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]

Tuesday, April 11, 2000

• 1535

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Bill Graham (Toronto Centre—Rosedale, Lib.)): Colleagues, I'd like to call this session of the committee to order.

I'm very pleased to welcome the Honourable Maria Minna, our Minister for International Cooperation, to speak to the estimates. She's accompanied by Mr. Len Good, who's the president of CIDA.

Welcome, Minister. Thank you for coming.

Hon. Maria Minna (Minister for International Cooperation): Thank you.

The Chair: Perhaps you'd like to make an introductory statement, and then we can turn it over to the number crunchers.

Ms. Maria Minna: I certainly would. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Merci beaucoup.

I must say that when I walked into this room, my instinct was immediately to walk to that side of the room, as I've been here many times.

The Chair: It's the old war room, so be careful where you walk. You might get a landmine or something.

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes, I know, I know. We're going to rename this room the Peace Room. Peace-building, that's what it's about.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, everyone, honourable colleagues.

[Translation]

It is a great pleasure to appear before this committee. I welcome this opportunity to discuss with you my vision and priorities for Canada's development and humanitarian efforts.

I would like to draw your attention to the document to which I will be referring today. You have already received Parts I and II of the Main Estimates. I would ask you to focus on Part III—the Report on Plans and Priorities—which more accurately reflects CIDA's agenda and spending priorities after the Budget.

[English]

As you know, the recent federal budget increased the international assistance envelope by a total of $435 million over the next three years. This reflects the Prime Minister's commitment to strengthen Canada's development assistance program and allows us to take on a bigger leadership role in world affairs. This is important, considering the budget cuts of the last few years.

The budget attaches great importance to key priorities for Canadians, such as balancing social priorities like health care, children, and education with sound fiscal management. I believe good social policy is good economic policy here and around the world. The two must go hand in hand. It is important to build strong infrastructure, ensure a good environment, and encourage economic growth in developing countries. It is equally, if not more, important to ensure that people are educated, healthy, and protected from the devastation of conflict.

[Translation]

This Report on Plans and Priorities outlines the main elements of a Social Development Agenda which I have developed along these lines over the last few months. It is consistent with CIDA's poverty-reduction mandate, as set out in “Canada in the World”, and with CIDA's six programming priorities for Canadian development assistance. This Agenda will strengthen CIDA's existing programs—and develop new and innovative programs—in four key areas: health and nutrition; fighting on HIV/AIDS; basic education; and child protection.

[English]

For health and nutrition, CIDA will launch a leadership initiative aimed at meeting specific international goals in the fight against such diseases as measles, malaria, and tuberculosis. We will also seek to improve the health of children through better nutrition and to improve women's health through education. Canada is already well-established in many of these areas.

For instance, last January I had the pleasure of representing Canada and the donor countries at the launch of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization. This alliance has set a five-year goal to reduce by half the number of children not currently immunized against deadly vaccine-preventable diseases.

HIV/AIDS is a key priority separate from health and nutrition because of its severe and devastating impact on the developing world, particularly in Africa. Africa is home to only 10% of the world's population, but to 70% of all people living with HIV/AIDS. This pandemic has already reduced life expectancy rates in some parts of the continent and left millions of children without parents. In fact, it is estimated that ten years from now, 40 million children will have been orphaned by AIDS, most of them in Africa. As well, entire labour forces are being decimated, with teachers, miners, and public servants dying every day.

• 1540

So it makes sense for us to invest specifically in fighting HIV/AIDS through prevention initiatives such as health education, gender relations, and behavioural change. Canada has already demonstrated significant expertise in this area. For example, CIDA funded a project carried out by the University of Manitoba that has not only increased awareness about the importance of preventing HIV/AIDS, but has actually helped Kenya stabilize its HIV infection rates.

As part of our focus, in June I will be hosting an international conference on HIV/AIDS that will focus on Canada's contribution to HIV/AIDS programming in developing countries and countries in transition. We will share Canada's drafted HIV/AIDS action plan with partners from Canada and around the world, and explore how we can work more closely and effectively with developing and donor countries to reduce the rapid spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa and elsewhere.

[Translation]

Like health and nutrition, basic education is an essential building block. Education—quality education—is a right for both girls and boys. The only way to move forward is to ensure universal access to quality, basic education. Canada and the international community have committed themselves to achieving this goal by 2015.

Two weeks from now, I will be leading the Canadian delegation to the World Education Forum in Dakar, Senegal, where I will make an important announcement about basic education. At this Forum, the nations of the world will be updating the Plan of Action to achieve “Education for All”. At CIDA, we will soon be releasing our own Education Strategy, along the same lines.

[English]

Child protection is the fourth key area because of the fact that children are the most vulnerable members of society. To quote the UN Special Representative Olara Otunnu, who spoke to this committee last week:

children have a primary claim to that protection [...] Because children are especially innocent and vulnerable and, moreover, children represent the hopes and future of every society.

In societies torn by war or burdened with poverty, this vulnerability can be seen in the abuse of children as soldiers, but also in the trafficking of children, in child labour, and in the overwhelming presence of street kids.

[Translation]

Our efforts extend not only to providing help to children who are currently in very real and harmful situations, but also to preventing such situations from never taking place again. Take the situation of child workers in Egypt. CIDA helps prevent dangerous child labour through its support for the Foundation for International Training. This foundation trains women and provides them with loans so they can start their own small businesses. At the same time, it ensures that the children often employed in these small businesses are not exploited, work in a safe environment and receive training and access to education.

[English]

With respect to conflict and children, my colleague the Minister of Foreign Affairs and I will be jointly hosting an international conference on war-affected children this fall. We will bring together ministers, senior officials, organizations, experts, and witnesses from donor and war-affected countries. Together we will develop an approach based on the best ways to protect all children, and not just child soldiers, in conflict situations. We are already doing this in some areas, such as in Sierra Leone, for instance.

Canada was one of the first countries to help with the disarming and demobilization of child soldiers in Sierra Leone. We are there right now providing psycho-social assistance and all of the community-based support needed to prevent tensions from flaring up again. We are helping to set the conditions of goodwill needed for successful negotiations and peace-building.

Each of the four key areas of this social development agenda are central to CIDA's overall poverty reduction mandate. In every area, we will maintain a strong focus on gender equality, which is essential to any serious approach to fighting poverty.

• 1545

The agenda includes concrete goals so that Canadians can measure our progress and understand what they are getting for their tax dollars. These goals are internationally agreed upon, based on the outcome of United Nations conferences and global agreements.

For example, in the area of health, Canada and other countries are working towards eradicating polio worldwide by the end of 2000 and cutting malaria deaths in half by 2010. In fact, thanks in part to Canadian support, researchers have discovered that the lives of some half a million children could be saved each year if bed nets coated with insecticide were widely and correctly used to keep the mosquitoes that carry malaria from biting during the night. While I am in Africa at the end of the month, I expect to participate in the African summit, Roll Back Malaria, in Nigeria, to boost support for this and other promising initiatives as part of CIDA's social development agenda.

[Translation]

With respect to HIV/AIDS, our goal is to reduce by 25% the rate of new infections among the 15-to 24-year-olds in the most affected countries by 2005.

In basic education, one of the goals is to ensure universal primary education in all countries by 2015. Another goal is to eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education by 2005.

In the area of child protection, we are developing specific goals with a focus on child labour and war-affected children.

[English]

It is very important to me to ensure that our aid dollars are invested wisely and that our approach to development offers us the greatest possible impact and effectiveness. With respect to these approaches, we are, for example, exploring initiatives called sector-wide approaches, or SWAPs. These rely less on individual projects and more on broad, coordinated approaches towards an entire sector such as health or education. It means teaming up with other countries that share our goals and working together to improve the delivery of programs. Resources are scarce, so combining our resources only makes sense. I will have further comments and an important announcement closer to the Dakar conference later this month.

