FAAE Committee Meeting

    Good morning, everyone. Pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), we are looking at supplementary estimates (B) for 2012-13. We will also have some votes on that after.

    I want to welcome Minister Fantino. It's nice to have you here as a first-time minister at this committee.

     I believe you have with you Greta Bossenmaier, senior executive vice-president. Welcome, Greta.

    Then we've got Sue Stimpson, chief financial officer. Welcome to you as well.

    Minister, we'll start off with your opening statement. I know you have an hour with us. So we'll get started, and then we'll move back and forth across the room for questions, and then I'll let you wrap up with a summary at the end, if that's all right.

    Minister Fantino, I'm going to turn the floor over to you, sir, and thank you once again for being here.

    Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to be here with officials from CIDA. It is indeed my privilege to appear here today to discuss Canada's international development agency and the supplementary estimates.

    As indicated, I will at times defer to the officials on issues, but nonetheless I want to begin by giving you a brief overview of the agency, the work we are doing, and the direction in which we are going.

    Development is a major part of the way Canada engages in the world, and CIDA is an important part of the story. Development has many forms. Many of you are most familiar with our humanitarian assistance, helping those in times of dire circumstances, whether natural disasters, civil unrest, or other catastrophic situations. Together with our partners, we demonstrate Canada's compassion.

    CIDA's work is more than assistance. It also underpins Canada's prosperity by unlocking the economic potential of the developing world and building tomorrow's markets. We help growing economies by offering alternatives, preventing threats before they reach our borders, and working to safeguard Canadian security. Development also promotes Canadian values of democracy, freedom, human rights, and the rule of law by helping to support willing governments that respect these tenets.

    Regardless of what form of development we engage in, CIDA is focused on results; not simply results as measured by statistics, but results as measured by what matters. By focusing on tangible outcomes, we can achieve great success.

    Results are not measured by how much money we spend. Instead, we are focused on answering such questions as, how many lives did we save? How many more girls are going to school in Afghanistan? How many newborns survive their first year? How many smallholder farmers are able to sustain their crops, their families, and their communities? The answers to these questions and many more give us the concrete results that clearly show the difference that Canada's investment dollars can make in helping those most in need.

    Achieving results and demonstrating transparency and accountability for taxpayers' investments is one reason that we have chosen to focus on 20 countries and three priority themes. We are having a real impact on the lives of those most in need. At the same time, we are an expression of the best of Canadian values and a contribution to our long-term security and prosperity.

    CIDA ensures that our development assistance is focused on results, and as such we partner with anyone, Canadian or local, to get those results. We align our priorities with local priorities to ensure that results will be sustainable long into the future. We focus on priority areas in which Canadian investments can have the most impact. These areas are: increasing food security; securing the future of children and youth, especially through maternal and child health; and sustainable economic growth.

    Canadians can take great pride in the tangible results their government is achieving. For example, in the area of increased food security Canada has fully untied its food assistance. It was the first G-8 country to deliver on its L'Aquila food security commitment, and it continues to lead towards achieving a new food assistance convention.

    Let me share with you some of the many stories of success with our help. Some 7.8 million chronically food-insecure people have been given food in Ethiopia, and in Haiti more than 400,000 girls and boys given hot meals in school. Our results in this area are not just the delivery of food assistance. Our assistance is also capacity building. For example, in Honduras 1,300 families are increasing agricultural productivity as a result of Canada's investments, and in Vietnam 15,000 people increased their incomes with better agricultural productivity. These examples lead to more local jobs, increased food productivity, and prosperity in those areas.

    As recently as 2007, more than half of Canadian food assistance to developing countries and one-third of Canada's non-food contributions had to be purchased in Canada. Tied aid is not cost-effective and is inefficient. It undermines the ability of developing nations to produce or buy goods for themselves and delays the aid reaching the people who so desperately need the assistance. To maximize the value of Canada's international assistance, the government untied all food aid in 2008 and has set 2012-13 as the deadline for fully untying the goods and services delivered through Canadian aid programs.

    We are also leading the way in securing the future of children and youth.

    In 2010, Prime Minister Stephen Harper championed the Muskoka Initiative on maternal, newborn, and child health, which strengthens health systems, reduces the burden of disease, and improves nutrition.

    By committing to these tenets, there has been increased access to adequately equipped local health centres, increased provision of medicines and vaccines needed to prevent and treat maternal and child mortality, and increased access to healthy and nutritious food that saves lives.

    For instance, through CIDA's support, 1.2 million children were inoculated against polio and measles last year in Bangladesh, and it is our goal to help in the eradication of this disease in the near future. Because of Canadian investments, 92% of infants under one-year-old in Mali received three doses of the penta vaccine used to treat five deadly diseases. That is up from 69% in 2007. In South Sudan, over 3,000 women delivered children safely and were assisted by trained staff. Over 18,000 expecting mothers attended prenatal clinics that allowed them to access preventive health care, ensuring a safe pregnancy.

    Our efforts are making a difference. For example, in Mozambique we supported a nationwide campaign that vaccinated nearly four million children against measles and resulted in an 80% reduction in measles cases compared to the same period in 2010. We also helped over 17,000 children against AIDS. In Afghanistan, 7.8 million children have been vaccinated against polio. These are tangible results that have made an impact in the lives of children and youth in Mozambique and Afghanistan.

