SRID Committee Meeting

SUB-COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

SOUS-COMITÉ DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE ET DU DÉVELOPPEMENT INTERNATIONAL DU COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES ÉTRANGÈRES ET DU COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Wednesday, December 15, 1999

• 1538

[English]

The Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier (Brampton West—Mississauga, Lib.)): I call to order the meeting of the Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Development of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

Mr. McGill, if you will just bear with us for a few minutes, there are a couple of issues I'd like to deal with before you begin your presentation.

First of all, I'm putting this out to committee members. We decided originally that we were going to begin early next year to look at some aspects of human security in Africa. In addition to our meeting in May on Sierra Leone, we have had two full round tables this fall in an attempt to refine our focus. What generally came out in our meetings with CIDA, EDA, and other NGO groups is they felt the role of civil society was something we should be looking at.

Our representatives from CIDA suggested strengthening civil society in Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of Congo. So I'm asking this committee if I have your permission to ask our researchers to draw up a plan for a study of civil society in the region of Congo. They were saying that although there is war there, people still live under civil society, and perhaps that would be a good place for us to do our research, and we could make recommendations to the government based on that. I'm wondering how the committee would feel about this.

• 1540

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien (Laval East, BQ): Madam Chair, when you mention Congo, I imagine you are referring to the former Zaire, to the Democratic Republic of Congo. There is also the Brazzaville Congo.

[English]

The Chair: Yes, the former Zaire.

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: This conflict affects several countries, including Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda. We are essentially talking about the whole region of the African great lakes.

[English]

The Chair: Yes.

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: Okay.

[English]

The Chair: Jim would have this ready for us—

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: Would it be possible to hear other witnesses who are more specifically from that region?

[English]

The Chair: Definitely. I don't see a problem with that. Definitely we would hear more before we embarked upon a journey, if we in fact can get a budget approved.

Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): That makes sense.

[Translation]

It would be useful, given the evidence of those who appeared before our committee.

[English]

I would ask if, when we're looking at the role of civil society, we could look at it in the broadest possible perspective. One of the major issues we heard quite compelling evidence on, which many of us are familiar with personally, is the impact of AIDS in Africa. As part of our examination of the role of civil society, if we could be looking at the way in which both civil society and government are responding to this epidemic that is taking hundreds of lives every day in sub-Saharan Africa, that would be quite helpful.

There are other human rights issues as well that clearly we'd want to consult with key NGOs and other groups on. I mentioned the issue of discrimination based on sexual orientation as a very serious concern in a number of African countries. I must confess I'm not aware of the situation in Congo directly, but certainly it's an issue we should be looking at. So that makes some sense.

If we are looking at the possibility of travel—this is the last point I'll make—hopefully as soon as we're back in February, we'll be looking at a specific proposal for travel, because obviously we have to plan that well ahead of time.

The Chair: Yes, we will.

Ms. Augustine.

Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Maybe I missed something in your response to Maud. You weren't thinking of just Zaire or just the republic, but you were talking about the whole region.

The Chair: The region.

Ms. Jean Augustine: All right, because there are some good examples of some work being done and some advances in places such as Uganda, where we can see some good experiences that could be compared, rather than just one country.

Mr. James Lee (Committee Researcher): Well, it was only one of the suggestions that's been made. All I was asking was, would the committee be interested in having me try to do a bit of work to propose something more formal? The possibility of a particular travel agenda would depend on your decision as to how broadly you wanted to look at it, but if this is something that interests the subcommittee, I can pursue that.

The Chair: Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I just want to agree with Jean. Uganda could be a good example. The other thing that is very important is that we would hopefully be looking at the role CIDA is playing in this area as well.

Some hon. members: Yes.

The Chair: Madame Debien.

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: I go back to my initial comments. I may also answer Jean's question. The problem in the former Zaire, or the Democratic Republic of Congo, affects several countries. In fact, almost the whole region of the African great lakes is affected by this conflict and by what these people want to do regarding their civil society. Uganda, among others, is a place where civil society is being strengthened. However, there are other countries in that region where nothing has been done yet. Would it be possible to get a better idea of the situation in the whole region? Is it too large an area? James, you seem to be saying that it is.

Mr. James Lee: Madam Debien,

[English]

the suggestions on civil society in the Congo seem to be two. Our CIDA representative said even though conflict is going on, people live in ex-Zaire. There is civil society that's important to see how people live even during conflict. And our witness from the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development talked about strengthening civil society so that they could play a role in the peace process. So in a sense, it's both civil society on the ground during conflict and the role they can play in ending conflict.