Coordination will also be key within the federal government. This can be seen in the budget, where new funding of $175 million is provided to address debt relief in developing countries. This can be seen in the $135 million to be provided over five years to improve the global environment, in partnership with developing countries. This is also evident in the $10 million dedicated to the human security agenda. In fact, my department and the Department of Foreign Affairs have been coordinating the human security agenda and one of its foundations, human development, which we all support through Canada's efforts in sustainable development and poverty reduction.

In sum, the members of the committee will see in this report on plans and priorities that my department is making strategic investments in key areas and is developing new, strong, and coordinated approaches. I have personally seen examples of our efforts in Haiti, Malawi, and South Africa, and I know Canada can, through the work of Canadians, make a significant difference.

The value and strength of our involvement lie in our partnership approach, involving Canadian teachers, nurses, environmental experts, business people, and many others, as well as international partners. Canadian assistance is very welcome around the world. This report on plans and priorities is our blueprint for ensuring that it achieves maximum impact for the tax dollars it uses.

Thank you very much. Merci beaucoup.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Minister.

Mr. Good, are you going to add anything?

Mr. Len Good (President, Canadian International Development Agency): No, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: Okay.

Colleagues, Mr. Gruending, who has just joined us from the NDP for the first time, has to go.

I believe you have a 4 o'clock appointment, don't you?

Mr. Dennis Gruending (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, NDP): It's at 4.15.

The Chair: Would it—

[Translation]

Ms. Francine Lalonde (Mercier, BQ): Me too.

[English]

The Chair: Okay.

Do you mind if we go a little bit backwards, Mr. Grewal? I'll go to Madam Lalonde first, then to Mr. Gruending, and then come back.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal (Surrey Central, Canadian Alliance): Not really. It's—

The Chair: You won't lose any time.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Sure.

The Chair: Now, if we have ten minutes for you and ten for you, you'll both get to your appointments.

Madame Lalonde.

[Translation]

Ms. Francine Lalonde: Thank you, member of the Official Opposition. Good afternoon, Madam Minister, and good afternoon, Mr. Good.

Madam Minister, first of all, I would like to say that I knew you in another committee. To some extent, it is a pity that you are in a department where the needs are growing constantly but where the funding is not.

• 1550

My first question will be general. Whereas the needs are growing everywhere in the world, as a result of globalization, widening gaps, AIDS in Africa, new problems that are developing in the former Soviet Union, given all of that and the fact that you have, proportionally speaking, less money, how do you set your priorities? What are the priorities? Secondly, what percentage of this money comes back here? I am not speaking only about bilateral agreements.

[English]

Ms. Maria Minna: First I will say that obviously the money is never enough to deal with all of the difficulties and all of the problems around the world, but it is important to point out that in the last budget, for the first time since the 1994 budget, CIDA received an increase. We received, for the first time, an increase to our base, to our threshold reference, which is important because it means we're moving upward instead of downward.

We also received an incremental increase for next year and the year after that, which will give the department an ability to begin to increase some spending in some areas. The priorities I referred to earlier in my statement are very clear: we're dealing with basic human needs in the areas of education, health, and nutrition as well as children in conflict. Also, of course, the gender issue runs right through these areas, because the education of girl children is also very important, and that is demonstrated everywhere.

But I think it's also important to point out that Canada or CIDA does not work alone. We don't work in isolation. We work in partnership, quite often with other countries. There are many actors in the field. We work with other countries or other multilateral donors in the fields of development as well as humanitarian aid. For the priorities I mentioned earlier, I'm looking, as I mentioned, to work on a sector-wide basis.

When I talk about, for instance, the education as opposed to doing a project in a country, what I'm looking forward to doing is working with colleagues, with counterparts. I know that Great Britain and others in this same field are working together on a sector-wide basis; we are actually assisting to develop a primary education system for some of the countries. It is working very well already in Uganda and in a couple of other places. It's the same situation with respect to the area of HIV/AIDS.

Resources can be pulled together and maximized by our working with partners that we work with very well, on the international scene as well as with bilateral partners. That is something that more and more, I think, people involved in aid and in development are beginning to see: that project-requisite programs are really not the way to go. I know that the World Bank itself has been talking about sector-wide programs or comprehensive development approaches. That is the way I would approach it, which is why the statement I just made talks about the priority areas for the social development part of the department.

With respect to your second question as to the percentage that stays here, I don't have—

Mr. Len Good: It's the largest part.

Ms. Maria Minna: I would say the largest part goes abroad because—

Mr. Len Good: The largest part does come back.

Ms. Maria Minna: It does come back, but—

Mr. Len Good: Do you want me to comment?

Ms. Maria Minna: Did you want to comment on that? I see it the other way. But go ahead, and we'll both go at it.

Mr. Len Good: Well, I see that in the sense that our partnership branch, for example, works with Canadian partners, and the bulk of what is spent there is spent on Canadian firms and institutions. It's the same with our universities.

The part that clearly does not, in the first instance, come back to Canada would be, for example, our grants to the multilateral institutions like the World Bank and the IMF and the regional development banks. But having worked in those institutions and having tracked their money, I can say that still a significant amount of those moneys ultimately returns to Canada.

At this point I would say that by far the largest part of it—if I had to pick a number arbitrarily, I'd say three-quarters, but that's a guess—returns to Canadian companies.

• 1555

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes, from the point of view of who does the work.

I was interpreting your question quite differently, though, Madame Lalonde. I was interpreting it from the point of view of where the greatest benefit was. In interpreting it from the point of view of the benefit, the benefit would be to the developing countries, obviously, because that's what the programs are about. They're about the transfer of technology, they're about development, and they're about humanitarian aid. That's why I was interpreting your question to mean where the bulk of the benefit of our work and the moneys that are spent would be. The benefit would be to the developing countries.

[Translation]

Ms. Francine Lalonde: I wanted an answer to my question, because I'll be able to ask supplementary questions based on the answer. We need a lot of time to spend on this issue, and I don't know if we're going to have another opportunity to do so. Naturally, developing countries may benefit from transfers of technology or knowledge, but as far as development is concerned, money is also required, especially when we know that many countries are bled dry because of the debts that they have to pay back. This is an important issue and I will get back to it later on.

Before I leave, I have a very specific question that once again deals with your priorities. First of all, I would like to quote a sentence from the documentation provided by the Library of Parliament:

According to the Canadian Council for International Co-operation, despite the increases in CIDA's budget, since unlike in the past two budgets the 2000-2001 budget did not pre-pay dues to UN agencies, the amount of new resources available to CIDA for new programming over the next three years will be significantly reduced.

This is what the Canadian Council for International Co- operation is saying. Do you agree with this assessment? That is my first question.

Now for my second question. East Timor was completely ravaged in very short order, even before the countries that had decided to intervene could do so. According to UNICEF, 70% of the buildings were pillaged and burnt. I will ask my question quickly. The UN and the World Bank estimate that it will take 760 million Canadian dollars, including $150 million for humanitarian assistance, just to get East Timor back on its feet. However, as far as I know, Canada has committed only one million dollars to date. This brings me back to my question on priorities.

[English]

Ms. Maria Minna: Firstly—

The Chair: Minister, I'm having a little trouble following this, but I think I understand the point.

Ms. Maria Minna: Are you okay with that, Mr. Chairman? Do you want me to continue?

The Chair: Well, no, I don't think I understand it, but we'll see what your answer is.

[Translation]

Ms. Francine Lalonde: Let her answer, Mr. Chairman. She is quite capable of answering.

[English]

Ms. Maria Minna: First, with respect to the budget, you must understand that the cuts were made across the board in the previous years. Like other departments, CIDA obviously received its fair share of cuts. In order to assist our program last year, we received a prepayment, but that was a one-time situation for our obligations at the international level. At this point this year, though, we have had $100 million added to our base, and that allows us to be able to in fact cover that commitment.

