:
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), the Department of Foreign Affairs user fee proposal relating to Passport Canada was referred to the committee on Thursday, March 29. I want to welcome our officials from Passport Canada. They are going to talk to us and give us a bit of an update on what's going on.
From Passport Canada, we have Christine Desloges, who is the chief executive officer. Welcome, Christine.
We have Lisa Pezzack, who is the director general, policy, research and communications. Welcome, Lisa, to you. And we have Michel Brunette, director, resource management and compliance. Welcome to all of you.
I believe, Christine, that you have an opening statement. Then we'll take some time to ask questions, going around the table. I'm sure you know how everything works here, so we'll turn it over to you. The floor is yours.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and honourable members of the committee.
I'm delighted to be here today to speak to you about Passport Canada's fee-for-service proposal, the result of two years of inclusive public consultations under the User Fees Act.
I will begin with an overview of Passport Canada's operating environment and the challenges we face from a business point of view. I will then outline our accomplishments in preparing and consulting on our fee-for-service proposal.
[Translation]
Passport Canada is one of the most visible services offered by the Government of Canada. Last year, we issued more than 4.8 million passports to Canadians, and more than 99% of our clients received their passport on time or earlier.
Passport Canada is a self-funding special operating agency working on a 100% cost-recovery basis. We are funded solely through the fees paid by passport applicants. These fees have not increased since 2001, except for a $2 postal fee increase in 2005. And yet, the business of issuing passports is much different today than in 2001. Over the past decade, Passport Canada has more than doubled the number of passports issued annually. Today, 67% of Canadians hold a passport.
[English]
Passport Canada runs a deficit on every booklet issued. A fee increase is needed to support our move to the e-passport, to bolster our ongoing fight against identity fraud, and to support our shift from a five-year to a 10-year business cycle.
When I speak about a business cycle, it is because, as a cost-recovery agency, Passport Canada functions more like a business than like a conventional government department. We use activity-based management to monitor and track the actual cost of each part of our operations.
Over the past decade, we have streamlined our business processes, making effective use of technology, and have found operating efficiencies wherever we could. However, our existing fee structure has fallen out of step with our business realities, and it cannot support the investments needed to keep pace with the advances in technology, international standards, and recommended practices. These concerns were raised by the Office of the Auditor General in 2005, and were reiterated by the public accounts committee in 2006 and in 2008.
[Translation]
The national roll-out of the ePassport and the implementation of its associated technology is a very complex project. Adopting the ePassport requires the creation of an entirely new passport booklet. We must build up an operating inventory of blank booklets.
Producing the ePassport also means replacing our printing technology across Canada, as well as IT system changes. Moreover, to ensure consistent service to Canadians, staff here in Canada and in our missions abroad must be trained in the new technology.
[English]
I will now move on to a snapshot of our User Fees Act process.
We began by consulting Canadians about our services through a website questionnaire, and we received input from more than 7,000 Canadians. We involved external stakeholders by organizing round table sessions with representatives from consumer and industry groups. More than 70 non-governmental potential interest groups were also invited to provide input through a letter campaign. We believe that these consultations and outreach initiatives provided an accurate overview of Canadians' opinions and preferences.
Mr. Chair, I can assure you that we listened closely to what our clients and stakeholders told us during our consultations, and I'm pleased to report that the results highlighted Canadians' satisfaction with Passport Canada's services.
Further, there is widespread support for the 10-year passport. About 80% of Canadians said that they will opt for a 10-year validity booklet, but many still want the option of having a five-year e-passport booklet as well.
So we will also continue to offer Canadians the option of a five-year validity booklet at a lower upfront cost.
Canadians told us they value being able to travel freely to many destinations around the world, without the need for costly visas. That is why, once its technology and the new security features were explained, most Canadians expressed a favourable view of the e-passport, citing the need to comply with international practices and stay at the forefront of passport security.
[Translation]
Canadians clearly indicated that they support a reduced price for children's passports and this is reflected in our proposal. Children's passports will still be valid for five years and fees will remain at 60% of adult five-year passport fees. In preparing our proposal, our goal was to keep the fee for the 10-year ePassport as low as possible.
Under our proposed new fee structure, the 10-year ePassport will cost $160, meaning that it will actually cost less per year than the current passports. The 5-year ePassport will however cost more per year. In addition to our consultations, we conducted an international comparison. With this proposal, Canada compares favourably to other countries despite being in the unique position of operating on a fully cost-recovery basis, contrary to our international counterparts.