• 1545

The problem with looking at the conflict, as I understand it, in ex-Zaire, or the Congo, is if you look at the conflict between all the states, then you have to look at all of the states, and that's very broad. But if we simply set out to see if civil society is as important as it seems to be and take a case study of the Democratic Republic of Congo, see what CIDA is doing to support civil society even while conflict is going on, and talk about how civil society could be strengthened to help end the conflict, the peace process, that might be a way to do it.

To take examples from Uganda and neighbouring places, this is just a....

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: This is precisely what I was saying. Could we go beyond the specific problem affecting the Democratic Republic of Congo? All these countries are interrelated in that conflict. They are in conflict with one another. Would such a study be too wide-encompassing? We would, of course, look at the situation, starting with Congo, since this is where the main conflict, the one that triggered all the other ones, is taking place. Using the strengthening of civil society in the Democratic Republic of Congo as an example, could we also look at the issue in a regional context? The problem is the same in neighbouring countries. I am thinking of Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda, the Democratic Republic and the other three countries involved.

[English]

Mr. James Lee: The other possibility is you could hold a few more hearings before you take your decision in February and ask the people who come whether it's possible to focus only on civil society in Congo or whether it has to be broader, and see what they say and take your decision at that point.

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: That is fine with me.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

Next is Mr. Robinson's motion.

Mr. Svend Robinson: This is a motion I actually circulated quite some time ago to all members of the subcommittee. I don't think it requires a great deal of discussion. It flows from the meeting the subcommittee had with the witnesses from Friends of Burma as well as the government witnesses—Ingrid Hall and others.

If I may, before I speak briefly of the motion, could I just ask for clarification? We were promised by the government representative, the departmental witness, that she would be getting back to us with some specific information on at least two subjects. One was the issue of the government's position on the people's parliament and what the Government of Canada's role is on that. The second was a list of companies that are in fact continuing to do business in Burma. That was quite some time ago, and I think members will recall it.

The Chair: Yes, you're absolutely right. I've not received anything from the department. However, it was my understanding that when asked our position on the government accepting the people's parliament, her response was that Canada recognizes countries and not governments. But I don't think we've had an official response.

• 1550

Mr. Svend Robinson: But she was going to get back to the committee with an official response on that issue.

The Chair: Yes.

Can I check on that? I'm going to have to get back to you, because I noticed the last meeting I acknowledged the receipt of answers from Ingrid Hall, but I don't recall actually reading them or knowing what they were or even where I got them from.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Can the clerk maybe help us?

The Chair: Well, Georges isn't here. I will check with him as soon as he.... He's at another meeting. I can check with him and let you know tomorrow.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Okay. I'm just wondering—

The Chair: I apologize.

Mr. Svend Robinson: So we actually did get a response then, and it just hasn't been circulated?

The Chair: It looks as though I said we did. I don't recall; I'm sorry.

Jim is going to go and check and see if he can get the answer.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Okay. Maybe we can stand this down until then.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Carleton—Gloucester, Lib.): Madame Chair, are we going to entertain that motion? Because I have an amendment to his motion.

The Chair: No, I believe Mr. Robinson said we'll stand this down until we get clarification here.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Okay. I have some answers to that.

The Chair: Oh, well, if Mr. Bellemare can answer, yes, please.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: On the motion from Mr. Robinson, I've checked into it, and there are two areas where we need to amend it.

First, this committee cannot urge the government; it can only urge the Parliament of Canada to recognize, and so on.

Also, we cannot ask that the government impose, but rather that the government consider the imposition, because then you're binding the government immediately. There might be other areas of expertise of which we are not apprised at this particular time at this committee. So we need to give that flexibility to the government

[Translation]

so that it can take a look at the issue and consider every conceivable issue.

[English]

Mr. Svend Robinson: I understand that. Obviously I would prefer stronger wording, but if the amendments in question would in fact result in a unanimous vote of this committee that would hopefully send a strong signal, and we could report back to the House with that motion, I would be prepared to—

[Translation]

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Madam Chair, I apologize to the committee. I hastily drafted the amending motion and I did not have the opportunity to write it in French. I can do so, if you insist.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I will read the motion and we can translate it simultaneously.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: I would ask Mr. Robinson to read his motion and I will then read the amendment that I am proposing.

Mr. Svend Robinson: With leave of the committee, I would be prepared to proposed the motion as amended.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: I would prefer that you submit the motion, while I would propose the amendment.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Okay. My motion reads as follows:

That the Sub-Committee on Human Rights and International Development urges the Government of Canada to recognize as the legitimate authority in Burma today the Committee for the restoration of a People's Parliament, made up of 251 elected members who were not authorized to sit, and further urges the Government of Canada to consider the imposition of investment sanctions on the illegal regime in Burma.