    The health and well-being of women and children is essential to long-term prosperity and security in countries around the globe. Where women and children thrive, communities and countries thrive. Women are the bedrock of families and have enormous potential to become decision-makers, drivers of economies, and real role models for future generations. Children offer a glimpse into a country’s future—the teachers, doctors, entrepreneurs, and leaders of tomorrow. By investing in the health of women and children, we can reduce their burden of illness and disease, enabling them to participate fully in their communities, steering their countries towards future prosperity.

    The last priority theme I want to speak about is sustainable economic growth. I think we all agree that economic growth is a key driver of poverty reduction. A stronger economy creates more opportunities, more jobs, and allows families to support themselves. This is why stimulating sustainable economic growth is so important.

    Development is not about dependency. It is about helping those in need to get a leg up so that they can prosper. Let me share some of those results with you. In Tanzania, one million poor people now have access to financial services and credit. In Colombia, over 5,000 people have been trained in agro-ecology. In Bangladesh, 900,000 farmers and small business owners now earn higher incomes, and in Bolivia, 559 women have learned new skills in non-traditional occupations.

    These are the kinds of results that will make a real difference in these countries. There's also a multiplier effect with this type of development. For example, with increased access to capital, more people are able to start small businesses or grow existing businesses. This creates more jobs and greater prosperity, adding more people to the middle class and out of poverty.

    These three priority areas help focus the work that CIDA does and tackle the key areas of development where we can make an impact.

    Canada's aid effectiveness agenda has already accomplished a great deal to make our development investments more focused, more effective, and more accountable. We can continue to build on these achievements, but we can't lose focus of our commitment to deliver real results for those most in need by accountable, transparent activities to Canadian taxpayers. This is an important priority for our government, and that is the reason CIDA has signed on to the International Aid Transparency Initiative in addition to creating our own open data portal.

    We are meeting here today to talk about supplementary estimates. Budget 2012 reiterates the commitment I just outlined and effectiveness, transparency, and accountability.

    As we look to the future and strive to maximize our results, we must also look to innovative solutions to development challenges. This includes using any and all legitimate tools and all partners available to us to meet this critical objective. This also means utilizing the private sector.

    First, let me clarify a misconception that has been perpetuated by the media and some organizations here in Canada that CIDA directly funds mining and private companies. This is absolutely not true. CIDA does not subsidize Canadian companies to make more money. We do not subsidize NGOs, for that matter. The fact is, collaboration of public and private organizations creates opportunities for innovation to scale up interventions in developing countries.

    Currently, CIDA collaborates with developing country governments, civil society, multilateral institutions, and the private sector because they are all necessary partners in this dialogue. For example, private companies are responsible for creating local jobs, raising the standard of living for millions of people and their families, contributing to the local communities in which they operate, and raising revenues for local governments so that they can then deliver what is needed by their citizens. Canadian companies are important players in sustainable growth and development.

    Let me speak specifically to our partnership with Canadian extractive companies. Canada has incredible expertise and a huge reputation in the area of the natural resources sector. CIDA can help set the right conditions for investment and responsible resource development.

    Earlier this year, the Prime Minister announced the creation of the Canadian International Institute for Extractive Industries and Development. The University of British Columbia, in collaboration with Simon Fraser University, will host this institute. The institute will draw on Canadian expertise to help developing countries manage and govern their natural resources responsibly and to ensure that benefits are maximized for their people and for long-term development in those countries. In fact, I have already received correspondence from Peru welcoming the creation of this particular institute.

    Canada is a world leader in the extractive sector, and our partnerships have returned great results. For example, we collaborated with the World University Service of Canada and Rio Tinto to provide better education services, better water, and better sanitation to 134,000 residents of 12 communities in Ghana. We collaborated with Plan Canada and IAMGOLD to train 10,000 youth in 13 communities of Burkina Faso in real job skills.

    I firmly believe that these kinds of partnerships, based on trust and mutual interest, offer the best opportunity to create and sustain growth and prosperity in developing countries. I think we can all agree that Canada's long-term prosperity is tied to new markets, including those rich with resources.

    To date, we have benefited domestically and globally in the resource sector because we truly bring a win-win approach to how we Canadians do business. We work directly with governments to create an environment where laws are respected and entrepreneurship can flourish to ensure that extractive development is incorporated in international and regional plans; to address corruption through greater transparency and accountability; to help governments reinvest revenues into infrastructure and basic services like health and education; to support women's rights and increase their opportunities for economic participation; and to provide local women and men with the necessary skills and job training to engage in benefits from the resource sector.

    This is not just about opening up countries to investment and trade, it's about empowering countries to act as trading partners with stable markets that are capable of receiving investment and enabling governments to effectively regulate and oversee their natural resources sector and economies.

    Working with the extractive sector is just one of the many ways that CIDA can work with private companies to make a bigger difference in the lives of those most in need.

    Mr. Chair and members, from delivering food to the hungry, to improving the lives of mothers and children, to responding to humanitarian disasters, Canadians across the country can be truly proud of their investment and the results they are achieving.

    I am now happy to answer your questions. Thank you.

    Thank you, Minister Fantino.

    We're going to start with Madame Laverdière, who will have the first round, for seven minutes of questions and answers.

    Thank you kindly, Mr. Minister.