[English]
After listening to everything Canadians told us, consulting with consumer and industry organizations, and evaluating passport services in other countries, we published our fee-for-service proposal on November 10, 2011. We invited Canadians to provide input on the proposal until November 25. During that period over 7,000 people visited the web page, and 56 provided input.
Passport Canada replied to all the input by mid-December within the prescribed timelines. As per the User Fees Act, those who submitted input were allowed to request independent advisory panels if they were unsatisfied with our responses, and no requests were received.
This brings us to the parliamentary tabling of our proposal, which we believe will best serve the interests of the millions of Canadians who depend on Passport Canada for reliable, secure, and internationally respected travel documents. Our organization prepared a balanced and comprehensive fee-for-service proposal. The proposal accurately reflects our costs and puts forward a fee structure that will allow us to move to a 10-year business cycle.
[Translation]
After more than a decade without increasing passport fees, the new fee and service structure will allow us to modernize services and improve the security of the passport program, while ensuring the financial sustainability of the organization. Thanks to the implementation of the ePassport, Passport Canada is ensuring that Canadians will have travel documents that are secure and highly respected the world over.
Passport Canada is working closely with its public- and private-sector partners. In order to ensure a timely deployment of the ePassport, the months ahead will be critical. Passport Canada will ensure that services to Canadians will not be affected as we transition to the new technology.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be pleased to answer any questions you and the committee members may have.
:
Perhaps I can take you through what we need to do.
I should say that the next few months are going to be critical. As I mentioned in my opening statement, we need to create a brand new book. We also need to build inventory. Last year we produced 4.8 million passports. We have to have sufficient inventory to be able to deliver this passport from coast to coast to all Canadians.
We need to bring in some updates to the information technology software, and that's well under way. We also need to procure some equipment, and that process is well under way. We actually expect the equipment to be there soon.
Then we need to roll it out, phase by phase, across the whole country, and then we need to install it in the major plants we have. We have two printing plants, one in Gatineau and the other one in Toronto. Finally, we need to do the training across the country.
We also need to be aware of the fact that, as we are cost recovery, we need to make sure that we balance demand with supply so that we do not waste anything. So we have to do a gradual elimination of the old passport and an introduction of the new one. We're working very carefully with the private sector as well as with our partners in government to ensure that this will happen as quickly as possible.
We anticipate, to answer your question, that we will start the rollout at the end of the calendar year. At that point, we will be issuing both an e-passport and a non-e-passport for five years. We'll roll it out across the country, and when we are in a position to offer it to all Canadians, we will roll out—likely in the spring of 2013—the 10-year e-passport to all Canadians.
:
Actually, I should say that we are producing more passports now with fewer people than we were during the crisis five years ago, so we have enhanced our efficiency by introducing national workload management. We also have a national tactical response team that watches in an executive committee every week, looks at the dashboard and the demand right across the country, so as to see how we can rebalance and meet all service standards. That's what we do right now.
The challenge with the introduction of the 10-year e-passports is that we must move to a 10-year business cycle. This means that for the first five years, the demand is there, but then on year six, those folks who have a 10-year e-passport are not coming back. So the demand drops dramatically, and what you have is first applicants and children. As Mr. Brunette just mentioned, children's passports are subsidized. Not only are they 60% of the cost of an adult's passport, but they also cost us more money to produce because we have to confirm that the adults getting the passports are the custodians of the children. So in fact it requires greater scrutiny to produce children's passports. That's a significant factor.
We have to be able, in the second part of the cycle, to sustain our operations, downsize the organization, and then upsize as the clients are coming back at the end of the cycle. That's a significant challenge, which our colleagues in other countries have not met. In fact, in the case of New Zealand, when they introduced their e-passport, they went to a five-year e-passport and they doubled the price.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Translation]
Ms. Desloges, I thank you, as well as your colleagues, for being here with us and for the often difficult and very technical work that you all do.
Like Mr. Williamson, I am a member for a rural riding in New Brunswick. You say that you allowed Service Canada agents in small rural communities to help people by checking to see whether their application had been properly filled out. In my riding, we often give advice to those who are not very conversant with filling out an application electronically. I know that this helps people a lot and reduces frustration. In small remote communities far from Passport Canada offices, that initiative was very helpful, and I wanted to let you know.