[English]

The Chair: Is there discussion?

Mr. Bellemare.

[Translation]

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you, Madam Chair. I congratulate Mr. Robinson for tabling this motion. As I indicated earlier, I would like to propose an amendment to make this motion more acceptable to the Parliament of Canada and to the government. The amendment reads as follows:

[English]

That the Sub-Committee on Human Rights and International Development urges Parliament to recognize as the legitimate authority in Burma today the Committee for the Restoration of a People's Parliament...and further urges the Government of Canada to consider the imposition of investment sanctions on the illegal regime in Burma.

• 1555

The Chair: Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: As we've discussed, I would be prepared to accept that amendment and would urge the committee to adopt the amended motion unanimously and to report to the House.

The Chair: Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the amendment?

[Translation]

Madame Debien.

Mrs. Maud Debien: I would like a minor clarification concerning the new wording. Mr. Bellemare, we should also refer to parliament in the second proposal. You mention the government twice. The first time, you referred to the Parliament of Canada and to the government, while the second time, you only referred to the government.

Mr. Svend Robinson: No, the wording can remain as it is.

Mrs. Maud Debien: It can? Fine.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Madam Chair, this is a very important distinction. Mrs. Debien asked a very valid question and I feel compelled to answer it, if you will allow me to do so.

A government cannot recognize or deny the existence of another government. It can only recognize a country.

Mrs. Maud Debien: I fully understood that.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: This is the nuance.

Mrs. Maud Debien: Yes, yes.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Is that agreed?

Mrs. Maud Debien: Yes.

[English]

The Chair: Is it the pleasure of the committee to accept the motion as amended?

(Motion as amended agreed to)

Mr. Svend Robinson: I would ask that we report this to the House directly.

The Chair: Thank you.

Ms. Eleni Bakopanos (Ahuntsic, Lib.): Should this go through the main committee, Madam Chair?

Mr. Svend Robinson: Oh, I'm sorry. I think we have to report to the full committee and then they report to the House.

The Chair: Yes, and we shall do that at the next sitting.

Thank you.

Thank you for your patience, Mr. McGill. As you will know, following the terrible catastrophes in Turkey and Taiwan, the subcommittee agreed with a suggestion by Mr. Robinson that we look at the question of Canada's response to emergencies such as earthquakes.

We're very pleased to have with us today Hunter McGill, from CIDA. Mr. McGill, did you have a presentation to make?

Mr. Hunter McGill (Director General, International Humanitarian Assistance, Canadian International Development Agency): Thank you, Madam Chair.

In response to what we understood the subcommittee's interest to be, we have prepared a backgrounder document, which I believe has been distributed to the members of the committee. In that document, we hope we have responded to concerns on the part of members of the committee for information about Canada's response. I'm in your hands to respond to questions committee members may have. Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much. We'll begin with questions.

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: Madam Chair, since the motion was tabled by Mr. Robinson, I will let him ask the first question out of courtesy.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you very much, Madame Debien.

[English]

I do have a number of questions. I must say I'm a little surprised and perplexed at the brevity of the response with respect to the earthquake in Taiwan. I'm not sure if Mr. McGill has read the correspondence that was addressed not only by myself to Minister Axworthy and to Minister Minna but also by the Taiwanese-Canadian Cultural Society, by SUCCESS, the group in British Columbia representing Chinese Canadians, and of course questions that were raised in the House.

All of those documents and questions specifically raised concerns with respect to the role of the Vancouver Urban Search and Rescue Team. I'm not sure if the document I have is missing something, but I don't see any reference at all to that issue, which, again, I would have thought perhaps our witness would have addressed had he reviewed the correspondence and background on this issue.

Obviously I would ask Mr. McGill to address that issue, which I had expected would be addressed in background material, and to explain to the committee why it was that the Vancouver Urban Search and Rescue Team wasn't immediately dispatched to Taiwan to assist in the search-and-rescue operations there. I would point out as well that this would have provided valuable and badly needed experience for the team. So I will open up my questioning by just asking what would be the obvious question.

• 1600

The Chair: Well, Mr. Robinson, if it had been covered in the brief, you wouldn't have had a question to ask.

Mr. McGill.

Mr. Hunter McGill: Thank you.

I apologize to Mr. Robinson for not having covered that off. I can tell him that we were aware, but through indirect means, of the interest of the Vancouver search and rescue team in taking part in any Canadian response to an international crisis for which they were equipped to deal. I say “indirect means” because the Vancouver search and rescue team has never approached my unit, which is the international humanitarian assistance division at CIDA, in any formal or informal way.