    In supplementary estimates (B), an additional $55 million in funding appears for development assistance. Does that amount include funding for the private sector strategy you recently announced?

    Mr. Minister, would you like me to repeat the question because it seems it wasn't clear?

    Yes, if you would, please do.

    Supplementary estimates (B) contains $55 million in additional grants for development assistance. Does that $55 million include funding for the private sector strategy you recently announced?

    If you don't have the answer—

    The simple answer is no.

    Very well.

    How much money has your department earmarked for that new initiative between now and the end of the fiscal year?

    Do you mean for the private sector?

    Yes.

    For the institute, it's $25 million over 5 years, so $5 million per year.

    Fine.

    Minister, you said in your opening remarks that working with the extractive sector is one of the many ways that CIDA can perform its work. How many new agreements through CIDA's partnerships with Canadians program have been announced since you became minister in July?

    The only announcement I can recall is the one involving the institute, and that was an initiative that was tabled by the Prime Minister about a year ago. Just to clear up the point, there was an allocation of $25 million to stand up the institute over the next five years, but that's the only item.

    I have to make this distinction. We have not partnered with the extractive industry. We're not funding any of that. All we are doing is—

    Thank you, Minister. We can come back to that. What I wanted to know mainly was the number of announcements that have been made with the partnerships with Canadians program.

    I understand that the institute has been announced. I think the call for the deadline for submissions for the institute was September 6, and the announcement was made on November 23, which means that it was a bit over two months between the deadline for submissions and the announcement—for which we congratulate CIDA.

    However, I offer a few other examples.

    For the international youth internship program, the deadline for submissions was in February, and we are in November and no announcement has been made. For the Canada fund for African climate resilience, the submission date was April 19, and no announcement has yet been made.

    Basically, you're saying that the institute, for example, is one of many ways. I'm trying here to understand what you are doing in the other ways, and so I'd like you to confirm that no announcement has been made on CIDA's partnerships with Canadians program since December 23 of last year. Is that a fact?

    I'm presently plowing through a number of files that will—or may, or may not—lead to announcements. I don't think that anything and everything CIDA does should result in an announcement. Some of these are just routine matters in which projects are put forward, are evaluated, and are approved or not, or they're altered and they go forward.

    How many have been approved?

    I don't keep score.

    Ms. Hélène Laverdière: You don't keep—

    Hon. Julian Fantino: No, I just do the day-to-day work.

    But do you know how many have been approved?

    I guess I can find out for you, but that's not my priority. My priority is to do the right thing for the right reasons, not how much money we put out or how many projects we approve.

    I'm not asking you about how much money; I'm just asking you about balance here—

    But I'm just giving you an answer.

    —and It seems that in the last months, there has been just one announcement, and it's for the institute.

    Hon. Julian Fantino: Well, you see—

    Ms. Hélène Laverdière: Thank you, Minister. I will give the floor to my colleague Paul.

    Let me answer that. You seem to think that CIDA's work is predicated on a number of announcements. I think, rather, that our people do hard work. We make announcements as they may be necessary. Announcements are not the priority.

    I tend to think that we're working with partners on the ground who have achieved results, NGOs that have achieved results in the last decades, and when they answer a call for submissions, it would be proper practice to at some point get to a decision on them.

    I'll pass the floor to my colleague Paul.

    We have one minute.

    Maybe I'll put this a different way. Just to clarify, you don't know how many proposals that were in front of you for the partnerships program have been approved. Is that right? You can't tell us right now?

    I can't tell you right now, no.

    Thank you.

    We have the situation, Chair, in which we have a minister who is very articulate on the mining extractive program, but he can't tell us how many actual files have been approved. We're hearing zero for the last year.

    I think it would be helpful if the minister or maybe someone there can help us with this. We're hearing of zero approvals for the partnerships program, but exulting over the $25-plus million for the program with extractive industries. I think we need to have more facts to be able to evaluate how the department is doing. I'd appreciate those facts being brought to us as soon as possible.

    Thank you.

    Mr. Chair, if I may correct the record here, you're confusing approvals with announcements.

    I asked how many approvals there have been.

    I've approved all kinds of projects that have not resulted in announcements. If you want—

    Do the people who applied for these programs know? Have they been told?

    It's an open window of transparency with CIDA. You can find out at any time you want what we've approved.

    Can you name two?

    Actually, that's all the time we have. That's seven minutes.

    We're going to move over to Ms. Brown for seven minutes, please.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Minister, thank you for being here today. It's been a while since we've had an update on CIDA projects, so thank you very much.

    One of CIDA's objectives is always to get out in front of situations, ahead of humanitarian disasters. Last year we saw the pending challenges in the Sahel region of Africa. We started acting last winter, as a matter of fact; I think we put $47 million into that. We established the Sahel matching fund in August, and in early fall you made a visit to the Sahel region.

    Could you update the committee, first of all, on what happened with the Sahel matching fund? I know we started it with a $10 million contribution. Could you give us the response we saw from Canadians?

    Could you also update the committee on your observations from your visit to the Sahel?

    Thank you.

    In September I had the chance to see first-hand the challenges faced by what roughly appeared to be about 18 million people plus in the Sahel. Canada was already a world leader in responding to the food and nutrition crisis in the Sahel. In this particular instance, as you indicated, we made an immediate response to alleviate the issues.