In essence, then, we're not in a worse situation than the one we were in before. In addition to that, we have received.... So there's an increase to our reference level, for starters, and that allows us to cover our obligations. Also, it makes permanent the increase to the reference level. It's not a one-time situation. It continues to be that way.

Secondly, we have also had an increase for the next year and the year after that. We will get an additional $45 million per year, which will allow us to make some increases also in the area of programming and in the area of prioritizing some additional ones. So while I know some people have said this is a negative, I see it very much as a positive, because we have had an increase to our reference level, and that allows us to cover our costs as well as having an increase.

• 1600

I'm quite happy to be able to look at a situation in which our budget is going up rather than either staying static or going down. That's not the case at this point. So that is one of the situations....

With respect to your last question on East Timor, we have just recently had.... You said that our commitment was only $1 million, Madame Lalonde.

Ms. Francine Lalonde: As far as I know.

Ms. Maria Minna: As far as you know. Okay.

As you know, in October 1999 I provided an additional $1.5 million to help the people of East Timor with respect to the situation that was happening. This additional funding brought Canada's total aid to East Timor to $2.9 million since the crisis, and to $6.7 million since April 1, 1999, which was a year ago. This is all since the crisis. And with respect to the reconstruction, we have recently been look at increasing that. So we have in fact committed a great deal more money to East Timor. We have been there consistently—prior to the crisis, during the crisis, and after the crisis—and we will be there for the reconstruction phase as well. It's a great deal more than the amount of money that you just mentioned.

[Translation]

Ms. Francine Lalonde: But we're talking about $100 million for Kosovo. Something must be done.

I'm going, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Lalonde.

Mr. Gruending.

[English]

Mr. Dennis Gruending: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the committee members for graciously and generously allowing me to go first. I think this is just the second time I've been at one of the meetings, and here I am asking for an early favour.

Madam Minister, thank you.

The Chair: You'll pay for it later, don't worry.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: He owes me.

Mr. Dennis Gruending: Madam Minister, while there is more money in the ODA envelope this year, it has a downward trend as a percentage of GNP. We were at about 0.5% of GNP in the early nineties, about 0.27% last year, and 0.25% this year, and it's projected at 0.24%, so the trend line is going downward.

I note the international comparison. We used to be seventh among twenty-one donors, and we are now eleventh. I recall as well that Mr. Pearson many years ago promised 0.7% of GNP. I note as well that in the recent throne speech and in some comments abroad, the Prime Minister raised some expectations.

I'm tempted to ask you why we haven't met our targets, but actually I'm more interested in knowing if you still hold to the target of 0.7% of 1.0%, and when you think we might get there.

Ms. Maria Minna: I see my colleague here is helping you out on this side. You're going to have to rewrite your questions.

Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): That's my question.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: You should not ask again.

Ms. Maria Minna: All right, the fact that there were cuts in our department in 1995—just as there were in other departments right across in order to deal with the deficit situation in Canada—is not news to anyone. We were at 0.27% prior to the budget. With the additional resources provided in the 2000 budget, Canada's ODA ratio will stabilize at 0.28% in the fiscal year 1999-2000.

Now, obviously I like to believe I don't live by just one budget. There'll be other budgets coming next year and the year after that, and hopefully the upward trend that we started this time is a trend that we can look forward to or hope for. I will certainly be continuing to work in that direction.

Are we going to hold onto the 0.7%? Certainly. I think it's worth it for Canada to hold onto that. We haven't abandoned it. It has been set back, but we are on our way back. We have had a very good increase in our reference level in this budget, and as I said, that is allowing us to do some very good work.

Keep in mind that Canada is still one of the top donors in the world with respect to the work we do internationally. We are not by any means a country that is not at the table with respect to doing some really good work around the world. We're one of the best in many fields.

For instance, earlier I mentioned the area of health. In fact, one of the reasons Canada was asked to join the GAVI board—and Canada is the only donor country that sits on the GAVI board, representing all other donor countries—is its work in the area of health around the world. We have a lead role in that field.

• 1605

Mr. Dennis Gruending: Thank you.

I'm hoping you're right about the trend line, although the trend line as it is extended out in the documentation we've been given by the committee indicates that through the year 2002-03 it is down rather than up. I hope you're right. This trend indicates it may not be.

I would remark that the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands do reach and go beyond the levels we had pledged for ourselves, and they're not bigger countries than we are; they're not richer countries. I'm curious actually and would be interested to know if, given the exposure you've had as minister, you have any idea why they can do it and we can't in terms of the level.

Ms. Maria Minna: Firstly, Mr. Gruending, I want to say nobody knows future budgets. As I said, I certainly intend to work on the next budget, and I hope everybody in this room will be supportive and work with me on it, and we may continue our upward trend. That's important.

I'm not going to compare us to Norway. I'm not entirely sure how they work their budgets. I would rather deal with what I know well. I don't know their budget that well. I've worked with my counterpart for a very short time. I think I met her twice, and she has now been replaced by a new minister, whom I have not yet met, so I couldn't comment on their structure all that well.

Mr. Dennis Gruending: I have a final question. I note and I'm very pleased that Canada has agreed in this budget to write off debt to the world's poorest highly indebted countries, a credit, as is indicated here, to the Jubilee campaign launched by Canadian churches—one of which, I might add, my wife was active in.

But we continue to insist that they implement what's called structural adjustment. From my own limited experience in other countries—Peru, for example, where the rate of tuberculosis was on its way up when I was there because of cutbacks in food programs a number of years ago—I believe structural adjustment programs have been very hard on especially the poor in those countries. I'm just wondering what you think about this. Should we tie it in this way? Are we actually being as generous to these people as we suggest we are if we do this?

Ms. Maria Minna: First I should tell you that CIDA, through the Government of Canada, does not give loans. We've forgiven all of the CIDA loans that existed. Those are all gone.

In addition to that, just in this budget, as you know, Canada has pledged $175 million to assist the HIPC countries, the highly indebted poor countries, that were identified by the World Bank.

In addition to that, we have forgiven all our commercial loans—well, we're looking to forgive all our commercial loans—which is an additional $85 million. There are about 18 of them. This is on the condition that the moneys saved go to social infrastructure for those countries. It's important that as we fund HIPC countries, the savings they make will go not to buying arms or other problems but to social infrastructure.

Actually we have been one of the lead countries, not only in advocating relief of debt for highly indebted countries and the poorer countries, but in terms of our own debt load that existed. CIDA now only works with contracts and grants. We don't give loans. As well, the last budget allocated $175 million toward the HIPC countries to assist with our fair share at the international level.

Mr. Dennis Gruending: Do we insist that they continue structural adjustment programs? Do I have that wrong? I certainly have read that.

Mr. Len Good: Do you want me to comment?

Ms. Maria Minna: Please.

Mr. Len Good: Structural adjustment and the HIPC initiative are different initiatives. It's certainly true that the way the bank has approached the first and second phases of HIPC, built into the requirements, as the minister said, is some recognition that the moneys saved have to be spent on things that are going to benefit the country from a social point of view, such as health and education.

You're also right that the issue of social conditionality has been raised. Having been through the difficulties with structural adjustment in the 1980s and 1990s and having been through one phase of HIPC, there is certainly a real awareness that the kind of social conditionality reflected in HIPC should help countries rather than make life more difficult for them. That's really well recognized now, and it's supported by our executive directors at both the bank and the IMF.

• 1610

Mr. Dennis Gruending: Thank you, Mr. Good, Madam Minister, and Mr. Chairman.

The Chair: We've had this conversation so often around this table about structural adjustment. We get environmental groups coming in here saying we shouldn't be imposing structural adjustment, and they'll say, “But you can't let them spend the money unless they use it for the environment.”

It seems everybody who comes to the table has their own idea of structural adjustment. An economist will walk in here and say we should implement conservative economic policy. Then somebody else will come in and say, “I'm against that, but I'm in favour of no arms”, or this or that. Somebody's always imposing conditions.

