material he prepared for us. It's very well done. Your suggested questions are very relevant and you take into account all the work done by this committee from the beginning of our proceedings. On behalf of the Bloc Québécois I'd like to thank you for the quality of this work. You will see that I've been inspired by some of your questions in the comments I'm about to make.

Madam Minister, Madam Chair, Mr. Vice Chairman, you know that the Bloc Québécois takes a great interest in the way in which your agency carries out its work in implementing Canadian development assistance policy. We're happy to support you in the initiatives and policies that, in our opinion, reflect the common values of Canada and Quebec and which the Bloc Québécois intends to keep promoting.

• 1005

I have three series of questions for you. The first deals with the level of development assistance. Of course this question will be debated in our committee because of the motion presented by our colleague Mr. Robinson.

Madam Minister, what are you doing to bring decline in development assistance to a stop? And what are you proposing to your Cabinet colleagues so that we attain as quickly as possible our objective of 0.7%?

I'm asking you this question because British authorities... I spoke to Ms. Short some days ago when she was here in Ottawa. She told me that she was fighting and that she would continue to fight in her government for the achievement of this objective. She also told me that she had very concrete and precise measures to propose to our government to reach this aim.

That is my first question.

Now for the second. I'd like to know how you see the link between aid, human rights, democracy and good governance, which is one of your strategic priorities, as I understand it. What is your philosophy and what measures do you take with respect to states that systematically and flagrantly violate human rights? Can you give us some recent examples of punitive measures? Those are not the only kinds of measures, they are probably not the best, but on some occasions they are required.

Have any such measures been implemented? Is there a suspension of aid in certain cases because of systematic and flagrant violations of human rights?

My last question also arises from my discussions with Ms. Short, from the reading of the document she prepared for her government, Eliminating World Poverty, and more particularly from her efforts to convince British public opinion of the importance of development assistance. What is the position of Canadian and Quebec public opinion on official development assistance? What are you doing and what measures are you taking to ensure that you have public support, something that is absolutely essential to stop the decline in the level of aid, and to begin increasing it?

Those are my three questions.

Ms. Diane Marleau: And three very good questions they are.

First of all, I prepared a plan of action with the Cabinet. I have already made a number of presentations to convince them to stop the decline in aid and I hope that I've been persuasive.

The next challenge is to eliminate the $150 million cut scheduled for next year. If we can at least eliminate next year's cut, it will be a great victory. I hope at the same time that we will be successful in slowing down these cuts. Extensive discussions are underway as you've read in the newspapers. Many issues are being addressed. I am sure that you will be able to observe the results in the first budget.

We are continuing our efforts and I greatly appreciate the support from the opposition parties. It is very important for me. I also appreciate the support of my colleagues, and there are several of them within the Liberal Party and in the Cabinet. I hope we will be able to attain some measure of success, although we cannot speak with certainty.

• 1010

Mr. Daniel Turp: Is the Minister of Finance on your side?

Ms. Diane Marleau: The Minister of Finance is always very kind. He always has encouraging things to say, but we need more than that to know what will happen in the budget presentation. As I have said, the decisions have not yet been taken and we shall continue our efforts. We have reason to be hopeful, although we have nothing definite yet.

Mr. Daniel Turp: Could you tell me when these decisions will be made so that we and the political parties can bring some pressure to bear at the appropriate time?

Ms. Diane Marleau: I would say certainly that within the next month or even the next two weeks, there should be some decisions that will be confirmed at the beginning of January; by the middle of January they should be definite.

Mr. Daniel Turp: Thank you.

Ms. Diane Marleau: As for aid programs and human rights, there are some countries in particular where we insist on specific programs. You ask whether we have taken any punitive action. Yes, we have. Let me give you the example of Niger. Our aid to Niger was cut off completely when there were serious problems. We recently started negotiating again with Niger with a view to resuming a certain part of our programs because of the considerable efforts made by Niger to set up a good government and democracy.

We cut off all our programs in Nigeria. There are several countries where we have decided to no longer apply the full CIDA programming. In other countries, like China and Vietnam, we are very closely involved in certain areas such as the training of judges and the setting up of legal aid programs. We also have a program to teach Chinese women how to make use of their rights.