    The humanitarian crisis in the Sahel region particularly affects children and women, and it was quite acute. This is being further aggravated by the insecurity in the region, including fundamentalists clashing, the Tuareg nationalists in northern Mali. It's a very precarious and unstable part of the world as it is.

    For these reasons, our government created the Sahel crisis matching fund. I'm proud to inform the committee that as a result of that outreach, Canadians, being the very generous people that they are, donated a total of $6.9 million to the fund.

    The Government of Canada response to the Sahel food and nutrition crisis, totalling some $57.5 million to date, combined with the donations from Canadians to registered Canadian charities, ensures that our humanitarian partners are able to do more to ease the suffering of people throughout the Sahel.

    It didn't result, I thought, to the same degree as previous matching fund programs had.... We analyzed this, as did our partner NGOs. The reason for this is the quick response that happened in the first place. We prevented the very serious, more tragic outcome.

    There was prevention, there was immediate intervention, which resulted in a much better outcome. We obviously didn't have those very compelling, sad pictures of starving children and whatever, because of that intervention. But we still need to be grateful to Canadians for their contribution.

    Thank you, Minister.

    I understand that part of what we're doing with that prevention fund is helping establish prevention mechanisms for the future in new farming mechanisms, helping them understand issues of climate change, and working forward in ensuring that these kinds of disasters don't happen in the future.

    I think you were in Burkina Faso as well, and we have a project there with World University Service of Canada that's working in partnership with one of our extractive industries giving real skilled jobs to local people who are developing opportunities for the future. Could you talk about that project?

    In essence, that project and other projects of a similar nature are basically intended to create a win-win situation for all. We have efforts under way to basically empower people or enable them to develop economies themselves, to create employment, to do the kinds of things that will help them deal in the long run with the issues of health, food, and security, the kinds of things that we now are obviously committed to. In Burkina Faso, the need is just so huge, so great, that we're trying to do the humanitarian aid, surely, but at the very same time we're trying to provide opportunities, support, and sustainment for people to develop their own ability to survive, if you will.

    Finally, the training there, again partnering with Plan Canada, of up to 10,000 young people in 13 communities to meet local labour market needs with co-financing by IAMGOLD and CIDA is a prime example of what it is that we're trying to do. We're trying to leverage resources in an ethical way that will enable the investment companies to be sensitive to the need to look at social issues, health issues, and community building in places where they operate. This is one example of how that has resulted in some very positive short and long-term outcomes.

    Minister, this is just a comment, not a question, but I happened to be at Essakane in Burkina Faso two and a half years ago. I saw the project that IAMGOLD had undertaken with the community to provide water, sanitation, and opportunities for real job training skills that are portable into the job market, should people decide to leave and go to some of the other cities that are around there. They are portable jobs that, at the same time, create opportunities for agricultural development there because they are trying to feed all of the people who are working at their mine. They've got a very modern, up-to-date kitchen, and they are using all locally grown produce, which is compounding the effectiveness of the work that's being done in that area. So I applaud you for the work that's being undertaken in those projects.

    The big thing there as well is creating employment opportunities and training for local folks, as you pointed out, so it's a model.

    Thank you very much. That's all the time.

    We're going to move over to Mr. Eyking for seven minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Welcome, Minister.

    As you're well aware, your department is one of the hardest hit by the government cuts, and I think it's staggering, $320 million. It's pretty disturbing when you see that most G-20 countries are maintaining or increasing their aid with less robust economies than ours.

    The other disturbing trend is that a lot of assistance does not fit with the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act, which is mostly supposed to focus on reducing poverty. The other thing we found out—and you mentioned Africa with the droughts and the instability—is that Africa is still the biggest continent in need of help, and that's where your biggest cuts are.

    Minister, you're from Toronto. Toronto and the country are great contributors to aid individuals, but most of them do it in their local communities through NGOs they believe in. That's where the vast amount of the contributions are. So when you're kind of cutting these NGOs off, you're cutting off that money stream from these individuals. My question is, do you have a sense of how much money is going to be lost as a result of the amount of money you're cutting from NGOs right now? How much does that translate to in the individual donations that would go to those NGOs to foster the programs they would want to do?

    There are a couple of things. First and foremost, I think there's a misconception here, that has been perpetuated, that CIDA is responsible for maintaining and funding NGOs for life. That's not the case. We are operating on the basis of ensuring that the best outcome is achieved for every taxpayer dollar.

     To give you an example, I was just in Haiti. Some people will tell me that there are some 4,000 NGOs on the ground in Haiti. Others will tell me that there are 6,000 plus NGOs. This is right from Haitians; this is not an invention or some third-party focus. My response to all of this is that we will operate with whatever agency, entity, NGO, or whatever, that will achieve optimum results for Canadian tax dollars, in a most efficient and effective way, and ensure that the outcomes are what are intended.

    The issue isn't about how many NGOs CIDA is going to keep operating.

    I believe that there should be a review. We can't just keep giving people money, unless you review wherever that money is going. But your department's drastic cuts...some of these NGOs are really doing a good job. It almost implies there's a bit of ideology from your government about whom you're picking.

    Do you have any directive from the PMO on whom you pick? How does the process happen?