So the new terminology, I take it, is no longer structural adjustment, because that's out. Now it's social adjustment that's in. That's where we're going. We're still going to impose conditions, but they're just different conditions, nicer conditions. It's still conditionality. I take it that's where we're going?

Ms. Maria Minna: As I said, with respect to our own debt relief—unless, Mr. Chairman, you're talking about the $175 million—with respect to the 18 countries where we are forgiving commercial loans, yes, we're saying we would like to see the moneys they're going to save address poverty eradication in those countries. I would rather see that than them buying arms or what have you.

The Chair: I would too. I just think it's still conditionality, but it's a different form of conditionality.

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes, exactly.

The Chair: Okay.

Mr. Grewal.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I welcome the opportunity to have the minister before the committee, as well as the president of CIDA. I will also take the opportunity to formally congratulate Mr. Len Good on his new appointment. This is the first time I've seen him formally since then. I remind him of the challenges of providing the best value for the taxpayers' dollars in the management of CIDA.

Mr. Speaker, last Christmas break we had CIDA Inc.'s audit results tabled, and I have a question with respect to the audit. Then I have two other quick questions, so I'll be blunt and brief.

According to the CIDA Inc. audits released during the Christmas break, nine out of ten projects do not get off the ground, 37 projects reviewed were paid despite missing reports, and 10% of all the projects filed no final report. Also, 40% of the projects failed and were still paid, and in 90% of the cases reviewed there was no follow-up to know if the grants were used for the intended purpose.

For 72% of the projects, economic benefits to host countries were not recorded, and for 50% of the projects there was no feedback. Also, 4.4% of those firms received 33% of the funding in 1999, compared to 7% in 1992. That means there is a concentration of the firms that get contracts from CIDA. Out of those 4.4% of firms, 75% received three or more contributions, compromising accessibility and equitable distribution.

So my question is, can the minister assure Canadians that this mismanagement that has continued for a long time—and we have been seeing it in one audit after another—will stop and we will not see similar audits again?

Ms. Maria Minna: First, if I may, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to the honourable member that he doesn't have to give me a lesson about taking care of taxpayers' dollars. I spent twenty years of my life working as the volunteer chair of a volunteer organization in my community. I can tell you I value taxpayers' dollars and volunteer dollars very much. Always, every time, there was never a penny misspent from that organization.

I can assure you there is no mismanagement going on at CIDA. It's easy to throw around terminology, with respect. CIDA Inc. is a program that deals specifically with assisting Canadian companies. In many cases they're not looking at very large amounts of money. It's a specific program that assists Canadian companies in developing countries. The programs they establish have to be developmental in nature, and we work together.

• 1615

To go back to some of the comments you made just a few minutes ago, your comments suggest somehow that we pay without having regard to any invoice or any reports or any understanding of what's going on. First, let me make it very clear that absolutely no payments are made without supporting invoices. We will not issue final payments to companies that submit final reports that are unsatisfactory. Those are things that go on at all times.

On average, CIDA does two audits a week, or an audit every two weeks. We do audits especially to improve the programs. This is what internal auditing is about.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: But, Mr. Chairman—

Ms. Maria Minna: Mr. Chairman, he should let me finish answering the question. He went on and gave me about ten points. With respect, I think I have a right to answer them now.

The Chair: Absolutely, Madam Minister.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: My time is limited, you know.

The Chair: You asked ten questions, so you're going to get ten answers.

Ms. Maria Minna: Well, you used up the time. That was your problem.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Minister, I just wanted assurance.

Ms. Maria Minna: The audits are done specifically to improve the management of programs. That's why companies, the private sector, and institutions do audits. We would be remiss—and you should in fact be here and hold us accountable—if we did not do audits. But we do audits, and we improve from audit to audit. This is how the administrative work of the department is improved.

We now have a new method of payment. A company will only be paid if it meets specific results that are agreed to in advance. That doesn't mean to say we did not know what the money was going to be for. That does not mean to say the moneys were not paid without invoices and without reports. For the 30% to which you referred before, there was a number, a sample, that the Auditor General looked at. The 37% was then an extrapolation across the rest of the organization.

One final point you made was that we are only successful on a very small number. With respect, I want to point out to you that we do a great many feasibility studies. The reason for the feasibility studies is to see whether or not the project a company wants to do is in fact feasible. If it is not, we will not go ahead, and sometimes the company itself will decide not to go ahead because it realizes it is not a feasible program to invest in. So we are very careful. In fact, the moneys that are allocated to CIDA Inc. in the last three years were not all used up.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Okay, thank you, Madam Minister.

These are not lessons from me; these are the lessons on the audit. Do you deny that these figures are true?

Ms. Maria Minna: What I'm telling you is that the lessons from the audit—

Mr. Bernard Patry (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Lib.): It doesn't matter—

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Let her finish. She's the minister.

Ms. Maria Minna: I have just told you what we do. I've told you that we learn from every audit. Eighty percent of the recommendations you're talking about have already been finished or are underway; therefore, in essence, they're rather old news in terms of the actual recommendations. Eighty percent of them are done, a few are on their way, and all of them will be finished by June. On the specific recommendations that were made in the audit—which you read, I'm sure—there was in fact a management plan published in the back of the audit itself. The management response was immediate, and I've just given you the response. To suggest that the program is mismanaged and that we are not accountable for the money we spend is not accurate.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: It's not a satisfactory answer, because the figures indicate mismanagement, not me.

Mr. Chairman, very quickly, I have another question.

The previous minister had to apologize in the House for the distribution of the contracts. Of the CIDA contracts, which amount to $2 billion per year, 90% to 92% go only to two provinces, Ontario and Quebec. The remaining 8% to 10% of the contracts go to all the other provinces and territories in Canada. I have nothing against Quebec or Ontario—

Mr. Bernard Patry: Thank you.

Mr. Denis Paradis (Brome—Missisquoi, Lib.): Thank you.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: —but the question is about the disparity in the distribution of the contracts. My constituents also want CIDA contracts so that we can create jobs.

Here is the question for you, Madam Minister—

The Chair: I don't know if the minister wants to answer the question, but my recollection is that—

Ms. Maria Minna: I can take the question, Mr. Chairman. I understand fully where he's going, and I can give him the facts.

The Chair: Yes, but I don't know if you were here when the evidence was given before by the.... As I recall, the minister told us that's true if you look at where the contract was awarded, but often that was to the head office of an organization that may have been located in Ontario or Quebec—

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: But who is responsible, Mr. Chairman?

• 1620

The Chair: —but which employed people in other provinces. And that's often a problem in the country.

I know this allegation is always vague, but I still don't think it's fair to put a question to this minister with that suggestion in it, because that wasn't quite the answer the former minister gave. The former minister said, “Yes, if you just take head offices”, but you've got to look at—

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Mr. Chairman, no. I have a little correction here. The previous minister said she was working on this in the department and the contracts were equally distributed—she listed one or two steps—but they were not successful.

So I still do not see...because CIDA has quarterly reports indicating how the contracts are distributed. For the last three years, in every contract where it showed the man's name...and there is no concrete step that has been so far effective in allocating that.

The Chair: Well, with that background—

Ms. Maria Minna: Mr. Chairman, I—

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: I didn't finish yet.

Ms. Maria Minna: I can answer that question.

The Chair: Maybe you'd better answer that part of the question, and then we can go to the second half.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: But I didn't put the question, Mr. Chairman. That was simply the background. That was my preamble.

The Chair: That was your preamble, okay.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: The question is, we have noticed that CIDA has been giving contracts to certain companies, and those companies have been donating back to the Liberal campaign. Here is an example: A parent company called Gératek and its affiliates got contracts from CIDA for $136 million. When you look at the Elections Canada donation list to Liberals, they donated $137,000 to the Liberal campaign. So for donating $137,000 to the Liberal campaign, they got CIDA contracts for $136 million.

What is the minister doing justifying this type of contracting, when the people in B.C. don't get contracts?