In Vietnam, for example, we developed a program for women who are running for elected office. Actually, Vietnam is not a country where the status of women is well advanced, but the program has been so efficient that men were rather annoyed because women were successful in obtaining 35 per cent of the positions, I think. It is very surprising for people in Vietnam. They even criticized us for not having such a program for men. They were a bit jealous. So we do have some programs like that one that have been very successful.

As you know, we do not have huge amounts of money to spend on such things and we try to make a significant contribution in certain areas. I can tell you that we've been very successful in those fields in particular.

We're also involved in providing training to journalists. We brought a certain number of people from Vietnam to Canada for a kind of internship with Canadian journalists. This is one way of encouraging a certain degree of openness. We haven't had programs in China or Vietnam for a long time now, it's only a beginning.

I met the Minister of Justice during the last visit of the president and we are in the process of preparing for a legal program that I consider very promising. They seem to be very open to the idea of working with us and learning how the system works.

• 1015

I'm convinced we must continue our efforts because this is the only way to bring about some openness in certain countries.

Your third question referred to the need to convince public opinion. When CIDA found out that it would be subject to drastic cutbacks in the order of 30% of its budget, the first reaction was to continue to assist the poorest.

It almost came to the decision that those particular programs were not as important. In my view, they are very important and we intend to emphasize this area. I think that Canadians need to know about the fine work done by CIDA. This is the only way that it will be possible to retain the support of Canadians everywhere. If they are not made aware of the good things we do, they will not keep on supporting us.

So we're going to have to do more. But it should be mentioned that this is a return to previous practices. We will be examining how we are able to make the best use of our money to influence public opinion.

You saw in my presentation that we did a poll that shows a remarkable degree of openness on the part of Canadians. Eighty percent of Canadians support our aid program. When the question was slightly modified, the percentage went up to 86%, with 65% of Canadians strongly supporting aid programs.

But we can always do more.

The Chairman: Thank you, Madam Minister.

Your time is up now, Mr. Turp. I'm sorry. It's Mr. Robinson's turn.

[English]

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I too want to join in welcoming both the minister and the officials from CIDA.

I have questions in three areas. The first is just to follow up on the fundamental issue of the level of Canada's commitment. The minister has indicated she's fighting hard within cabinet both to rescind the proposed 8% cut and, hopefully, to turn around and start moving back towards that goal of 0.07% that Canada is committed to and has been committed to on numerous occasions.

I'm pleased to hear the minister's doing that. I'm hopeful that the colleagues from her party as well as all opposition members will indeed reinforce the minister's fight by sending a clear signal through this committee that we believe our commitment is fundamental. We should, in fact, rescind those cuts.

I would just note that if the cuts proceed, I understand that Canada will drop from 11th place to 15th place in the level of our foreign aid. A few years ago we were in 5th place, then dropped to 11th, and now it will be 15th. That really is a rather shameful decline in this level of commitment. I don't think it reflects the Canadian people's views, frankly.

I want to ask a couple of questions about our aid itself and then move into two specific areas. The first is with respect to the proportion of our aid that goes to least-developed countries, the poorest countries in the world.

CCIC has noted that the proportion of Canadian aid that goes to the poorest countries in the world has declined from 0.14% of GNP in 1992-93 to only 0.08% in 1995-96.

I'd like to ask the minister for her commitment that she will examine this and hopefully reverse this, because that is a very disturbing trend. In fact, we should be strengthening the amount of our commitment to the poorest countries and hopefully increase it to the target the United Nations has recognized of 0.15% of GNP going to the poorest countries.

Perhaps I'll just put my questions and then the minister can respond to them.

I'd like to ask the minister what steps she's taking to meet that UN-recognized target of 0.15% for the least-developed countries?

Secondly, there's this whole issue of what proportion of our aid, of ODA, goes to meeting basic human needs. I read the performance report and it suggests something like 38%.

• 1020

In real terms, in terms of emergency assistance—and you can also argue about food aid—it shouldn't be considered part of basic human needs. We're talking about long-term human needs. And I would hope that there, as well, the minister might indicate what steps are being taken to put more funds into meeting basic human needs, excluding emergency assistance.