    There is absolutely no directive whatsoever. I think what I bring to the job is my own Canadian citizen and business approach to how things should be done, in consultation with CIDA folks. There's no directive. But it makes perfect sense that we coordinate, that we don't squander a nickel of hard-earned taxpayers’ money. We're not there to address the flavour of the day; we're there to do the heavy lifting.

    I should also make it clear. People talk about cuts. These are adjustments. Things happen; things have changed. There are countries that were in dire need of CIDA and Canadian aid—

    If I may, Minister—

    I thought I was answering.

    I just want—if you could allude to the ones—

    Mr. Chair, could I finish?

    A quick response, yes, then we'll come back.

    I'm sorry, Minister, they give me only five minutes for the whole thing. That's why I can't fit so much in.

    I just want to make it clear that we are not in the business of funding NGOs for life. We will pick and choose those that provide the most ethical, most efficient, and most effective results for Canadian taxpayer dollars.

    “Ethical”, you're saying. The Canadian Nurses Association, the Canadian Teachers' Federation, Development and Peace—are you saying they're not cutting it? They're not doing the job? They're not ethical?

    You said that; I didn't say that. You framed it in that context.

    I can't see why these NGOs have been cut.

    Well, because times have changed, country statuses have changed, needs have changed. The world economy has changed. Programs start and programs finish. There are all kinds of variables and we're adjusting to that. But I should assure you and the committee that we have not cut our ability to respond to humanitarian aid situations or disasters. That's still there, and we will continue to respond to those situations officially and effectively, as Canada has in the past.

    Do I have time?

    You have five minutes. I'll give you two more. You get seven minutes, Mark. Go ahead for two more minutes.

    Minister, we've always funded technical advice for corporate social responsibility. It was part of our mandate before. Now it seems to be—and you're disputing, saying that we're not subsidizing Canadian companies. But when you're giving money to these companies, you're technically not being a watchdog if you're cutting the corporate social responsibility fund that we used to have and maintain.

    I'm sure that 90% of our companies in Canada are good corporate citizens and they want to do the best. But do you have any mechanism in place, or are you cutting the funding for that mechanism that we had, to make sure that our corporations are good citizens of the world when they're putting mines in Panama or Chile or Africa? What trigger or what mechanism do you have to make sure that they're good corporate citizens, instead of just giving them money for their coffers, I guess?

    Minister, you've got about 30 seconds to answer that.

    We do not fund mining companies. We use all the due diligence in the world, and the extractives institute will be another asset that will help us do the ethical kinds of things that need to be done to enable countries to develop their own industry in a way that they can profit and benefit from the results of extractives.

    Thank you very much.

    For our second round, which will be five minutes of questions and answers, I'm going to move over to Mr. Obhrai.

    Thank you very much. Five minutes is pretty good. I would love to give my two minutes to Mark Eyking, but you gave it to him, and he wasn't asking an intelligent question anyway.

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

    Minister, welcome to the committee. I think this is your first visit to the committee. Am I right?

    Yes.

    Very good. You're doing a good job. I liked the answer. You said “adjustment” instead of “cuts”. So take note of that, it's called adjustment not cuts.

    Minister, you spoke about taking over the results agreement approach to using the taxpayers' dollars very efficiently, as you have outlined.

    As you know, you touched on Haiti, but our other largest contribution is to Afghanistan, where Canada has been at the forefront in helping. Recently, in July, there was the Tokyo Conference in reference to coordination of aid to Afghanistan.

    Can you update us on the Tokyo Conference, the accountability issue, and our role in Afghanistan?

    I did have the opportunity to travel to Afghanistan twice in my capacity as associate minister of National Defence. Even in the timeframe of six or eight months apart, I saw significant differences in the actual situation there.

    I was struck by the difference compared to my previous visit and how many improvements are actually being made, as we speak. To see little girls walking down the street, coming and going from school with backpacks filled with school books and uniforms, made me feel like we were looking at children here, like there were some other issues happening there.

    It shows our commitment there is paying off big time by changing the direction of young lives and most definitely impacting positive futures for them. Due to our government's efforts in Afghanistan we are also seeing more health workers being trained. The Afghans are also beginning to take over responsibility for their own security.

    I must also say that recent developments in Afghanistan have been somewhat troubling, but we have made the commitment on mutual accountability to the people of Afghanistan and to the Canadian taxpayers, at the recent Tokyo Conference.

    I had the opportunity to have a brief discussion with Mr. Karzai in New York and impressed upon him and his people that our development assistance is not unconditional. It is dependent on increasing accountability, transparency, and proof that the rights of women and girls are being upheld, protected, and championed.

    Canada has achieved significant results in its engagement in Afghanistan, but obviously, it's a work in progress and much still remains to be done. In many areas, Canada's fingerprints on Afghanistan in terms of the rule of law, human rights, the development of farming there, and the water issues.... There are so many areas.

    To that end, we can't talk about Afghanistan without paying tribute to 158 of our soldiers who lost their lives there, and one civilian member of Canadian authorities, and as well to all the injured folks.

    It's been a sacrifice, but I'd like to give Canadians the assurance that significant improvements are continuing to be made.

    Do you want to ask a question, Dave? You have a minute.

    I'll ask a quick question.

    Minister, it's great to see you. I'll maybe have the second round, and I can ask a little bit more.