According to the experience of electors that I send to your Fredericton office, the staff there is exceptional and very professional. In my area, in case of emergency or complications, the most direct way of dealing with things is to go to Fredericton. As members, we note that the service we receive from those offices and from your office in Ottawa is also very impressive. I wanted to tell you that and to thank you.
I am going to follow up on the questions put by my friend John Williamson. People certainly want to know about the costs when they come to our offices. Everyone wants more services while paying less tax and fewer service fees. That is often what we encounter. In your proposal, you attempt to assess the cost of the ePassport. You talked about costs of 13% for auxiliary products and services and 10% for new and ongoing investments.
That sounds like bureaucratic expressions that may mean something, or perhaps nothing at all. Can you give me an example of these
[English]
“auxiliary products and services” or “new and ongoing investments”.
Thank you, Ms. Desloges and your colleagues, for being here today and providing us with information on what I think is a really exciting new product.
I concur with some of the comments made by other members about the need for a 10-year passport. It's something that people in my constituency in Mississauga have been requesting for quite some time.
Canada is a country of international trade, with diaspora connections all over the world. The ability to move freely across international boundaries is vitally important to us. Thank you for all the hard work you and your colleagues have done in bringing these 10-year passports forward.
I was struck by something you said, Ms. Desloges, in your opening remarks about Canadians telling you that they valued being able to travel freely to destinations around the world without the need for costly visas. I wonder if you could elaborate a little bit more on that and give us some examples of places where Canadians do need visas today and how that might change in the future, if that's the case, or if we didn't do this, where visas might arise.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much. This has been most helpful to all of us.
I know that in York region, where my riding is, there is a real problem with fraud and the production of identification for a fee, which is then used illicitly. I know that York Regional Police have really struggled to get this under control, so I'm really pleased to hear that these mechanisms are coming into play.
Following up on that, we're talking about fraudulent documents, and really what this passport is going to allow is almost a form of insurance for identity theft, isn't it? Because if I have my passport, which has my photograph embedded in that chip, it's going to be virtually impossible—maybe I shouldn't say that, but almost impossible—for anybody to decode that and prepare documentation that can then steal my identity, because I'll always have that backup with Passport Canada to say that this is the person who presented originally. It's an insurance policy, really, that all Canadians ought to think about in the future.
My question, then, goes to the second step of that. I have my NEXUS card, and I know that NEXUS now has the retina scan that I can step up to. I was at the Toronto airport, and you just step up to the machine and it scans your retina. Is that ever going to become part of Passport Canada? Is that another step down the way, or has it been considered?
:
Thank you so much. Hi, everyone.
Allow me to thank you all for the opportunity. I am Sudanese, and I live and work in Sudan in Khartoum. I am a researcher by profession, and I am the executive director of the Sudanese Organization for Research and Development. Later in my statement I will talk briefly about my organization.
I'm really honoured to have the chance to talk to you today and I thank you for that.
Since July 2011 the Sudan we used to know has split into two countries, following a referendum where southern Sudanese chose separation over unity.
The independence of southern Sudan unfortunately did not lead to stability in both countries, as hostilities started again and will seemingly continue unless more pressure is put on the two countries—the two leaders of the two countries—to resort to negotiations and go back to the negotiation table.
The resumption of hostilities was not unexpected as certain outstanding issues were not resolved at the end of the interim period following the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. Those issues include the settlement of the borders between the two countries, the contested Abyei area, and definitely the whole problem of the oil, and the situation of southern Sudanese in the north, and northern Sudanese in the south.
In addition to that, conflict in Darfur, which started in 2003, is still going on. Although it's not in the spotlight as it used to be, it is still going on. After the independence of southern Sudan more conflict erupted in the region of South Kordofan and the Blue Nile.
The economic situation in Sudan has deteriorated from bad to worse, and the Sudanese pound continued its fall while prices are rocketing higher, rendering Sudanese people hungry, homeless, unemployed, and sick.
Human rights violations continued where the national security forces act with full impunity and they enjoy full immunity. Human rights activists are frequently arrested, imprisoned, and interrogated. Independent newspapers are frequently shut down, closed, and censored. Women in particular are harassed. Unconstitutional laws, such as legalizing marital rape, girl child marriage, and wife battering, are applied under the so-called Islamic sharia family laws.