I can assure Mr. Robinson that subsequent to our becoming aware of the interest on the part of the Vancouver team in taking part in any response by Canada to an earthquake or similar type of event, we have been in touch with the team. We have also talked with the provincial government in British Columbia, both directly and through our Canadian partner, Emergency Preparedness Canada, about the capabilities of this team in Vancouver.

In the most recent Turkish earthquake several weeks ago, we were able to make it possible for the chief and the deputy chief of the Vancouver team to go to Turkey within 24 hours of that event to take part in the international response. We very much appreciate that the Vancouver civic authorities made it possible for these gentlemen to leave literally within 12 hours of our being in touch with them. They went and they worked initially with the United Nations coordination machinery for the international response to the second Turkish earthquake. They—

Mr. Svend Robinson: Madam Chair, could I just ask...? I appreciate that they were sent recently, but just to get back to Taiwan, because I think that's what we're looking at here, am I understanding correctly that Mr. McGill is saying that his unit wasn't aware of the desire of this team to in fact participate in search and rescue in both the earlier Turkish earthquake and the Taiwan earthquake, that he had no knowledge of this?

Mr. Hunter McGill: They had never approached us indicating what their capabilities were, what their ability was to mobilize within the timeframes that are absolutely essential for any kind of response to an event like this. We had heard through the media and through other informal means that such a team existed in Vancouver, but they had never approached us to tell us what they were able to do.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Did it occur to you that you might want to approach them to determine what their capacity was? This is a highly skilled search-and-rescue team that was quite prepared to go.

I have a copy of the newspaper from the day after, from Thursday, September 23, in which a spokesperson for CIDA, Michelle Veilleux—I'm not sure if you're familiar with Madam Veilleux—said that Canada hasn't deployed any rescue teams to Taiwan because “the territory has not issued a formal appeal for assistance”. She said “We will not send anyone not knowing whether they need it or not. For now, I think they are able to handle the situation.”

Of course, by that time the United States, Russia, Switzerland, Turkey, Japan, Singapore, and many other countries had immediately dispatched teams. They didn't wait to find out whether they needed help. This was a humanitarian crisis. Were you aware that this was the position of the agency you work in? Could you perhaps explain why that would have been the case?

Mr. Hunter McGill: Let me just answer your first question about why we hadn't sought them out. The rules we operate under are Treasury Board rules and under them we must explicitly exclude urban search and rescue. This is for reasons that I can only speculate on, because these rules were set up long before I joined the humanitarian assistance division. I believe one of those rules to be that this is an extraordinarily expensive way of providing humanitarian assistance.

That could easily get us into a discussion about what a human life is worth, and I must confess I come unequipped to take part in that kind of discussion today, but it has never been our practice in the past to mobilize Canadian search-and-rescue teams, partly because there weren't any in Canada. You, I believe, are aware that the Vancouver team is really in the process of being formed. They have never mobilized for a domestic or an international event.

• 1605

Mr. Svend Robinson: They've been waiting to get that opportunity.

Mr. Hunter McGill: Well, indeed. And we hope in the next few weeks to be able to work with our colleagues in Emergency Preparedness Canada and the British Columbia government to make it possible for this team to take part in a simulation, which they've never had the opportunity to do, so that they can test out their capabilities.

If I might just return, and I apologize for taking a roundabout route to answer your question, the reason I was mentioning the second Turkish earthquake was that the two Vancouver team members who went to Turkey, worked with you, and then subsequently worked with an American search and rescue team, came back and debriefed us. They told us it had been the most valuable experience they could possibly have had and that they in fact were grateful they had not been sent to Taiwan because the circumstance of the conditions that prevail after an earthquake are such that they feel—and I have this third hand—that they would not have been very helpful in the Taiwan context.

Knowing what they now know, having been in Turkey after an earthquake and having seen the conditions that prevail, they found it an extraordinary helpful learning experience, and it has now enabled them to really configure themselves, to do some planning and identify roles that will enable them to be very useful when and if we are in a position to deploy them.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I have two other brief questions. You mentioned certain Treasury Board rules or regulations that preclude urban search and rescue. First of all, I'd like you to submit a copy of that for circulation to the members of this committee, those particular rules. I don't know if you have them with you.

Mr. Hunter McGill: No.

Mr. Svend Robinson: If you could, you can get them to us.

Under those rules, are you able to deploy now, or are you precluded? And if you're precluded under the existing rules, are you going to be going to the Treasury Board to seek a change in those rules so that in appropriate circumstances we are in fact able to contribute in this very important way?

Mr. Hunter McGill: The rules have not been modified as yet. We are certainly looking at that and the minister has directed us to re-examine those criteria terms and conditions to extend their coverage to urban search and rescue.