    Can you talk to us about partnerships? You talked about partnerships. We had the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation here. We also had Rotary and I believe the polio project as well. Can you tell us about those projects and those partnerships, and how they've been successful?

    The Gates Foundation has long established itself as a huge contributor not only to polio eradication but to so many other causes. I can speak to the sexual exploitation of children. I was involved with the Gates Foundation, the Microsoft company, while I was police commissioner and police chief.

    In this particular instance, the partnership of the Gates Foundation, Rotary International, as well as the Canadian government, CIDA, in an effort to eradicate polio in some of the major problem countries such as Nigeria, Afghanistan—and I forget the other one now—is optimizing the resources all around to take one last run at this very debilitating disease, which has long disappeared from Canada, basically. And this is what we want to do worldwide.

    Again, it's leveraging partnerships on an ethical approach to dealing with a nagging problem, helping those in greater need. It's a great success story.

    Thank you, Minister.

    That's all the time. We will catch you on the next round, Mr. Van Kesteren.

    Mr. Dewar, sir, you have five minutes.

    Thank you.

    Minister, I just want to come back to the partnerships program.

    I ask the question very directly: how many projects have you approved since you have been minister? I know they're piling up on your desk, but I just want a straightforward answer on how many you have approved. Just give us an estimate.

    Why can't you take my response for an answer—that I don't keep track of the numbers of projects I have approved? I have approved a lot of them. I am approving projects as they come forward. Why is it so important for the NDP to worry about numbers as opposed to results?

    That's a very interesting question, Chair.

    I think what the minister is here to do is answer questions that we pose about his job. His job is to maintain the budget and to ensure that he's approving projects. The minister hasn't told us—we've had zero, according to him. He can't tell us if he's approved 5, 10, 15....

    So, I just want to give him a last chance. Has he approved zero projects in the partnerships program since he has been minister?

    That's so typically disingenuous. I told you, if you had been listening, that I had approved a lot of them, that I don't keep score.

    How many of them?

    Excuse me. I don't keep score. I do my work diligently day in, day out. I approve projects as they come forward, but I don't think that what matters is how many I have approved; rather, what I've approved in terms of results that we're attempting to achieve for Canadians.

    Sir, this is the height of arrogance. When you say to a member of this committee that you can't tell us how many files you have approved—the people doing the work on the ground, who are saving lives—

    You know, I was very interested, you said that CIDA's not here to help fund NGOs for life, but—

    Excuse me, Ms. Brown.

    We're going to hear a story now....

    Chair, I have a point of order. I just don't believe it's appropriate for anyone on this committee to call the minister “arrogant”, and I think the member should withdraw that.

    That's not a point of order.

    Back to you, Mr. Dewar.

    You say that CIDA's not here to help fund NGOs for life. Those NGOs, sir, are saving lives. Not you, with all due respect. You fund the people who save lives. I don't save lives, you don't: we help them to do that. And you can't tell me—you've told me zero. That is the answer you are leaving on record of the number of partnership applications you've approved.

    I have saved lives, by the way.

    No, not as a minister—I know you have as a very well-respected police officer—in terms of NGOs and what they do. You're saying that you're not here to give them money for life for their operations. No one is suggesting they should.

    I just asked you a very simple question: how many have you approved?

    If that is an absolutely mission-critical need for you, the NDP, to know, then I will get that information to you as to the number of projects I have approved. How's that?

    You can't even give us a ballpark figure, Minister.

    I didn't come here to do that—

    You came here to answer questions from this committee, and you are not answering the questions, sir, so we are leaving “zero” on the record, until you tell us otherwise.

    Just a second. I understand the minister's offered to get a number for us and we will wait to hear back on that number.

    Mr. Chair, I want it on the record that's it’s totally disingenuous to take my answer and transport it into such a negative outlook on life. It's absolutely deplorable.

    Yes. Thank you.

    He said he'll get us the numbers.

    Chair, I want to go to the other question I had, regarding the partnerships program with the extractives.

    Minister, the problem with the program is, as the OECD said, that there seems to be confusion with development goals and promotional commercial interests. Are you aware that Rio Tinto's profits were $726 million; IAMGOLD's profits were half a billion dollars; and in the case of Barrick Gold, $3 billion?

    Could you help explain to us why we feel the need to put projects in their field as opposed to.... Just think of this for a minute; I worked in development. If your kid doesn’t have the fortune of living in an area where the extractive industries are, you are not able to get the benefits of these programs. Why are we partnering with these groups and cutting aid to NGOs that have a long track record of delivering aid and making a difference in people's lives?

    That's almost all the time we have, so you have about 45 seconds to answer.

    The simple answer is, aside from what profits you quoted, they in turn are giving a helping hand, in a significant way, in the communities where they're working, to people in those places who are in dire circumstances, to those countries in their social response to those needs—be they health, food, education, employment, economic opportunities. They are investing in the social and other economic benefits for those countries as well, while they obviously, as investors, are well entitled to make a profit.

    Thank you very much.

    We're going to move to Mr. Van Kesteren for five minutes.

    Thank you, Minister, for coming here.

     I was quite pleased—and for a number of reasons—to hear that you were given the portfolio of minister for CIDA. I know that we may not share ideologically some of the same aspirations that the NDP do. They're well-intentioned, but we all recognize, and I think, sir, you must have, too, that for 50 years we have been pouring aid into a lot of countries and nothing has happened.