I have some questions in just two other areas, one with respect to our commitment globally on AIDS. The minister has noted in her statement to this committee this morning the devastation of the crisis, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

The minister herself, as Minister of Health, was present at the signing of the declaration of the Paris AIDS summit in December 1994.

Yet the independent evaluation that was done of the national AIDS strategy, phase two, was very critical of CIDA. I want to draw this particularly to the minister's attention, and Madam Labelle will be aware of this as well.

I am quoting from the evaluation, where they said, “The federal government has played a relatively weak role in terms of contributing to improvement of the HIV-AIDS situation”. Specifically, they said, “CIDA, which is most directly involved in the international efforts, is perceived to operate quite independently of the rest of the strategy.”

So I'd like to ask the minister for her assurance that she will in fact undertake to the committee that CIDA will respond to these concerns as an essential part of phase three of the national AIDS strategy. CIDA will play a much more active and visible role and, particularly, they will enhance funding to Canadian NGOs that are working in this field.

The Interagency Coalition on AIDS and Development had funding cut off completely, as I understand it, in 1996. I'd ask the minister to show some leadership in this area.

Finally, I'd like to ask the minister what CIDA's policy is with respect to participation in the Three Gorges dam project in China.

Mr. Julian Reed (Halton, Lib.): It's the best project in the world.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Just so the record is clear, Mr. Chairman, that was Mr. Reed.

Go ahead, Madam Minister.

Mr. Julian Reed: I have no apologies for saying that.

The Chairman: Let the minister answer her question.

Ms. Diane Marleau: First of all, 72% of our bilateral aid goes to the poorest countries. That's the answer to your first question.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I was talking about the percentage, the proportion.

Ms. Diane Marleau: We don't have this. We can get it to you at some point.

They're associating the gross domestic product with it, and as you know that's falling. We're declining anyway, so that's definitely going to decline, no matter which way you look at it.

That's what you said in your question.

Mr. Svend Robinson: No, I said the proportion of the GNP going to the poorest countries has declined.

Ms. Diane Marleau: That's right, and so has all of the money, in comparison to our GNP. One follows the other. Our aid has diminished, so obviously we're going to, overall—

Mr. Svend Robinson: But the portion of that aid going to the poorest countries has gone down.

Ms. Diane Marleau: I'm not sure that's actually the case, because we really have tried to limit our aid to the poorest countries. As a matter of fact, we have a number of countries in transition. We are slowly moving away from that programming when the countries seem to be emerging, because we do have to continue to help the poorest of the poor.

You said the proportion of our aid to basic human needs is 38%, but that includes, of course, emergency aid.

Our aim is to get to 30% for Africa. Africa, basically, is about the poorest area of the world. So we're working in that direction. We're going to make up the difference, if at all possible, over the next few years.

On our commitment to aid, I agree with you. In this rush to cut budgets, they tend to forget that AIDS is an increasingly major problem, especially in sub-Saharan Africa.

I was in Harare in Zimbabwe...and the number of orphaned children. I went to a cemetery where there were hundreds and hundreds of graves, and they were all between the ages of 20 and 30. As you know, AIDS in Africa strikes males and females. Large numbers of very young children have been left with no families. Grandparents are looking after their grandchildren as none of their own children have survived. We really have to do more and we are increasing our aid in this area because there's no reason—

• 1025

Mr. Svend Robinson: Including to NGOs that are working in the area?

Ms. Diane Marleau: Yes, to CPHA. We have to. CIDA's problem has been in dealing with this massive cut and trying to see how they can balance what we have to do versus some of the other things. We've also tried in many areas to use the funds that we have to lead to more funds.

That's been one of the things that I think is very important.

Mr. Svend Robinson: And the Three Gorges dam?

Ms. Diane Marleau: We're not involved in the Three Gorges dam at all.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Why is that?

Ms. Diane Marleau: All I can tell you is that it isn't a project that we've been involved in. I can't speak to why that decision was made. All I can tell you is that we are not and have not been involved.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Madam Labelle.