Mr. Svend Robinson: The last question I have is with respect to the role of the Government of China, the People's Republic of China, during this earthquake. As I understand it, the Government of China played a very destructive role during the immediate aftermath of the earthquake when they insisted that all Red Cross relief supplies be approved and processed through the Chinese Red Cross. They also, I believe, delayed the arrival of a Russian rescue team by many hours because they refused to allow them to enter Chinese air space.

What was most offensive for many people was that the President of China, purporting to speak on behalf of the people of Taiwan, offered thanks to the international community for their aid. This was deeply, deeply offensive, as I'm sure Mr. McGill would understand. When I questioned Minister Minna, your minister, on this issue in the House, she said aid was not affected at all by China.

I wonder if you have had a chance to perhaps review this and whether you could share with the committee the results of your review and confirm that indeed China did interfere in this way.

Ms. Jean Augustine: He can't comment on his minister.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I'm just asking him to clarify the position now.

Mr. Hunter McGill: I can certainly amplify what the minister said to you, and I can give you ironclad guarantees that the position of the Beijing government had absolutely no impact whatsoever on Canadian humanitarian assistance to Taiwan. We were not in any way affected, through our selection of implementing partners to the nature of any of our assistance to Taiwan following the earthquake.

We followed our humanitarian principles of impartiality, etc., and in no way did the view of the Beijing authorities affect our humanitarian assistance.

I have not had the opportunity to verify with all of the other providers of humanitarian assistance after the Taiwan earthquake whether their experience was the same. I would believe that's probably the case. The Russians are not normally providers of humanitarian assistance, so I have no contacts there, and I couldn't verify or comment on the report you've given me.

• 1610

But certainly, I know in the group of regular donors with whom I work—the United States, Switzerland, and western European countries—there was no effect of any views of Beijing on the delivery of their humanitarian assistance.

Mr. Svend Robinson: If you could perhaps get back to us on the Russian experience, I would appreciate that as well.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Hunter McGill: Sure.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Bellemare.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you, Madam Chair.

On the point brought up by Mr. Robinson regarding China and Canada's response, there was a question about what the minister thought or what the department did. I would like to read into the record here Madam Minna's answer to Mr. Robinson's question in the House. It reads:

...aid to Taiwan was not affected at all by China. We acted immediately with respect to financial aid, which we distributed to a number of local organizations in Taiwan as well as to the Red Cross.

With respect to the issue in search and rescue, directly supporting development of the search and rescue team has not been part of CIDA's practice in the past. However, as the new minister I have actually reviewed this policy.

We are in the process of communicating with the Vancouver search and rescue team. I am hoping that if there is any need in the future we will be in a position to deploy them.

That was the minister's answer. If I may, I'll move on to my own questions to Mr. McGill.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Mr. McGill, have you or any of your staff had a chance to review at all the capability of the Vancouver search and rescue team to date?

Mr. Hunter McGill: Yes, we have. As I mentioned to Mr. Robinson, we have been in dialogue with the Vancouver search and rescue team quite extensively over the last five or six weeks. We, both directly and through Emergency Preparedness Canada—who are the regular interlocutors with Vancouver—

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: I appreciate that you may have had some discussions. As a former city councillor, there are things that come to my mind immediately. I am not aware of the composition of the Vancouver search and rescue team. They could be volunteers from off the street. They could be firefighters. They could be police officers. I have no idea. They may be employed by the municipality of Vancouver. They may be employed by the Province of British Columbia. I am not aware of that.

However, what I am aware of is that if you send people out, especially third-party groups like this who don't work for the government, there may be a question of costing. There certainly is. And there certainly is a point in liability, if we send out anybody who is not prepared, who doesn't have the experience. We cannot send people just to give them experience. The first person who wants to do good, who has to jump off a boat or a plane to go and help someone...we don't do that automatically. We have to make sure the capability is there and, if experience is needed, that the experience is really monitored, so we don't get involved in public liability insurance cases, in case someone gets really hurt, in case someone dies.

Who pays? Is it the City of Vancouver? Is it the Province of British Columbia? If it is firefighters we're sending, is it the firefighters union or association? Is it the Canadian government? These questions have to be addressed.

Also, in other countries that do have expert teams that go on site, what was the process in those countries. Did they assess the capability? What did they provide in terms of procedures in order to be able to pick certain people, to train certain people, and then obviously to send them with all the coverages imaginable so that the host country sending any rescue team is totally covered and is protecting its own team?

Have these been addressed yet by your department?