    I'm very proud and happy to see that you've taken a very take-charge attitude. You're looking at every project. You're analyzing every project and you're looking for results, and you understand what we believe is a firm economic fact, that is, that the unguided hand will engage business, and that will begin to grow economies. We've seen that happen in countries.

     We want the same thing: we both want to see improvement in the lives of the poor.

    I'll tell you that one of the areas that I was especially pleased to see when you were named the minister.... We know there is corruption. You have a very esteemed past career as chief of the London police, as chief of the Toronto police, and then of course as the commissioner of the OPP. You understand these things. I'm wondering—this just occurred to me as you spoke—about corruption. Are you engaging in that...? Are you seeing areas where perhaps corrupt regimes have taken advantage of moneys sent to them by Canadians? As well, where could you see that possibly being eradicated?

    That's always a major concern. That's why, in the work that is done by CIDA on behalf of the Canadian people, there's a lot of upfront work that is done to embed those checks and balances, working with trusted partners to begin with, and trying to avoid government-to-government funding allocations.

    There's a lot of that work done at the front end, and then, obviously, the whole ongoing process is monitored. The results are monitored ongoing. There are different stages at which there are holdbacks, if you will, on the absence of deliverables or accountabilities. We are working very hard.

    We're always very concerned about that. As you know, some countries have a reputation. Even in my meetings with various leaders over the last little while, in speaking to them in these different countries receiving aid, I've always addressed this issue with them, on behalf of Canadians, of course.

    We do a lot of monitoring. We do a lot of checks and balances. A lot of work is done, as I stated, at the front end, but also ongoing throughout the projects, to ensure that Canadian taxpayer money is safeguarded.

    I have one quick point. Mr. Eyking was mentioning that we have a record that we shouldn't be proud of, but the fact remains that we are the only country that is paid up on the global fund, out of a lot of countries. You know this, of course. I'm not telling you anything new.

    The other thing I wanted to talk to you about is this. Could you possibly share with this committee what you discovered on your recent trip to Haiti and what's happening there? Are we making some progress? Maybe you could share that with the committee.

    Well, as you know, Canada was involved with Haiti long before the earthquake. More recently, they're having to deal with Hurricane Sandy. The role that Canada has played there has been a long-tenured one. I recall that in my days as police chief I was sending police officers to Haiti, even long before the earthquake. We've had a long-standing relationship with Haiti on many different fronts.

    There are some very significant things happening in Haiti, to the extent that we're obviously hopeful for a more stable government. There are still some issues there with respect to their commitment to have free and transparent elections. There's still some work to be done there. I met with both the president and the prime minister, and a number of ministers as well, to express Canadians' expectations and concerns.

     In fact, all kinds of benefits have been derived. Now, 330,000 pregnant women have access to health institutions with qualified personnel. Over a million girls and boys receive hot meals at school. We visited some of those places.

    Going forward, we're going to be revisiting our strategy with regard to further aid and what that will be with respect to Haiti. That was part of the reason for that visit. We're in the discussion stage now. I should say, however, that since 2006 Canada has contributed about a billion dollars to the Haiti situation, both to the disaster and to the other issues we've been dealing with.

    Thank you very much.

    Ms. Grewal, we're going to have you go probably for about four minutes, just because we were over a bit with Mr. Van Kesteren.

    As well, you were over a little bit on your statement, Minister, so we'll give the NDP a chance to ask another quick question.

    Ms. Grewal.

    Thank you, Chair.

    Thank you, Minister, for your time.

    Minister, sexual violence against women in conflict areas is a really terrible crime. Recently you travelled to the Democratic Republic of Congo with our Prime Minister and made an announcement on bringing perpetrators to justice.

    Can you explain a little bit about how this will be achieved and what the results have been so far in this area?

    Very quickly, it's a huge issue in the Congo with respect to the sexual victimization of women. From the reports we have, and the fact-finding, a lot of this is really a weapon of war that's being used by conflicting sides.

    I did meet—as did the Prime Minister, by the way—with the authorities there at the highest level, expressing our concerns. We're doing a lot of work with regard to the victims, assistance to victims and all of that, of this particular heinous crime.

    What we are doing now is taking a much more in-depth view and review of our response to sexual violence perpetrated against women in the Congo. We're going to be holding that government accountable as well, to ensure that it pursues offenders vigorously—which I don't know is happening right now—and that the offenders be brought to justice. We're going to try to leverage some pressure in some of these areas as well.

    Thank you.

    I'll pass the rest of my time to Ms. Brown.

    The Chair: You have two minutes, Ms. Brown.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you again, Minister, for being here.

    I just wonder if you could state for the record the openness that CIDA has taken with our open portal in accessing information and the transparency we've tried to create through that access. Could you comment on that?

    More and more of CIDA's business is transparent. It is available for one and all to view. We're very conscientious and committed to transparency and accountability. That in essence is what we are doing to ensure that transparency and accountability are at the centre of our international development agenda. It's open view, if you will.

    Joining the International Aid Transparency Initiative I think showed concrete leadership and transparency in the way that business should be done with taxpayers' money. CIDA has already started uploading or publishing a lot of this data. I think the standards will help us—help all of us, actually—ensure that we are totally and absolutely accountable for how we spend taxpayers' money. We're committed.