Ms. Maria Minna: Okay, first, I think the way in which the honourable member, with respect, has posed the first part of the question on concentration is irresponsible, if I may, and I apologize, Mr. Chairman, for using that term, but nonetheless it is. Is he suggesting we are purposely keeping other parts of the country from applying and participating in this firm, which is absolutely not true?

Let me give you some facts with respect to that. First, as you said, most head offices are in central Canada, but there's more to that. On average, of companies that apply to CIDA Inc., we approve about 60%, whether they're from central Canada, western Canada, or eastern Canada. For instance, between 1993 and 1999, of the applications that came from Quebec, we approved about 51.7% Of the applications that came from Alberta, we approved about 51.1%—not a major difference. The difference, though, is that we only had 356 applications from Alberta, but we had 1,591 from Quebec.

So when the applications come in, we have more or less the same average of acceptance. That is why we have started—the department and I, and we're having one in Newfoundland this week—international development days with companies and NGOs, to talk about access, the programs CIDA has, the contracts, and how one can participate. We've done it in Vancouver. The next stop will be Saskatoon.

I have met with round tables across this country now in Vancouver and Winnipeg. I haven't done one in Toronto yet, but I've done them in Moncton and Nova Scotia, in order to try to assist. We have promised that we will have a two-day session overnight in Atlantic Canada some time soon. We now have a person working part-time in Vancouver to assist us in encouraging more companies to participate. I am looking at additional personnel to assist, possibly in Atlantic Canada and western Canada. Therefore, it is not an issue of us not trying or us not wanting. So the suggestion the honourable member is making is absolutely wrong, and I refuse it.

With respect to his last comment on donations, I could go through every single company and tell you the donations.... Most of these companies have worked with CIDA for the last decades. They have received contracts on both sides of the House, from our government and other governments that have been in power before us. They have given donations to different parties whenever they wished.

• 1625

The decisions that are made at the department are not made on the basis of who gave what and when to whom. Some companies have been involved with CIDA for the last 20 to 30 years, since its inception in some cases, and have in fact donated to both governments at different times. So I don't accept that premise at all.

The agreement of contracts with CIDA has nothing whatever to do with what donations are given; that is not a prerequisite. As a matter of fact, most of the contracts go through a competitive process at CIDA. As you know, they are put on the MERX, and that is how they are decided. I don't accept that premise at all.

The Chair: Okay. We'll give you another chance and come back to you.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Sure.

The Chair: Monsieur Patry.

Mr. Bernard Patry: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have two short questions, and I'll share my time with one of my colleagues, if you agree.

Madame Minister, you pinpointed in your remarks four key areas of the social development agenda. You mentioned education, health, HIV/AIDS, and child protection. Then you said, “The agenda includes concrete goals so that Canadians can measure our progress...”. I have two questions.

First, does the fact that you are focusing on the four areas mean you will be cutting back on other activities CIDA has engaged in, such as governance? Second, when you mentioned that the agenda includes concrete goals, are they concrete goals for CIDA and/or the international community? I'd like you to elaborate a little bit on that.

Thank you.

Ms. Maria Minna: First, you are quite right. What I call the social development agenda includes the area of primary education, because I believe strongly that without education, development is not possible in countries, especially if you link education to the problem of HIV/AIDS, where prevention is very important. That's very much needed. So the social development agenda is very important to the department, and it's very important on an international basis as well. A lot of these items have been discussed internationally. There are also some international objectives.

As I mentioned earlier, there are three conferences happening back to back in Africa in the same week. One is on rollback malaria, which addresses our issue in the health area. One is on education in Dakar, which goes to our education commitment. Another one is on children and conflict in Ghana, which goes to our war-affected children program. These are very key areas of development, in our view.

That does not and will not affect the programs we have in the area of governance, because it's a matter of maintaining stability. It's a bit of the chicken and the egg. If you have bad governance, you have a problem. But at the same time, if you don't have a strong, stable society, a well-educated society, and a healthy society, with the demands from their government and their institutions, you also may not have strong governance. That is why, with the importance and priorities we have set out, we will not be cutting back on that program.

Mr. Bernard Patry: Now my second question regarding your concrete goals....

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes. I'm sorry.

Mr. Bernard Patry: You said the agenda includes concrete goals. Can you elaborate a little more about those concrete goals? Is it just for CIDA or the international community?

Ms. Maria Minna: Sorry, I apologize.

The concrete goals affect CIDA, of course, but also the DAC because they are international goals that were decided for the 21st century by the international community. They very much mirror the kinds of goals I mentioned earlier; they're very much the same. So what's positive about this is we are working together.

I talked earlier about rolling back polio, or eradicating it by 2000-2010 for malaria and so on. So there are specific areas and commitments that have been made by the international community for the 21st century. They are mostly the same goals we have chosen. They're very much our four goals, but they're also international goals.

Mr. Bernard Patry: Thank you.

• 1630

[Translation]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier (Brampton West— Mississauga, Lib.)): Mr. Paradis.

Mr. Denis Paradis: Before I begin, I will go back to the issue raised by my colleague, Mr. Grose, from the Canadian Alliance, when he intimated that CIDA was wasting resources. I would simply like to point out to him that perhaps wasting occurs when a party takes money from the people in order to change its name without changing its backward policies based more on navel-gazing than on any consideration for the needs of the people around it.

Having said this, Ms. Minister, I would briefly like to raise three points. My first point concerns the Red Cross. Representatives of this agency recently testified before this committee and requested the assistance of both members of Parliament and the government in order to ensure that the Red Cross could keep its commitments to the international community. Madam Minister, do you intend to give a favourable answer to the Red Cross's request?

Secondly, item 4 on page 6 of the document that everybody received refers to the Youth Employment Initiative. Could you explain what this is about?

Thirdly, very often, when catastrophes occur in the world, countries intervene, but only after a lengthy and sometimes cumbersome decision-making process. Some people say that this is too little, too late. If there is a flood occurring somewhere, and people are clinging to the trees because of the rising water and it takes a month for someone to get to them, they start to get tired of holding on to the branch at the top of the tree.

Consequently, would it not be appropriate to think about an approach where, for example, we could have warehouses and basic equipment as well as lists of people prepared to leave on a moment's notice, after receiving a telephone call, to intervene as soon as there is a need, in order to deal with the humanitarian crises that occur throughout the world? The government of Canada has planes to provide transportation.

These are the three points that I wanted to raise, Madam Minister.

[English]

Ms. Maria Minna: Listen, we have an excellent reputation with the Red Cross. We're very proud of our relationship with the Red Cross. In fact, you probably know that most of the time when we announce programs of aid, we generally say we are working through the Red Cross and its affiliates.

We are looking at its requests for additional assistance as a result of its situation. Certainly we are very supportive. We have very much a trust agreement with the Red Cross. It's one of our biggest partners in the field. That's something we are very proud of and are looking at very closely.

With respect to emergencies, I understand your concern, and I understand what you're saying, but I think we must look back just a little bit. It may sometimes appear that we are responding late, but if we look....

For instance, each situation demands a different response. Just in my lifetime here as minister, I've had a number of them. The first one was the Turkey earthquake. One of the things some of our friends in Canada wanted us to do was to send search and rescue. In fact, in Canada we have very little capacity with respect to earthquakes and search and rescue. There is a team in Vancouver, but it had no international experience at that time. So that's one.

The other, of course, is that we are always in touch with our own embassy, our people on the ground, and the country itself. In that particular case they were asking us to provide water purifiers, shelter, food, and all kinds of other assistance to assist the survivors and the wounded to live, and also the firefighters because of the oil wells. We have expertise they didn't have, so we responded immediately with the firefighters who were able to put out the fire within, I think, 24 hours. That worked very well.

We sent, I think, over a million water purifying pills, and of course we announced money immediately. Again, here we go back to the Red Cross, which was able to actually purchase the materials immediately needed on the ground to assist.