Mr. Hunter McGill: You've raised a range of issues that are indeed part and parcel of the dialogue we are having with the Vancouver team. The issue of liability insurance was in fact something that delayed by several hours the departure of the two team members who went to Turkey after the second earthquake, for precisely the reason you gave. We couldn't send those people over to a region where buildings were falling down and not have the confidence that indeed they had adequate insurance. Even though they were Vancouver civic employees, they were acting well out of their normal terms of reference as employees of the City of Vancouver.

• 1615

The experience of other countries is wide-ranging. I would venture to say that the most experienced and proficient is Switzerland. They have 26 years of experience. They have built up an extremely impressive arrangement that involves a series of partners within Switzerland, including Swissair and the Swiss army. Some say it's pretty difficult to tell the Swiss male population from the Swiss army—and they're right.

When the team is mobilized, it includes 102 people from the army, an organization in Switzerland that trains sniffer dogs, etc. It is completely self-contained. The team has its own water supply, accommodations, insurance, transportation, etc. My Swiss counterparts tell me it costs them basically the equivalent of $1 million Canadian to mobilize that team. Then, depending on how far they send it, the cost goes up. That gives you an idea of the cost dimensions of such an exercise.

In France, they have a similarly large team with considerable experience. The United States has several teams, given the experience of the Americans with urban search and rescue needs.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Which country?

Mr. Hunter McGill: The United States. Mr. Robinson referred to the United States team that went to Taiwan. There was a tricky issue about the international response to Taiwan. One of the rules is you don't go to country without being given permission; it's an issue of national sovereignty, etc. The American team was actually in the air before the Taiwanese authorities finally agreed to allow it entry. The Swiss team had to delay their departure by almost 24 hours, I believe.

These are important issues when we're talking about the response to an earthquake, because it is the view of the experts that unless you can get search and rescue teams operating within 72 hours, the prospect of saving anybody under a building is very limited. You will have seen that from the press reports. In a couple of cases, there were some remarkable instances where people were dragged out of buildings after four, five, and six days. But that's very much the exception. The rule is, if you can get the people who are trapped under buildings within 72 hours, you will have a chance of rescuing them.

The delay that was occasioned by the Taiwanese authorities' reluctance, or resistance, to provide agreement was remarkable, in the case of the Swiss, because the Swiss had pre-negotiated these agreements around the world. Urban search and rescue is a specialty of the Swiss. They don't do a lot of the kinds of disaster responses we do; they're specialized. So they have these agreements in place to facilitate the arrival of their team.

In the case of Taiwan, the Taiwanese were reluctant to take up on this, and the Swiss were a little perplexed at this. That's another aspect of the utilization of a Vancouver search and rescue team we will have to investigate with the Vancouver team, and also with countries where we potentially might respond.

The reaction of the two members of the Vancouver team, after their experience in Turkey, has been that they believe it would be appropriate for Canada to consider, in the case of urban search and rescue, having a geographic focus, perhaps within the Americas, perhaps within the Pacific Rim. But this again is going to be an important element in our capacity to respond in a timely and effective way and will form part of the discussion we will continue to have with Vancouver.

I hope I've answered your questions.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Very well. May I go now to Taiwan and—-

The Chair: Mr. Bellemare, you're out of time—next round.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Fine. Thank you.

The Chair: Madam Debien, do you have any questions?

Mrs. Maud Debien: No.

The Chair: Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I just want to get clarification. Was Brian Inglis one of the two people who went ahead of the team?

Mr. Hunter McGill: Yes, he was.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Do you know who the other one was, by any chance?

Mr. Hunter McGill: I don't recollect the name. I apologize. I believe it was the deputy to Mr. Inglis.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Ms. Augustine.

Ms. Jean Augustine: I'm going to ask a few basic questions here, which will show how much I know about this department.

• 1620

I notice you're the director general. What is your staffing, and what do you do most of the time? Disasters don't happen every.... Are you mobilized in other areas, etc.? That's my first question, if you can talk a little bit about your department.

Secondly, how do you work, or how is the work coordinated with the Canadian Forces disaster assistance response team? What connection is there between the Canadian Forces team and other UN disaster assistance teams—UNDATs and whatnot? How does CIDA operate, collaborate, and partner in that world?

I hope my questions are clear.

Mr. Hunter McGill: I'm sorry, the temptation to take a lot of your time is very strong here. I will try to be as succinct as possible.

My division, as a whole, has 12 permanent staff, but that also comprises the unit that deals with peace-building, because CIDA's peace-building unit is also within my division. It deals specifically with natural disasters and complex international and humanitarian emergencies, which is the term we use to describe the situation in democratic Congo you were speaking of a few minutes ago, and Afghanistan and Angola. I have eight staff members in that unit, and the budget for that this year is $104 million.