The space for civil society is therefore shrinking. Our area of work is also limited to providing emergency assistance and income-generation activities.
Support to non-governmental organizations and civil society groups and community-based organizations decreased significantly since southern Sudan independence. Most UN agencies, international NGOs, and donors shifted their weight to southern Sudan. This move is explained based on the comparison between the two countries in terms of the level of infrastructure and services and the capacity-building needs in South Sudan. Also, the international community assumed that Sudan enjoyed stability and was governed by a so-called democratically elected government.
Both assumptions, stability and democratic government, proved to be invalid. My country is far from being stable, with war covering almost one third of the country and the so-called elected government increasingly practising atrocities and human rights violations, actively working towards effecting an Islamic constitution and building an Islamic state in Sudan.
In 2007, in the midst of the comprehensive peace agreement and interim period, the Sudanese Organization for Research and Development was born as a result of a series of conversations among like-minded civil society activists, who were concerned at the time about the role of civil society in promoting notions of democracy, citizenship rights, and peaceful coexistence. SORD soon started to take its place among the civil society organizations working to achieve those goals.
As a research-based organization, SORD has proven itself and gotten recognized through its serious work and engagement in civic education, gender justice, and social inclusion. During the past four years, SORD has successfully implemented programs and projects for civic education, support to community-based organizations, and women's rights. Our work has expanded to include five other states beyond Khartoum, reaching thousands of women and young people around the country.
One of the main umbrella programs that the Sudanese Organization for Research and Development is currently undertaking deals with issues of gender justice and women's rights in Sudan. Under this umbrella program, we are advocating for the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the African protocol on women's rights.
We are working on enhancing women's political and social leadership. We are working on combatting discrimination and discriminatory practices, mainly within the legal framework of Sudan, and we are challenging the existing personal status law between two brackets—the family law for Muslims and providing or proposing alternative laws. The work SORD is doing is making a difference at two levels: increasing the level of public awareness and education, and changing the behaviour and the practice of a huge number of segments of society. We are seeing some potential for changing those laws.
Producing research-based evidence, and using documentary films and women's stories and experiences have helped and give SORD credibility.
Having said that, our work is in a religiously sensitive area such that the family law for Muslims has opened fire on us from the Islamic fundamentalist Salafi groups, which have lately become very vocal in criticizing our work and criticizing SORD—even naming some names inside the organization—saying that we are doing some work that is against Islam and Islamic culture.
However, at the same time, that has provided publicity for our work, and we are getting a lot of demand from different parts of the country, based on these attacks from the hardliners or the Islamic fundamentalists.
Thank you to our guests for appearing before our committee.
Actually, just before the last election here in Canada, we did a report on Sudan. We pushed for it because we were concerned about doing a report on Sudan before the referendum.
It's interesting to note that what we heard before the referendum were concerns around Abyei, concerns around oil fields, and concerns around what would happen to southerners who were in the north, particularly women, and of course there was some mention about northerners who were in the south. You come to us today and present us with all of those issues. Many of us were hoping that after the referendum there would be peace flowing like a river, but we understood that in fact it was not going to happen, particularly when the talks broke down around Abyei, for instance.
My question to you is a geopolitical one. Then I'm going to hand this over to my colleague, Mr. Saganash.
We've heard in the last number of days very disturbing language coming from President al-Bashir. He is using language that certainly concerns me when he speaks with regard to members of the south and the military as bugs that can be squashed. We do not have to go back too far in history to see that when people start referencing people as other than human, this is a warning for us to be seized with. I read today that former U.S. president Jimmy Carter has talked about maybe having a UN peacekeeping presence there.
So clearly there is a need for the world to pay attention. That's not a question. My question for you is, in your opinion, what do you think the world, and obviously Canada, should be seized with when it comes to our ability beyond helping you as an organization—I'll let my colleagues get to that a bit more—but in general terms?
What should the UN be doing? I know that there have been the usual discussions at the UN. But very specifically, what would be your recommendation to the UN as to what should be happening to quell the violence and to deal with some of the outstanding issues?
Thank you.
First of all, allow me to agree with you and say that we are all very much disturbed by and concerned about the statements of al-Bashir, which didn't go by without impact. Immediately after the speech, there were so many other media leaders who started to quote him. Accordingly, some raids have already started. I'm not sure whether you know that a very big church for the southern Sudanese in Khartoum was demolished last Saturday.