The follow-up was to send the DART team from our own military. That took care of....

The other one is Mozambique. Again, that was a different situation. In that case the flood waters were coming fast. We do not have the capability to send helicopters down to help rescue people, but what CIDA did, what the Government of Canada did, was to immediately announce moneys.

• 1635

Of the $1.6 million we announced, $750,000 was to pay for the rental of helicopters and the purchase of fuel in order to assist with saving lives, and of course to buy locally, as quickly as possible, supplies of food and water and so on. The emergency is such that you need to buy it immediately in the local market. Then we had two planeloads sent over, as time permitted.

So sometimes we act in phases, in concert with advice from our people on the ground at CIDA, from our embassies, and from the United Nations, who coordinate a lot of these things on the ground, and so on.

That gives you a bit of an idea.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Paradis: If I may make a comment, Madam Minister, I would say that we would be much faster if we already had, on hand, 20,000 blankets and a host of other goods. If we had planes ready for takeoff, we could be one of the first countries in the world to arrive on the scene, in order to help the population which, very often, is in distress, and in need, rather than having to go through a time-consuming process every time.

There is a textile plant in my riding. The other day, the president said that he was prepared to provide I don't know how many thousands of blankets for this type of warehouse. I am positive that there are people in the country who are prepared to provide goods to be kept in storage. Whenever a catastrophe occurs somewhere, the planes would be ready to take off.

[English]

Ms. Maria Minna: No, that's fair. First, in the two examples I gave we acted appropriately because of the type of situation. At the same time, at the moment we are looking at setting up across the country a readiness response team, coordinated with ourselves, DFAIT, Defence, Immigration, and the Solicitor General, because to some degree it affects all of us in different ways.

That way we will have a ready response, and probably, as you've said, will have stockpiles for situations in whichever parts of the world they're in. We work with international multilateral organizations all the time.

So we are looking at establishing more readiness alert, if you like, and identifying expertise across Canada that we could use at a moment's notice. That's part of what we're doing right now to improve our response, to answer your question.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Paradis: Thank you, Madam Minister. My time is up. If you could answer my other question with respect to the Youth Employment Initiative during the time allotted to one of my colleagues, please do so.

[English]

Ms. Maria Minna: With respect to young people, we have an international internship program. We have a scholarship program for developing countries as well, and programs for young people who wish to volunteer abroad.

These are three different areas in which young people can participate.

The Chair: Mr. Grewal, five minutes.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, I reject the premise of the statement by the parliamentary secretary. His comments are unwarranted. I didn't make up the figures I quoted. Those figures are from the auditor's report on CIDA Inc., and if he hasn't read it, probably he can ask for a copy, which I would be very pleased to provide him with.

On another note, the minister mentioned that sometimes there are about two audits per week. Can I make a request to the minister that she provide us with copies of the audits? Are the audits public documents, and on the website? If not, would she prepared to put them on the website?

Ms. Maria Minna: They're on the website.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: All of them?

Ms. Maria Minna: All of them—

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Very good.

Ms. Maria Minna: —from 1994 to 1999, I believe, are now on the website. You can take a look at them.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: I didn't see them. I looked into it.

Mr. Len Good: Every completed audit.

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes, every completed audit from 1994 to 1999 is on the website.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Including the internal audit?

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes. In fact, that was the first audit I, as minister, released just before Christmas.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Very good.

Now, about the distribution of audits, I would like to very briefly revisit that point. The former minister, when she was before the committee, stated, sorry, but British Columbians don't bid very much on these contracts; for some company to bid for the audits, that company must be doing repeat business with CIDA.

That was the point I was concerned about. In my view, it is not getting justified...that so many companies apply and so many companies get the contract. That's not the point. The point is, why are other companies not bidding from other parts of the country? That is the real question that needs to be addressed.

• 1640

About grants, my question is, how many grants and contributions files in the minister's department have been under RCMP investigation in the last year or currently?

Ms. Maria Minna: In terms of investigations, I don't think I can comment on what's going on and what they're doing.

But to go back to your first question, about concentration, I can't comment on what my predecessor said. I don't have the minutes of the last meeting, so I won't get into that. I can tell you, though, that CIDA has been very busy in the last year and prior to that.

In fact, the part-time staff we have in Vancouver was hired by my predecessor, not by myself; therefore she was also attempting to expand the applications that come into CIDA.

In order to apply, one does not have to have had repeat business with CIDA. That is not one of the criteria.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Okay.

Ms. Maria Minna: With respect, as I said before, the concentration is partly due to the fact that we do not get enough applications from different parts.... Atlantic Canada has the same problem. As I said, I have spent, thus far, a great deal of time meeting with Atlantic Canadians, with western Canadian companies. I will be again in Newfoundland where there is an international development day with companies, and in Saskatoon soon.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Thank you.

The question was not which companies; I just want to know how many companies or how many files are under RCMP investigation. I want to know the number, not the name and contents.

Ms. Maria Minna: To be honest with you, I'm not sure I can comment on that. But if I may, I can certainly come back to this committee with additional information on that.

The Chair: Yes, sure.

I think the question is legitimate if it's just, are there investigations going on, and if so, how many. It's not appropriate to ask into what subjects or anything like that, because they're just investigations.

Ms. Maria Minna: Sure.

The Chair: Until something is proven, it's obviously harmful to have allegations out there, but there might be one or two.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: I have a small question about the nature of ODA versus GDP.

Canada has been committing for the last seven, eight, or more years that 0.7% of GDP will be our commitment for the poorest of the poor countries for ODA. But we have only been able to keep the commitment to the level of 0.32%, and now it is reduced to 0.25%.

If in the last seven years we have not been able to keep our commitment, why would we commit to those countries that our level will be so much but we are performing so little? Are we misguiding those very poor countries that are making their planning based on our commitments? Why don't we commit what we have actually been able to meet for the last seven years?

Ms. Maria Minna: I find the question the honourable member is putting a little bit interesting. First, you must understand, we had to deal with a huge deficit, which is why there were the cuts. I think the honourable member's own party has been advocating for ensuring that both deficit and debt is a priority to be addressed.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: That's not the point.

Ms. Maria Minna: To continue, secondly, as I said, we were at 2.7%. The allocation we had in the last budget will bring us to 2.8%, so we have had an increase.

He is suggesting that we make a commitment to a particular country to spend $2 billion and then we spend $1 billion. The commitment is not to a country but to ourselves that this is how much activity we will do in developing countries.

But the impact of Canada's programs in developing countries is quite substantial. If the honourable member were to travel—or he may have—and visit some of our programs, he would see the substantive impact of the programs we do have. We are one of the leading countries in the area of ODA in the world with the G-7, so I don't think we're a shrinking violet here.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: But, Minister, the question is not that our money is not properly utilized; that is probably the second question. The primary or main concern is, based on our commitment, those countries do their own planning that 0.7% is collected from this country. They have a false perception that we will be committing 0.7%.

Ms. Maria Minna: If I could correct the honourable member, I think there's a misunderstanding. Countries do not make their plans on the basis of a stated objective that the Government of Canada may have had for the last number of years. They don't even make their plans on the basis of our current budget. The plans of each country are based on specific negotiations with the department on bilateral arrangements that we make. There's what's called a country framework, negotiated country by country within which we work.

• 1645

Where we do have bilateral programs—obviously not in countries where we do not have bilateral programs because of conflict or other problems—these are negotiated with the country, and it is agreed upon as to which priorities the country has, together with us, and how much money we will be able to commit for that year within the country. But the money never goes to the government in any case. We do programs with NGOs and other partners.

So the countries do not make their plans on the basis of Canada's budget. They make plans on the basis of our specific negotiations and commitments with them directly on a country-by-country basis.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, the minister stated that she will be submitting to us a report on how many grants and contributions files are under investigation. How soon can we expect that information in this committee?

The Chair: We'll ask the minister. She'll do her best. She'll tell us whether there are any.