Our relationship with the Department of National Defence is a very good one, and one which we are continually working to enhance. We have ongoing working meetings with them, of a lessons-learned character, and also to plan our possible response to future situations.

We've had two very successful major operations, in conjunction with the Department of National Defence, both of them involving the DART field hospital you referred to. The first one was after Hurricane Mitch, just over a year ago, for the Central American countries. Complementing the work of the DART on the mobilization of that hospital were the services provided by National Defence to fly humanitarian supplies from Canada to Honduras and Nicaragua.

The second deployment of DART was to Turkey in August. That was more of a logistic challenge, because of the distance involved. But DND managed to come up with a solution to the transport problem and got the field hospital there. We understand it was an enormous success and provided very important and valuable services to the people affected by the earthquake in the region where it was situated.

We've done lessons-learned exercises with DND from both of those operations. We also, of course, work very closely with our colleagues from Foreign Affairs and International Trade, always hoping to improve our responsiveness.

In the context of work in the international field with the United Nations and other organizations, there are UN agencies with the specific responsibility of coordinating humanitarian response. The headquarters, from a policy standpoint, is in New York. The operational headquarters for the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance, or OCHA, is in Geneva, and we are in regular contact with them.

They are usually our first point of contact with the UN system, in the response to any natural disaster or complex emergency, to find out what is needed, what the priorities are, and what other people are doing, so we don't get out there and trip over one another or duplicate what other countries may be providing.

As is virtually always the case, the resources available are never sufficient to meet the needs of the people affected by these situations, so we want to make sure we're not going to duplicate and waste effort.

• 1625

We also have an informal network of the major humanitarian assistance donor agencies—ourselves, the Americans, the Japanese, and western European countries. We get together on a regular basis to exchange notes and to improve our coordination so that each of us is able to pick up the telephone, call the others, and make sure we are going to do the right thing, in a timely way, in any circumstance. It's not a perfect system—I don't think there is any perfect system—but we do strive continuously to improve it.

With respect to what we do when we're not responding to natural disasters, well, then we work on things like Afghanistan, Colombia, Angola, and the Great Lakes region of Africa, where the tragedy has been ongoing for quite a long time. That's a short list, I'm afraid.

Ms. Jean Augustine: I have one more brief question.

Let's take the situation of the Caribbean, where we know that hurricanes are going to occur on an annual basis. Are we working with the region in terms of preparedness, giving them some skills, equipment, and whatever so that it won't be the disaster it presently is, where we have to run in with humanitarian assistance?

Mr. Hunter McGill: Yes, indeed we have. The Caribbean and Central America are two areas where we have had the opportunity to be able to do a lot of disaster preparedness and disaster mitigation work. We work with local partners. The eastern Caribbean has a regional institution that looks at disaster preparedness.

In the western hemisphere, we have the advantage of working with the Pan American Health Organization, which has done a great deal of work in disaster preparedness. It extends to ensuring that the public health facilities are ready to deal with the aftermath of a disaster and to dealing a lot with the training for government and civil society players who immediately go into action after a hurricane, as we see often in the Caribbean.

We've seen dividends flow from that in terms of the damage that now occurs after hurricanes of regular dimensions, if I can say that. This is excluding a Hurricane Mitch, which I simply do not think you can prepare for. A class 5 hurricane is so damaging, the best preparedness in the world in terms of infrastucture and so on simply would not be sufficient. But in terms of the response mechanisms of civil administration and civil society in many of the countries of the Caribbean, there's been a lot of investment. We're very happy to have been able to contribute to that, particularly through PAHO, as it's called, the Pan American Health Organization.

We regularly visit those preparations. In fact, most recently, after Hurricane Lenny, we were very pleased at how the local authorities were able to manage the aftermath. There was a requirement for a much lower level of external assistance than had been the case in the past, even as recently as five years ago.

The Chair: Thank you.

Madam Debien.

[Translation]

Mrs. Maud Debien: Mr. McGill, you partly answered my question. If I heard correctly, your budget for the year 1999 was $4 million.

Mr. Hunter McGill: One hundred and four million dollars.

Mrs. Maud Debien: Fine, $104 million. I heard $4 million and I apologize for that. I was surprised to hear that CIDA had allocated $11 million to humanitarian assistance operations with a budget of only $4 million. I was wondering where the rest of the money came from. I understand now. You answered my question.

Does your budget increase every year or is it diminishing? Considering the cuts that have been affecting CIDA over the past number of years, has your budget remained stable, has it increased or has it diminished?

Mr. Hunter McGill: Since I first came, our budget has increased very significantly, based on the needs identified, such as those following hurricane Mitch and, this year, the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo. The government decided to allocate additional money to humanitarian assistance in response to the requests that were received.