Ms. Huguette Labelle (President, Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)): Some of you who might have been around many years ago, before any of us probably were—you might remember that many years ago CIDA supported some environmental assessment of the Three Gorges dam, but has not been involved since and is not now.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I have a final brief question. The minister talked about the importance of coherence of Canadian government policy. Does the minister have any views with respect to the fact that while CIDA refuses to involve itself with the Three Gorges dam, another wing of government, the EDC, is quite prepared to finance this same project?

Ms. Diane Marleau: I have not had any conversations with them and obviously they're not my responsibility. I'm sure you will feel free to have your opinion known to these people and I'm sure you have already.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: I presume, Minister, there's no suggestion by Mr. Robinson that everything the EDC does CIDA should do as well. I thought there was an attempt by many parties of the House to make sure that CIDA fills a void that is not filled by other agencies.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I was suggesting that CIDA's wisdom might apply to EDC.

The Chairman: So I don't see the incoherence.

Mr. Assadourian.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Welcome again, Minister.

I have two questions. Last week we saw a document that showed every donor country's contribution to foreign aid diminishing, including ours. Maybe to get the best bang for our dollar we need to pool our resources and specialize in certain ways that we can help the world.

We are all over the place trying to do everything we can. That's fair game, but maybe if we focused our attention on the democratic movement, for example, or medicine or food.... Do we spend less and do more? If all of them come together, pool their funds, and do it in a way that's focused, maybe we can better help these people than we are now. That's one suggestion.

Second, the first item on page 13 says every dollar reinvested in CIDA Inc. brings 5.34¢ return to us and 10.50 to the receiving country. How do you come to that calculation? Is that the same ratio with NGOs' contribution to this country, or does the government bring in 5.34¢ per dollar? How do you figure that out? If that's the case, if we invest $1 billion with this CIDA program, you're going to bring in $5.34 billion in revenue. Each $1 billion creates 11,000 jobs, so you get 60,000 jobs. That's a lot of jobs.

Ms. Diane Marleau: Yes, it's true.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Those are my two questions. Could you comment on them?

• 1030

Ms. Diane Marleau: First of all, we do try to concentrate our aid in certain general areas, depending on the country. We cannot do everything. We know that. We try to use the dollars that we do have in a strategic fashion. But another thing we do, which is very much appreciated by the countries, is that we will sit down and work out exactly what it is the countries need and what way they believe it will be of most use to them. As a result of that, a lot of our initiatives are very successful. We try not to go in and impose ourselves, because when you do things like that you don't necessarily get the best results.

It's very important for me. I have lived all of my life in mining communities in northern Ontario, and I've lived in Sudbury for almost 35 years, and I was on municipal council. Toronto would come and try to bail out Sudbury because we were tied to the price of nickel. When the price went down, we had massive unemployment—28% or 30%. They would impose the programs that worked for them in Toronto or Ottawa or some of the large centres, and we never had any good results from this programming. There might have been some temporary help, but it didn't work in the long term.

In the late 1970s or early 1980s Sudbury decided it would no longer accept this, that they would use what they had and decide what was important. They would decide what was the basis for their future and insist on programming that would help that basic industry. It was far more successful and today Sudbury is a fairly successful place. The population has not gone down, but the mines went from employing some 26,000 people to fewer than 5,000, and the unemployment rate now is at or about the national average.

So my personal experience is that when you invest money in programming, it's far better to do it in cooperation with that country, letting them tell you what might work best for them. This is what CIDA is doing and this is one of the reasons Canada is so well-respected. It's because of a lot of the programming we have internationally, and I think we want to continue that.

That said, we will invest moneys in certain areas. In China we said we would work to help them on the clean coal. For us that is a wonderful investment both for the environment, because it's one of our priorities, and because it is very good for the companies who get in there. They have the potential for contracts that may be funded by the countries themselves, by the World Bank, or by some of the regional development banks.