That said, at the same time, there are now huge numbers of people gathering, from civil society and from human rights defenders, and they are issuing statements—and political parties are also issuing statements—condemning what al-Bashir has said, and at the same time trying to look at what happened in a more objective way.
I think I said in my testimony that pressure has to be exerted. At the same time, I think this is also because the democratic movement in Sudan has not been well supported, especially during the interim period. It was left to only the SPLM and the NCP. I think it is high time for the international community to pay attention to the counteracting forces in Sudan, the pacific and non-violent movements in Sudan, and particularly the sorts of democratic movements. They have to be supported. Youth groups have to be supported.
I think that although the international pressure is important, the internal pressure is equally important. The internal pressure needs to be acknowledged and needs to be really supported. It is the only guarantee, in my view, to bring about that balance. At the same time, I feel the same has to be done in this House. I don't want to talk on behalf of this House, but the same thing is happening...yes.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Elkarib, thank you very much for your presentation. Welcome to the foreign affairs committee. We're delighted to have you here.
I was privileged to be in Juba three months ago. I had the opportunity to visit South Sudan with the Canada-Africa Parliamentary Association. I believe that we were the first foreign delegation hosted in South Sudan. We have a head of office there, Adrian Norfolk, who is managing Canadian affairs there.
Canada still has Sudan as a country of focus for our foreign aid money. I know that we visited several projects going on there. We didn't get into the north, into Sudan itself, so we weren't in Khartoum. But we were in Juba, and we saw a number of projects in Juba that Canada has been supporting for several years, one of them being a hospital and a training program for nurses.
Then we flew to Wau and saw a CIDA project in Wau that is investing in agricultural assistance. We saw a number of programs where women are accessing some microfinance. It was a remarkable opportunity to see some of the country and to become acquainted with people of South Sudan.
My question revolves around the issues of education and health care, though, which I think are probably similar in both northern Sudan and South Sudan. There is an enormous Sudanese diaspora in Canada. I wonder if any of that diaspora has become engaged in both the problems and the good things that are going on in Sudan. Are they assisting in taking some of those positions of responsibility to perhaps bring a different perspective to some of the issues, particularly education?
I saw some of the child brides. I saw some little girls, who were probably not more than 12 or 13 years old, with babies in their arms, and these were their babies. The problem of child brides is something that needs to be addressed. They need education. They need the opportunity for education, because that's what's going to change their lives.
I wonder if you're seeing any recall, I guess, of the diaspora who have migrated to Canada or to other countries. Are they coming back to invest in South Sudan to help mitigate some of these problems?
Let me preface that by saying that my son-in-law is from Ghana. My son-in-law has just finished his Ph.D. here, in science. I don't think he's going back to Ghana, which is a great loss for Ghana, I believe.
Are there opportunities for the diaspora to invest, themselves?
:
Thank you. That's a very important question.
First of all, let me say that the context of South Sudan is completely different from the context in Sudan. Most of the diaspora, particularly in Canada—I hope I'm not taking their name—are here because of political reasons. The political context is the same in Sudan. That is why, although at the level of civil society there is very strong coordination between us and the civil society, and the diaspora here in Canada and in other parts of the world, in terms of coming back and investing in Sudan, given the political context and the legal context, there is no opportunity in Sudan.
For example, on education, it is not illegal in Sudan to take girls out of school. In fact, the law says that a girl of 10 can get married. Even for us inside Sudan, struggling to encourage girls to go to school, the laws are obstructing us. So it is not easy for people to come from outside, from the diaspora, to invest in this area, I must say.
There is a little bit of movement in the area of health, such as supporting some health activities, coming and working during holidays, and doing some operations from the Sudanese diaspora all over the world, but unfortunately, not when it comes to women's rights and girls' rights. That's mainly because of the political context. In the south it is different, because the political context is facilitating that. In Sudan, it is not facilitating that at all.
Thank you very much for your time here, for your presence, and for the candour with which you describe some of the difficult circumstances in Sudan. It's a learning experience certainly for me and I appreciate you being here. Perhaps I'll pick up on our colleague, Ms. Brown's, line of questioning, because I think all of us are wondering what the Government of Canada can do, what Canadian civil society can do, what can the diaspora do, to support a greater advancement of human rights and particularly women's rights in Sudan, capacity building in public institutions—painful as it is—and some evolution towards democratic institutions.