Ms. Maria Minna: Tomorrow would be fine; no problem.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Thank you.

The Chair: I wonder if I could follow up on this number thing, because you're talking about the 0.35% and 0.7%, and everything. This is obviously as discussion has gone on, but in terms of numbers, Minister, it seems to me that even if the percentage of our GDP may be going down—

Ms. Maria Minna: Don't forget, our economy is performing very well.

The Chair: If our GDP increases by 10% or 15%, in fact the absolute number of our aid has gone up.

Ms. Maria Minna: Exactly. The absolute number of our aid has gone up. That is what I've been trying to say.

The Chair: So it's sort of an apples and oranges thing.

Ms. Maria Minna: Absolutely.

The Chair: As a percentage of GDP, it might be less, but you have to look at a bigger—

Ms. Maria Minna: Keep in mind that our economy is doing very well, but the absolute numbers that we're spending in aid have gone up considerably.

The Chair: Yes. It would seem to me to be logical.

We're going to move to Madame Augustine.

Ms. Jean Augustine: Thank you.

I'm not going to say it's good to see you, Minister. I just saw you.

Ms. Maria Minna: Okay.

Ms. Jean Augustine: Mr. Good, it's good to see you.

My question will actually start with a comment. I'm glad to hear you will be making the round of the various cities and talking to them as to how to access CIDA's contracts and CIDA's arrangements, because oftentimes the criticism we hear in many of our offices—and I'm sure my colleagues can bear me out—are from new players on the scene, people from minority communities, from various racial and ethnic groups who say, how can we get into the game around the CIDA contracting? Maybe, as you say, making a tour and explaining to people and leaving behind some documentation as to the process would be most helpful. So I'm very pleased to hear that.

Since one of your focuses or priority areas is the area of health, I'd like to ask about reproductive and sexual health, how that's built into there, coming out of Cairo and the commitments we make to fund certain programs around the world. Looking at what we have or what I consider to be an absence of a population strategy, I'm asking what we're doing in this area of reproductive health and how that somehow ties into your priority area. That's a little bit more than just immunization, a little bit more than just some of the things you delineated there.

There's one curious footnote here in part III. I sit on the human rights subcommittee of this committee, and we notice here that your 1999-2000 funds for international human rights, the ICHRDD group, are now going to DFAIT, would be paid by DFAIT. Why was it moved out of CIDA into DFAIT?

• 1650

Ms. Maria Minna: I'm sorry, but could you repeat that? I apologize, but I didn't quite get—

Ms. Jean Augustine: It's on page 6 of the—

Ms. Maria Minna: Of the document...?

Ms. Jean Augustine: It's number five. It says, “Starting in 2000-2001, the funds will be paid by DFAIT.” The International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development.... I'm just wondering why there is this change. What's the reason for the change?

Ms. Maria Minna: Let me zero in—

Ms. Jean Augustine: And how does that tie in to the fact that you are doing human security and DFAIT is doing human security? Or how is the child protection separate from the human security? Could you just speak about the differentiation and CIDA's responsibility there?

Ms. Maria Minna: Okay. It's easy enough. They're a continuum, and we work very well together. I'll just give you an example.

I'll start with your first question with respect to what I call family planning. Earlier I mentioned immunization with respect to health, but I could have mentioned water, I could have mentioned shelter, and I could have mentioned, obviously, family planning. That is part of our health program.

Gender runs through all of our priorities. Actually, we do a great deal of work currently in the area of family planning, because in the world today about 600,000 women a year die giving birth. It's a huge number. We have not done a tremendous amount. As the world, we've not moved forward on that file enough.

The whole area of family planning is something that is important. It's something that is very much part of all of our health programs, that is an inherent part of our health programs. We do have a great many programs around the world on that—in Bangladesh, in Africa, and elsewhere.

With respect to human rights, firstly I should point out that quite apart from the specific ICHRDD funding, CIDA funds a lot of the human rights programs very directly; we work directly. In our own hemisphere, in the Americas, we have a fair number of human rights programs right across South America in different countries, as well as in Haiti, to train the judicial system, to establish human rights commissions, and to encourage the whole human rights infrastructure. We do a great deal of work in that field.

I gave you the example, as I say, of the hemisphere, but that goes across many other countries, so we're very involved directly in programming in the area of human rights. That's something we will continue to do.

With respect to the human security agenda, I will let Mr. Good deal with that. Maybe before I go to that, he should answer on ICHRDD.

Have we found the answer to that one?

Mr. Len Good: The answer with respect to the change in 2000-01 in the department from which it's paid is that it's apparently strictly a housekeeping change, an accounting change of no real significance. The institution does, however, report to Parliament through Lloyd Axworthy, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and on that basis it just seems sensible to the two departments to relocate that small chunk of money from CIDA's budget to DFAIT's budget.

Ms. Maria Minna: To be consistent in reporting back....

Thank you.

With respect to the human security agenda—and you said children in conflict and how those two things square off—and Minister Axworthy's human security agenda, they're one and the same, really. We work together; we collaborate on it.

On the de-mining program, we fund, but quite often you'll see that the foreign affairs department will also add some of their moneys from the human security agenda and attach it to ours; then we work together.

Human security is one of those issues.... Where does it begin and where does it end? If a child is not fed, it's an issue of human security. HIV/AIDS is an issue of human security because of the numbers of people dying and the threat to the population. Conflict is a human security issue. It's a continuum. I choose to see it as a broad definition as opposed to a very small and defined way of seeing it.

• 1655

With respect to the work we do with DFAIT, with Minister Axworthy, in the main we are talking about prevention of conflict, conflict resolution, and dealing with children in conflict, which is why we're co-sponsoring the conference in the fall. With respect to CIDA, we have that, plus, of course, we look at human security and at all of the other aspects that threaten human life. That's human security as well. It's human rights. It's a bit broader, but there's a lot of collaboration and working together on that issue with the minister.

The Chair: Thank you.

[Translation]

Mr. Rocheleau.

Mr. Yves Rocheleau (Trois-Rivières, BQ): On the subject of CIDA activities abroad, during a trip to Africa, a Quebec co-operant told me about the fact that a large portion, perhaps as much as 75%, of the international assistance actually goes—and this was confirmed earlier by Mr. Good, if I understood correctly—to all sorts of players, particularly to consultants or large or medium-sized Canadian companies.

Do you find that this makes sense when we're talking about international assistance? What is the organizational culture of CIDA like? What strategy or approach is it trying to take? Does CIDA try to ensure that as many Canadian and Quebec players benefit from CIDA's activities, or does CIDA ensure that the country concerned is involved as much as possible? Let's take an easy example. Let's suppose that we are looking for drinking water in order to dig a well. When you find water in the village, it's wonderful. I have seen this with my own eyes. If, not far away, there is a firm of local consultants who are able to do the follow-up work, why not teach these people how to fish rather than provide them with fish, as the saying goes?

What is CIDA's philosophy in this respect? There is a danger that my colleague was referring to, before our friend from Brome- Missisquoi responded to him. For the great Liberal family, and we know how far its tentacles reach, it may be easy to dip into these funds for fundraising campaigns, for election funds. Hence, we can come full circle with this type of phenomenon.

[English]

Ms. Maria Minna: First, Mr. Chairman, let me dispel the notion that what guides CIDA in its work and in which companies we use or to what extent we use Canadian executing agencies, whether they're not-for-profit organizations or private sector—or public sector, for that matter—has anything whatever to do with elections and donations. That is absolutely not the case. I want to make that very clear and put that one in its proper perspective.

Now, to answer the broader question, though, for the honourable member, in his question, he is addressing a couple of issues here. Firstly, we do use local contractors in work that CIDA does in the countries. Quite often, they're also subcontractors. The honourable member must remember that in a lot of the work we do with Canadian executing agencies, whether they're private sector or universities or colleges or NGOs, their main job is not only to provide the drinking water, if you like, but also to leave behind the technology, the training, and the understanding of it for the people in the area in order for them to be able to do it for themselves.