That ties in to the figures that we were talking about, which are figures associated with a program called CIDA Inc. In that program the benefits to Canada for a small investment of dollars in terms of long-term economic growth, and to the countries themselves, is absolutely unbelievable. It's a fairly new program so we've been able to follow it fairly closely. Agriteam is an example of the kind of thing we see happening. With a small investment these companies get into a certain country and then get contracts that are financed in other ways, and the benefits come back to us as well as to the country. NGOs play a large part in that. It's a very successful program. It does many things. It helps the country and at the same time we help ourselves.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Thank you.

The Chairman: Are you going to be short, Ms. Augustine? Three minutes are left in that ten-minute time block.

• 1035

Mr. Reed, are you fairly short?

Mr. Julian Reed: I can be fairly brief, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Okay, good.

Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): I'd like my ten minutes.

The Chairman: We're going to five minutes.

Mr. Julian Reed: I realize that Three Gorges is not on the table this morning, but I'll restate what I muttered in my frustration earlier. I feel the Three Gorges project is the greatest project of its kind, because if the world's oceans rise one metre, the displacement of 1.5 million people in China will be nothing compared to the 95 million in China who will be displaced by the rise of the oceans. That's on the record for better or for worse.

Yes, the government has made serious cuts to what is one of the most worthwhile organizations that we have in Canada, but I would submit that if the government had not made serious cuts and had not initiated serious cuts right through government, there would probably be no CIDA today. So we've had to ride with a very difficult situation, but it is a situation that is probably not all negative. It has prompted more inventiveness and ingenuity on the part of people rather than having them presume that funding was there.

One comment that I think was missing in the brief had to do with population control. It is said that our population over this next period will grow by 700 million people. I presume most of those will be at the bottom end of the economic scale. That would be one question: are we active in terms of educating the world's population in birth control?

The other question I would ask, and I primed the minister a little bit ahead of time, is how does CIDA cooperate with other ministries in terms of connecting on things like new technologies that surface in Canada, where a project would often give an opportunity to fly the Canadian flag big time?

I remember an experience in 1980 in St. Lucia where a fish plant was built by CIDA and it was energized with diesel engines. It was the most bizarre decision I could imagine. Canada was at the forefront of solar technology at the time and that could have been used for the chillers or whatever was necessary.

I hope we have passed that stage and CIDA and other governments now interact and ask what's out there that we can use on projects. Those are the two questions.

Ms. Diane Marleau: On your first question, I would say that we invest a great deal of money in basic education for girls. One of the best known ways of controlling population is educating young girls and women. It's a proven fact that the more basic education that young girls have, the fewer children they have. For us it's very important to attack the problem in that way. It's one of our central focuses. Whatever country we go to, we encourage the education of girls.

Basic education in Africa is the basis of everything we do. In India and in Bangladesh you have to educate the girls because they are the ones who are the least likely to be educated. It's one way of tackling the problem, and I'm very hopeful that we're making huge progress in those areas.

• 1040

Some of the states in India, for instance, have now taken that on themselves, because they have realized that it is the single most effective way of ensuring smaller families, in a very good way.

We're going to continue to do that. We think that's the most essential thing we can do.

As well, there are our programs on poverty reduction. The poorest of the poor tend to be the ones who have more children, and one of the reasons is that many of their children tend to die. They need them to help feed themselves. They need a larger family to help with the work. So we also have programs on maternal and child health, so that they don't need to have quite as many children—they won't die at such a young age. We're going to continue in that direction. For us, it's the best way to do it.

The Chairman: Thank you, Minister.

Maybe I could move on, because Mr. Reed, your question was rather more than a three-minute question, if I may suggest. It's a vast problem.

Mr. Julian Reed: My apologies, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: No apologies necessary, because it is important. It's just that I have to move on. I'll go to Mr. Mills. We're trying to keep these to five minutes.

Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, Ref.): I'll just welcome the Minister, and certainly Madame Labelle and Mr. Robinson.

If you keep the answers really brief, I'll try to keep the questions brief.

First of all, Haiti. The prime minister has resigned. The cabinet has resigned. There are no more jobs. There's no education. The police force is showing an increased level of internal crime. The judicial system isn't working.

There are a number of CIDA projects there. Our troops are leaving today. How do you see the success of keeping those projects going in Haiti?