    In other words, if someone wanted to know how many projects have been funded, they could actually access that information on the website.

    Some of it will be there, of course, but I've undertaken to provide Mr. Dewar the information he's seeking. If it's not on there, we'll deliver it directly to him.

    Ms. Brown, you have 10 more seconds.

    Minister, you know that this committee has just undertaken a study on the role of the private sector in achieving Canada's international development interests. We've had quite a number of witnesses come to the committee—

    I'm sorry, Ms. Brown, I did say 10 seconds. That's all the time we have.

    We're going to finish off with Madame Péclet, please.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    A total of $55 million was earmarked for development assistance, food aid and education. Does that include an increase in family planning aid?

    We know that the UN recently recognized reproductive choice and access to family planning as a fundamental right. We also know that the U.S. is going to raise its family planning aid from $610 million to $1 billion.

    Do you agree with the UN's position? Do you consider access to family planning a fundamental right?

    Voluntary family planning is a critical element of improving maternal, newborn, and child health, as well as reducing the burden of HIV/AIDS and generally improving the choices available to women around the world.

    Do you agree that access to family planning is a fundamental right, as recognized by the UN?

    It all depends on the interpretation of family planning. If you're talking about abortions, we don't support abortion.

    Thank you very much.

    Thank you very much, minister.

    We are also seeing a geographic shift in funding support. More and more NGOs in western Canada are receiving funding, with fewer and fewer NGOs in eastern Canada receiving support. In the last announcement, on December 23, if memory serves me correctly, funding for AQOCI international cooperation organizations dropped to something like 11%.

    Can you explain that?

    I don't think we pick NGOs by geography. We pick NGOs by their ability, capacity, and reputation, and we proceed accordingly. I don't think the criteria for picking NGOs is geographic. We're not going there. We're picking the best people to do the job required, for the best outcomes and the best results for taxpayer money.

    And yet, minister, there's been a pretty drastic change in the proportions.

    How do you explain that change? Are organizations out east pulling back or underperforming as compared with the past? Are western organizations performing better?

    Well, to be clear, any organization that is not successful in its bids is debriefed—its submissions are reviewed—so I don't know that there is any particular focus. Obviously, there are some sensitivities and some language issues; there is all of that factored in. But we don't have a quota as to what province or what part of the country we designate NGOs.

    Thank you, minister.

    No doubt, you are familiar with the Paris Principles.

    No, I'm not....

    You don't?

    No.

    Oh. If you don't know about the Paris principles, I think my question is therefore irrelevant.

    Thank you.

    Minister, we're going to get you to wrap up, and then we will vote on the supplementaries.

    Mr. Chair and members, thank you for the opportunity and for having me here today with our officials.

     I will also take this opportunity to congratulate you on your recent report, Driving Inclusive Economic Growth: The Role of the Private Sector in International Development. We are reviewing the report, and we will be tabling the response in due course. I want you to know how important and valuable that particular report is to us, and we'll deal with it.

    Allow me to make one observation. The opposition found enough time in their dissenting opinion with respect to the report to complain about having no CIDA officials present for the study, yet they did not find enough time to invite any one of us to appear.

    I'm honoured that the Prime Minister asked me to be Minister of International Cooperation. Canadians have shown themselves time and again to have a sense of compassion for their neighbours, whether that is here in Canada or around the world, when people are suffering most. CIDA is an expression of the best Canadian values.

    Mr. Chair, humanitarian and developmental work at CIDA is critical to the lives of so many people around the world, and I'm proud to work alongside the many committed CIDA personnel who work diligently around the world in very difficult circumstances. I praise their efforts.

     Canada has a lot to be proud of, and Canadians' generosity has been demonstrated time and time again through our matching funds, the kinds of results that we've been achieving, the lives we are saving, and the quality of life we're improving for so many people around the world. That is a sense...to be proud of achievements, realizing full well that we have challenges to continue. But all said, Canada ranks very, very high with the receiver countries, and the communities and leaders in these countries, and the NGOs, for the work we're doing, obviously in partnership with many of them around the world.

    Thanks very much to you, Minister, and to the officials, for taking the time to be here this morning.

    We're going to suspend for a couple of minutes as the witnesses leave. We're going to come back and look at the supplementaries, and then we'll go in camera to deal with committee business.

    Minister, thank you very much.

    [Proceedings continue in camera]

    [Public proceedings resume]

    We will have all the members back to the table. We're going to continue on with the meeting. I just want to know what the members want to do in terms of the supplementary estimates. We do have a number of them there. We have a choice: we can vote on them individually; we can vote on them as a group; or not vote on them at all, and they would be deemed reported back. I'm going to defer to what the committee wants to do.

    Let's work. I want to go on the record.

    An hon. member: Let's vote as a group.

     Dealing with the supplementary estimates (B) 2012-13: Votes 1b, 5b, 10b, 15b, 30b, L35b, L40b, and 45b under Foreign Affairs and International Trade, shall they be carried?

    (Votes 1b, 5b, 10b, 15b, 30b, L35b, L40b, and 45b agreed to)

    The Chair: Thank you very much. Shall I report the supplementary estimates (B) 2012-13 to the House?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: What we're going to do now is just take one minute to go in camera and then we're going to discuss some committee business.

    [Proceedings continue in camera]