Could you expand on your comments, which I think Ms. Brown reflected on, on the idea that partnerships might perhaps be better in some respects with state governments as opposed to the national government. I don't pretend to understand the federation or the structure in Sudan. If national institutions are weak or show massive disrespect and an inability to protect the rule of law, and the rights of women are subject to, I think you said, influence or very negative interventions from fundamentalist Islamic groups, how would that not then work its way down into lower orders of government?
Different levels of government would be ashamed to invest considerable amounts of money and energy where, from the top, is coming a series of rather negative interventions that either make it not sustainable, or very quickly it becomes money that hasn't brought about the change we were all hoping to see.
:
The federal system in Sudan is very well identified. Health and education are state responsibilities. Each state has full authority and the full right to decide, of course within a national framework. But in terms of investing in education, in terms of the quality of education and health, these are state-level issues.
We no longer have national hospitals. Even the hospitals in Khartoum belong now to Khartoum state. We need to understand that, and that's what I'm talking about when it comes to, particularly, health and education.
When it comes to issues of rights and legislations and freedoms, this has to be done at the national level for sure. Issues of rights, women's rights, all the legal framework has to be worked at the national level. But the government at the national level has proved beyond doubt that they are not willing.
One of the most important commissions related to the CPA, the human rights commission, never materialized until the Comprehensive Peace Agreement expired. That shows how the government is not committed to issues of human rights.
Who is working on issues of human rights and the civil society? There are the ones who are pushing. There are the ones who are trying to provide the space with the help of the international community. That's where support from governments such as Canada is so important to the civil society and the democratic movements in Sudan.
In my view, and this is my advice, unless drastic change has happened, and particularly if they are affecting the Islamic constitution, there is no space to work on issues of human rights with the government at this stage.
I don't want to go into the fact that generally the Sudanese now are not very happy about the government and there are efforts to change the government through the upcoming elections or otherwise. While that is happening, I think the money and support should go to the civil society.
Capacity building for civil society is so important, and the value for money which goes to the civil society proves to be much higher than the money that goes to the government. When I say civil society, I include international organizations of course. I mean the national civil society, but also the international civil society, who are very instrumental in working on issues of rights.
When it comes to services, I think it is going down, in the localities and at the federal level, if there is a chance for support in that sense. That's exactly what I meant by saying the context in southern Sudan is different from Sudan.
:
Yes, we are working in a rather difficult situation. We are a non-governmental organization. We have a legal presence. We are registered. We are following the procedures that are described by the government to legally exist in the country.
Having said that, our activity is not necessarily approved by the government, and we are frequently summoned by security. Some of my staff have been arrested by security for working on issues like children's and women's rights. We always try to talk to our members, to our board, and to our stakeholders on how we can navigate such conditions.
SORD is part of a human rights defenders group whereby we are trying to educate ourselves on how we can protect ourselves, our documents, and definitely the target group we are working with.
Yes, we know we are working in a delicate situation. We try to work together and always have contingency plans on how to do things. But of course, it is our decision to do that, and we are making a difference. We also try to approach women, especially among the government, because there are certain issues where women can listen beyond their political ideology. So we are trying to work with some soft-liners—if that's the right word—and to have them on our side, which is not an easy thing to do, but that is how we have been existing up to now.
:
The separation has definitely affected the women's movement in Sudan. Before the separation, and particularly during the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, there was quite a strong women's movement. Women from the north and south were working together, coordinating with each other, and supporting each other. And we have lost that, you know.
We are still trying to connect. We are still trying to share strategies and experiences. But for sure, that has affected the women's movement in the north.
It has affected it also in another direction, especially when it comes to the issue of Islamic laws. Before independence, there was a strong argument for religious diversity. We are not all Muslim, so that gave us an argument against Islamic sharia laws. We are losing that, because now most of the people in the north are Muslims.
We also have to change our strategies. We can no longer use that excuse. Although we are not yet 100% Muslims, we are definitely not as we used to be before independence. This is definitely affecting the movement.
It is also affecting the South Sudanese women, because they were also very much supported by the relatively strong women's movement in the north, and they are now losing that. They are also losing it increasingly because the government structure in the south has taken some of the women from the civil society to now be ministers and part of the government. So the movement in the south is also struggling.
We are now part of a society that is bringing the women from the north and south together. I hope that what happened last week is not going to affect that, but I am afraid that it will.