Ms. Diane Marleau: It's a very complex and very difficult situation. We are going to increase the number of police we have. As you know, the United Nations has agreed to maintaining a police force of 300 international police officers to help in Haiti. This is at the request of Haiti, and we're a part of that. We will have, all told, approximately 50 on the ground. We are continuing to work in many of the areas you have mentioned. The short-term issue is the security issue...and the very difficult one that's in place.

We are also working at the institutional level, at the governance level on the medium-term, to encourage them as much as possible to return to democracy and to create a judicial system that will function. As well, we are looking to the long term, to how we can help them in terms of their economy so that they can have some jobs.

There is so much work to be done in Haiti.

The environment is another area we are working very closely at helping them with, because there's a lot of deforestation.

We're going to continue as much as possible to work with Haitians, with the UN police corps, to manage what's happening on the ground in Haiti, and we're going to monitor very closely.

Mr. Bob Mills: Okay. The landmines announcement yesterday—we're going to spend $100 million in the clean-up process, which of course will be a drop in the bucket compared to the problem. Is that coming out of the CIDA budget, or where is the $100 million coming from?

Ms. Diane Marleau: That, sir, is new money, we're told, and so it hasn't been quite decided—

Mr. Bob Mills: There's a new taxpayer.

Ms. Diane Marleau: It will be addressed shortly, I guess, as to which departments will be spending the bulk of this money. Much of that will be for de-mining and victim assistance, which are very much programs that CIDA does.

Mr. Bob Mills: It would seem that if it comes out of CIDA, that will of course restrict you in other areas. Anyway, we could get into that.

Third, in terms of using aid, we have a subcommittee working on abducted children. The use of aid to some of these countries as a “pry”, if you want, as pressure to try to get some of these kids returned to Canada—is that sort of thing possible?

• 1045

Ms. Diane Marleau: I guess it's possible, but the countries where we have the biggest problems are not countries where we have aid programs. That's become the—

Mr. Bob Mills: France is the biggest problem.

Ms. Diane Marleau: That's something we're working on. It's a diplomatic problem. There's no aid program with France, for instance.

Mr. Bob Mills: No.

Ms. Diane Marleau: Again, it's certainly something that you could consider, but I don't think it would be an effective way of solving the problem. Not enough of the countries in which we have huge programs tend to have that kind of problem.

Mr. Bob Mills: There are some, but—

Ms. Diane Marleau: They tend to be—

Mr. Bob Mills: Fourth—I get ahead of the chairman here—

The Chairman: You're always ahead of me, Mr. Mills. Sometimes there's no bridge across the water.

Mr. Bob Mills: —relates to the coordination of aid efforts in countries in which we have NGOs. I was in Bosnia, and agencies were literally falling over each other for turf to do the same job. How much effort are you putting into—and Madam Labelle will know I've asked this question before—coordinating these activities?

Ms. Diane Marleau: We really want that, and we are trying in every way possible. Bosnia is a good example. National Defence is working with the Japanese and the British in that country in particular so that we're not duplicating our efforts, but it's not always something we can do by ourselves.

I've been to meetings in Africa at which the Africans themselves were asking the donor countries to please work together. It's ridiculous that they have to go from country to country, agency to agency, but some donor countries go in and they have a purpose. They're going in, yes it helps the country, but they have their own purposes. That isn't always a very constructive way of coordinating. But let me tell you that we do an awful lot of it, and we're becoming more and more successful.

As a matter of fact, we're really going to push this coordination on the landmines issue. It's very important for us because there are NGOs, there are governments, there are people doing some de-mining, some victim assistance in a patchwork sort of a way, and if we can mobilize everyone and develop a strategy per country, with that country, I think we'll be far more successful at eradicating some of these landmines, as well as at helping those people affected by landmines.

That's my aim. As a matter of fact, I'll be giving a speech at noon on how all the NGOs, the donor countries, can work together with the countries affected to ensure that all the dollars we can get and put together will go more to helping the people than contributing to cross-subsidization.

I think your question is very good and very important. I think right now the countries are all thinking it's a good idea, and we're going to strike while the iron is hot.

The Chairman: Thank you.