We're not in the business of making people dependent on the Canadian government to do things for them. That would be irresponsible. That is why we call it “development”: the main purpose is to transfer technology and knowledge and, at the same time, to improve the life of the people and eradicate poverty in all of the facets in which it presents itself.

Part of the discussion that has been going around internationally, though, and I think maybe you are in part referring to that, is the whole issue of tied aid, that is, do we continue to use Canadian executing companies—for-profit companies, the public sector or NGOs—or do we simply go on the international...?

Some of the discussion going on right now with respect to tied aid is that when there's a contract of work to be done in a particular country, the country obviously drives it, and that's what I said earlier: there is an agreement and a discussion with the country as to its priorities and its needs. That is a priority that the countries must know, and it must drive the issue.

• 1700

Secondly, what is being suggested is that in order to untie aid 100%, the bidding be put on an international footing so that anyone from anywhere around the world could conceivably bid for that contract, both the developing country as well as any other developed country.

In this case we have a problem of how we ensure the quality of work done on the ground. How do we deal with the issue of corruption in many countries? How do we have transparency in all cases? That is a major problem and it's something we're looking at—transparency and accountability. We've just gone around the table today with some honourable members saying they're trying to hold us accountable to certain things. How are we able to be held accountable in that context?

So it's a debate that's still going in; it's a debate that we're participating in, and that is not yet done.

I think, from my perspective at this point, I would have to satisfy all of those things in order for us to say, yes, we're going to go completely with the untied aid. But I also think it's important that if we do do work in developing countries, where we are in essence providing development and transfer of technology, at the same time we're providing support for Canadian companies. I don't see that this is a negative. I would see that as a plus-plus at this stage.

I think it's very important obviously that the work that is done in developing countries by our agencies, be they private, public, or our NGOs, is accountable to us, but also that it is true development and that they are leaving behind skills and technology transfer and knowledge for the countries to be able to be self-sufficient. Ultimately we'd like to be out of those countries and not stay. Companies would go in and invest on their own, because it's a good investment to be there. That would be....

The Chair: We're just a bit over 5 p.m. I wonder, Minister, if you could stay an extra couple of minutes just to answer some questions from Ms. Bakopanos. She's the last person on the list.

Ms. Maria Minna: That's fine.

The Chair: Ms. Bakopanos.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos (Ahuntsic, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be brief, because a lot of the questions I would have asked have been asked.

One of them, which I think the minister answered very well, concerned governance. You said governance, and good governance, is directly linked to the other four priorities you assessed for your ministry, Madam Minister.

I also want to make the point, and I think it was made earlier by the NDP member, concerning the Jubilee 2000 campaign. The fact is that maybe overall our spending has gone relatively higher than it was in the past, but there's also the fact that we've written off certain debts of third world countries. It's an important factor that has to be taken into consideration.

Ms. Maria Minna: Exactly.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: I think that's something the opposition often loses sight of.

My direct question has to do with a book that I read recently—and I think you and I have discussed it—which is called Let My People Go.

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: It's about the situation in the Sudan and slavery. I was wondering if you could tell us very briefly, because I know it's late in the day, what types of projects the government is involved in, in terms of making sure that slavery and the sale of humans, children and young women, does not continue in an area like the Sudan.

Ms. Maria Minna: First, the work we do with Sudan is primarily humanitarian work, because, as you know, going into the country is not a possibility. As you know, more recently, a number of NGOs have left Sudan because of problems with the rebels wanting to get—

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: Yes. That's the purpose of my question.

Ms. Maria Minna: I understand that this is the purpose.

It makes it very difficult for us to verify delivery. There have been comments, and I don't know that—

Mr. Len Good: UNICEF and the UN, of course, are still there in this area.

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes. UNICEF and the UN are still there, as Mr. Good is rightly telling me. But some of the NGOs have had to move out because of the demand for them to sign a piece of paper that basically says they support the side of the particular rebel side, or what have you. We obviously can't take sides in the situation.

It's very hard not only to know for sure but to verify the slavery issue, because of the fact that it's very difficult to get in. Most of the work we do at this time is really not inside the Sudan, but it's dealing with the refugees and displaced people.

UNICEF is still inside and the UN are still inside, but it's not the ideal situation.

• 1705

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: May I just add a parenthesis?

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: The fact is that those young women, and women and children, are sold to countries where in fact there's a signed international agreement. So they are taken from the Sudan but in fact are in areas of Africa where there is no civil war.

I think part of what we should be looking at—and I don't want to go into detail because that is not the issue we are dealing with, if we have an agenda in terms of human security—is that there are countries that are in fact allowing the sale of human beings within their boundaries.

So it's not a question only of the Sudan; it's a question of who is buying those slaves. They may not be saying that, but the fact is we have done business and are doing business with certain other countries—Algeria, and so forth, or Morocco—in which there are slaves who are from the Sudan.

Ms. Maria Minna: It's a fair question. Obviously, I wouldn't support it, and obviously, it would be something that we need to deal with at some point. Certainly I think it's something that CIDA could look into and maybe do some research on. We have contacts. We work with people underground in many different countries, and if in fact at some point we are able to verify some of what you've told us—

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: Read the book Let My People Go.

Ms. Maria Minna: —I think we would want to find a way to act on it.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: Thank you, Madame.

Ms. Maria Minna: Thank you.

The Chair: If you're interested, Ms. Bakopanos, you don't have to go that far, because there's an article in last Sunday's New York Times that the FBI are investigating the fact that there are 75,000 indentured people in the United States.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: Yes. Thank you.

Ms. Maria Minna: In Maclean's magazine as well.

The Chair: Who knows what goes on in this country as well. Maybe we should all have a look at this question.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair: As opposed to members of Parliament, who are all indentured slaves to some system or other...to our whips.

Minister, this committee made a recommendation some time ago that the government might look into helping the Red Cross. Canada—

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes, there was a question put.

The Chair: Would you have a look at that for us, or see if you could—

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes. We are in fact looking at it as we speak.

The Chair: Thank you. That's helpful. We appreciate it.

I want to say on behalf of the committee, Minister, that we want to congratulate you on your aggressive work in cabinet on behalf of your portfolio. There's obviously been a feeling that our aid programs have slipped in the past, and most of us, I think I can say on behalf of the committee, feel we have a minister who has the interests of the aid community at heart and is working hard to deliver it for Canadians and for the benefit of Canadians.

Thank you very much for coming.

Ms. Maria Minna: Mr. Chairman, I have a question, if I could. This may be unorthodox.

I know the honourable member from the Alliance was asking about our commitments and our ODA. Maybe it's not a question; maybe it's a request, that his party not recommend as a policy something I read not too long ago, that the UN be disbanded and possibly CIDA be re-annexed back to DFAIT, which would shrink even further, or somehow be disbanded somewhat. Maybe that's a request more than a question.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Can I comment?

The Chair: We want to get out of here. Just say yes or no.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: Just yes or no. That's not our policy. Our policy is perceived as though we don't care, but we do care. I personally have lived in Africa, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Maria Minna: I didn't suggest you didn't care.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal: I understand your point, but the only thing is that the money should be wisely spent.

The Chair: Right. Absolutely.

Colleagues, before you go, as you know, we've been spending a great deal of time trying to organize our potential trip to the Caucasus. It's now—

Ms. Maria Minna: Can I come, too?

The Chair: If you want to pay for yourself, we'd love to have you.

We've had a great deal of trouble getting the necessary approval from the House committee, but it's now been approved and will be put to a vote in the House at 5:45 this evening. So we may actually be able to move forward on that agenda. I'm quite pleased.

It's been a lot of work, and I want to thank all the members of the opposition party. Every single member of the opposition party has been good enough to speak to their House leaders, and we appreciate that.

We're adjourned until Thursday at 9:30 a.m.