• 1630

Our annual budget for humanitarian assistance is usually around $50 million. As I pointed out, there has been a major increase this year because of the scope of the crisis in Kosovo. Our budget was also increased a year ago, after hurricane Mitch.

Mrs. Maud Debien: I thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

[Translation]

Mr. Bellemare.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you, Madam.

[English]

If I may, I'd like to go back to the Taiwan and Turkey issue. Did Taiwan or Turkey ask for help from Canada in one way or another, whether it be search and rescue, material and supplies, or food of any kind?

Mr. Hunter McGill: In the case of Taiwan, there was never a specific request to the Government of Canada. We responded to a general appeal that went out through the Red Cross movement, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies in Geneva, to which we responded.

In part, we also responded to proposals we had from the Canadian trade office in Taipei, which was aware of the work of some local organizations that were doing important humanitarian work. The Canadian office there felt we should contribute as well, and in fact we did.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: In terms of our help here, what were the specifics?

Mr. Hunter McGill: In the case of the assistance we provided through the Red Cross movement, it was for shelter materials for people who had lost their homes.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: In Taiwan or Turkey?

Mr. Hunter McGill: In Taiwan. I'll give you a separate answer on Turkey, excuse me.

In the case of Taiwan, it was shelter materials, food, and emergency supplies for people who had lost their accommodation and so on. There was also assistance of a slightly longer-term character for populations that were particularly hard hit, including the autochthonous population of Taiwan, which has, as I understand it, a rather disfavoured status on the island.

In the case of Turkey, there was an official request from the Turkish authorities to the Government of Canada. In part, the response came in the form of mobilization of the DART mobile hospital.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Can you explain what the DART mobile hospital is?

Mr. Hunter McGill: It's the disaster assistance response team of the Department of National Defence, made up of military personnel who have medical skills and who can run a 50-bed field hospital. It's an entirely self-contained unit. It has 200 people, of whom about 60 or 70 are medical personnel. The balance is support personnel.

This is a very important factor, because when you put this unit into the field, it must be self-contained. Otherwise, it's of less assistance and less value than it could be. It also takes quite a lot of effort to mobilize this, as you can imagine, with 200 people, the field hospital itself, the tents, and accommodation. They also take their own water purification equipment. It fills up quite a lot of airplanes.

When I referred to the challenge of mobilizing this team for Turkey, part of the difficulty was that it's quite a distance to the affected region of Turkey. DND had to do some very creative work. It would take probably about 50 Hercules flights, and that was just too long, so in fact DND found other ways to do it.

It's a very valuable disaster response tool for certain circumstances. Because it is 200 people, you have to have the right kinds of conditions. In Turkey, and in Honduras after Hurricane Mitch, we were able to do so.

I was going to mention that in the case of Turkish authorities, they did ask for other forms of assistance, including assistance to deal with a major fire at an oil refinery in Turkey that had been affected by the earthquake. We were able to get some tremendous expertise from a firm in Calgary, who were able to send two of their experts to assist the Turkish authorities in dealing with what could have been an extremely serious situation there. As you can imagine, when an oil refinery fire gets out of hand the environmental consequences alone are extraordinary.

• 1635

We also did a range of other things in Turkey. It's a bit of a gloomy list. I mean, Turkish authorities asked us at one stage for body bags. But it's a fact of life. You've seen the loss of life, over 700 people.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Did we supply them?

Mr. Hunter McGill: Yes, as it turned out, we did. We had them.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you very much.

Mr. Hunter McGill: You're welcome.

[Translation]

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you, Madam Chair.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

I think you have answered our questions very well.

The minister was supposed to have appeared last Wednesday, and we didn't have a meeting, so I think we will ask the minister to appear before us in early February. Perhaps we can ask her if she could focus on civil society in Africa, which would help us a little more in deciding which direction we're going to be taking in our African study, if that's agreeable with the committee.

Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: We can certainly ask her to focus on that, but obviously members of the committee may have questions in other areas.

The Chair: Oh, yes.

Mr. Svend Robinson: To follow up on the earlier issue I raised, I believe James has some information he wanted to share with the committee. Having had a brief look at it, I think we may want to ask for more.

The Chair: I think what we're going to have to do, though...and James found this when he went back to the office. I think it was to have been distributed to members' offices, I'm not sure, but we can't find a translated copy.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Okay, distribute the translated copies.

The Chair: We will have that taken care of, and it will get to you.

Thank you very much for your presentation.

Merry Christmas, everyone, and have a happy new year. See you in the millennium!

The meeting is adjourned.