I just want to draw to the attention of the members of the committee a procedural problem. Two motions were submitted to us. I have two members left. Both Ms. Augustine and Ms. Guay have been waiting a long time. I'd like to give them a chance to get in, so, Minister, if we could cut down....

I believe we managed to get an arrangement whereby Mr. Robinson will agree to a slight modification to his motion, which would then get the general consent of everybody in the room. We can probably deal with that very quickly, and then we'll see if we can deal with the other one. That's the plan.

Perhaps I'll draw to everybody's attention that we're lucky to have with us this morning some parliamentary colleagues from the European Parliament, Mr. Michael Wood and Mr. Tony Cunningham. We also have le secrétaire général de l'Assemblée nationale du Togo.

Welcome before the committee. I hope our proceedings are not too confusing and befuddling for those of you who have not been here.

Ms. Augustine, it's up to you to bestow light and clarity to the proceedings for our foreign guests.

• 1050

Ms. Jean Augustine: I'll do the best I can to be brief.

Minister, I want to support the rescinding of the cuts for 1998, and I want to do as much as I possibly can to support my colleagues in that call.

Those of us who hear from constituents on a regular basis—for example, Partnership Africa, OXFAM, World Vision, CARE, Partners in Rural Development, and I can go on and name other organizations who do the work out there—hear several things. I want to put a few on the table and ask you to address those things. I'll just throw them out.

The first one is the issue of the peace-building fund. That would be the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. Then there's the training of Haitian police by the RCMP; funding for Radio Canada International; de-mining activities, etc. All of those are additions to CIDA's budget.

What does that mean for CIDA's core budget funding, and how has that actually reduced your dollar amounts? As well, do you agree with the arguments being made that the moneys seem to be going in various areas other than basic human needs, etc.?

Ms. Diane Marleau: I will answer that very quickly, if I may. I happen to think that setting up funds such as those is not necessarily the best use of our dollars, and that we can do more by using the dollars we have without setting up these separate funds. I'm very hopeful that we will not have any additional pressures on our budget.

These things have caused some very serious pressures on our budget, frankly. Mind you, the training of the police in Haiti is something we should be doing. That is one of the basics of what we do when we go into a country. It is to help good governance. The training of police is obviously a part of that.

So that fits in. That's not a separate thing. The de-mining activities are also part of what we should be doing.

That all fits into the framework of what we do, but the others are things we do anyway. There certainly is no need to segregate funds for them.

Ms. Jean Augustine: One other very public criticism that was made of CIDA was the lack of expansion, if you wish, or the increase—or maybe the reduction—of in-house expertise. The expenditure of dollars in hiring outside experts on, I think, World Food Day...and headlines were made by a very public speech criticizing CIDA's ability to do certain things simply because of the lack of in-house expertise.

I'll throw out one more before I ask you to respond. This has to do with the white paper the U.K. recently published. In that white paper, Eliminating World Poverty, they presented a package of reforms, including: meeting global targets; building partnerships; policy consistency; resources toward 0.7% GNP and so on; and ending aid and trade provisions.

I'm wondering, if we are headed in that direction how would the impact of that paper coincide with some of the things you are intending to do?

The Chairman: I'm sorry to interrupt, Minister, but we have six minutes. I'm told we have to leave this room. Normally we could run over for ten minutes without any problem, but I've been advised by the clerk that we have to leave.

Now, we do have to deal with our motion—

Mr. Svend Robinson: On a point of order—and I know the minister will want to respond briefly, and I also I know Ms. Guay does have questions—I gave notice some time ago of this motion—

The Chairman: I appreciate that.

Mr. Svend Robinson: —and I would ask that we proceed with the motion.

The Chairman: My understanding is that there is general agreement about the motion at this point. I think we can deal with it.

• 1055

I'd like to give Ms. Guay a chance to ask a question.

I'd like to recommend, Ms. Augustine, if you would accept, that the minister give a written response to the questions.

Ms. Jean Augustine: Certainly.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Ms. Guay, perhaps you could put your questions and the minister could give you an answer in writing, and in this way we could return immediately to the motion.

Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ): Madam Minister, I would like to have a fairly quick answer.

I'll ask my questions quickly. I'd like to know the percentage of CIDA's budget devoted to NGOs and the private sector, with specific details. The question was already put to Mr. Robinson and we didn't get an answer. I didn't receive the documents. Mr. Robinson, we asked for this quite recently.

My second question relates to the action plan with the Minister of Finance in order to obtain $150 million. Wouldn't it be better if you spoke out publicly to bring pressure to bear on the minister? We on our side will continue to bring pressure so that you obtain the necessary funding.

I'd like to know whether there have been any cuts in aid to Algeria since out of the $4 million granted, only $270,000 are for human rights. This is something that should be looked into because the situation has become critical in that country with all the massacres taking place.

I'd like to know whether there's going to be a review of CIDA's programs in which members of Parliament can take part. I know that this has never been done before, but if it were possible, we would like to participate.

Do you intend to reinstate vaccines against tuberculosis? In a discussion I had with a doctor, he mentioned that even in Canada cases of tuberculosis were starting to reappear and our drugs were not able to deal with them. So we're talking about prevention and I think it is particularly important at the present time.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Ms. Monique Guay: Is that short enough?

Ms. Diane Marleau: Yes. We'll give you an answer as soon as possible. We could even discuss it among ourselves as we leave the meeting, if you don't mind. It could be of assistance to you.

The Chairman: Thank you, but a written answer would be useful for the entire committee because these are questions of interest to everyone and it would appear in our minutes.

[English]

I'd like to give the floor to Mr. Robinson to speak to his motion.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will be very brief in the interest of time. I think we've already had a discussion of the basis for this motion.

The motion is as follows:

Whereas ongoing cuts to Canadian official development assistance have caused Canada to slip to the middle of the pack among OECD aid donors (from 5th place in 1995 to 11th place among 21 in 1997);

—and I would note as well that we would slip even further if these cuts proceed—

and whereas these severe cuts have exacerbated the growing gap between rich and poor countries and have hurt Canadian NGOs' ability to deliver basic needs programmes to individuals in need;

be it resolved that this committee urge the Minister of Finance to reconsider this year's planned 8 per cent cut in overseas development aid.

I move that, Mr. Chairman, for the reasons that have been given very eloquently by the minister as well as by other members of this committee. I would hope we could send a strong signal to the Minister of Finance that we as a committee urge them to reconsider this cut.

The Chairman: Mr. McWhinney.

Mr. Ted McWhinney (Vancouver Quadra, Lib.): I'm happy to second the motion. I will convey it directly to the minister today.

The Chairman: Thank you. The minister will no doubt help the two of you carry your bags.

Mr. Mills.

Mr. Bob Mills: I don't want to give a long presentation here—although I could, if you like.

The Chairman: Well, the incoming chair of the incoming committee is going to kill us all if we don't move over.

Mr. Bob Mills: The reality check is that we're $600 billion in debt. We have a $50 billion interest payment. We are the highest taxed in the G-7. As a result, we should be talking about effectiveness of the dollars we have. For that reason, we have to oppose the motion.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Mr. Turp.

Mr. Daniel Turp: Mr. Chairman, the representatives of the Bloc Québécois are proud to support Mr. Robinson's motion.

[English]

The Chairman: I put the question.

(Motion agreed to)

The Chairman: Thank you very much

Mr. Turp had a resolution on Algeria, which obviously we will not be able to deal with now. We'll put it on the Order Paper for Tuesday.

The clerk advises me we have a day to deal with the MAI report, which Mr. Speller will have completed by then.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Will there be a steering committee as well?

The Chairman: We can try to deal with it—

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: Yes, that's what I wanted to ask, Mr. Chairman. I'd like us to have a steering committee meeting so that we can take stock and talk about Algeria and also have information on the follow-up to the response I received from Mr. Kilgour in the House of Commons about the parliamentary delegation to Algeria.

• 1100

The Chairman: We'll discuss this in the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure, it's quite a complex situation.

Madam Minister, thank you very much for coming here this morning. We wish you every success in your endeavour.

[English]

The committee is adjourned until Tuesday.