SRID Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Development of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, April 29, 2003

¹

1545

The Chair (Mr. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.))

The Chair

Mr. Yves Rocheleau (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

The Clerk of the Committee

Mr. Yves Rocheleau

The Chair

Mr. Yves Rocheleau

Mr. Svend Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP)

The Chair

Mr. Bernard Taylor (Executive Director, Partnership Africa Canada)

¹

1550

¹

1555

The Chair

Mr. Charles Mugraneza (Director of Overseas Programs, Alternatives Canada)

º

1600

º

1605

The Chair

Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca)

º

1610

Mr. Bernard Taylor

Mr. Charles Mugraneza

º

1615

Mr. Keith Martin

The Chair

Mr. Yves Rocheleau

Mr. Charles Mugraneza

º

1620

º

1625

The Chair

Mr. Bernard Taylor

º

1630

The Chair

Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, Lib.)

Mr. Bernard Taylor

º

1635

Mr. Charles Mugiraneza

Mr. André Harvey

º

1640

Mr. Bernard Taylor

Mr. André Harvey

Mr. Bernard Taylor

The Chair

Mr. André Harvey

The Chair

Mr. Charles Mugiraneza

º

1645

The Chair

Mrs. Karen Kraft Sloan (York North, Lib.)

º

1650

Mr. Bernard Taylor

º

1655

The Chair

Mr. Charles Mugraneza

»

1700

The Chair

Mrs. Karen Kraft Sloan

The Chair

---

CANADA

Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Development of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade

---

NUMBER 006

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, April 29, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹  (1545)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mr. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.)): I'd like to welcome everybody to our continuing hearing on the urgent humanitarian situation in Africa. I'm delighted that we will have witness testimony here today.

    At present we have two witnesses here, Bernard Taylor, the executive director of Partnership Africa Canada,

[Translation]

    And Charles Mugiraneza, who is the director for overseas programs at Alternatives Canada.

[English]

    Before we begin with our witness testimony I'd like to present two motions. You had notice that they would be presented to deal with the issue that arose when our committee met on April 8. We did not have sufficient numbers for a quorum but we had excellent witness testimony on April 8.

    The two motions purport to deal with these two issues as follows. The first is, and I quote:

That the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence when a quorum is not present provided that at least three members are present, including both government and opposition members.

    The purpose of this is to ensure that in fact such witness testimony can be properly presented when our witnesses are here and we can provide them the appropriate courtesy of the hearing.

    The second is, and I quote:

That the statements made by officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and the Canadian International Development Agency to Members of the Sub-Committee on April 8, 2003 and the subsequent questions from Members and responses from officials be deemed Evidence for the Sub-Committee enquiry into the humanitarian catastrophe in Africa and that the Evidence so heard be deemed to constitute the Proceedings of the 5th meeting of the Sub-Committee.

    The purpose of this motion is because we had an excellent meeting and I think it would be really a shame if the witness testimony and in particular the discussion that followed, the excellent questions that were put and the responses received, were not part of an official record that could be thereby disseminated as a meeting of this committee.

    (Motions agreed to)

    The Chair: Okay, I'm delighted that the two motions have been passed, and therefore, from a procedural point of view, this will permit us to proceed in the manner that is both representational and effective.

    Yves.

[Translation]

    Mr. Yves Rocheleau (Trois-Rivières, BQ): Mr. Chair, I want to bring to the attention of the Chair and the committee the fact that I met a PhD. student or professor here at the University of Ottawa—I do not remember which exactly—but this person is from Rwanda, and I asked him to write a report about the situation in his country, which is extremely difficult as the committee well knows; he intends to have this, he said, for early May. I hope, for the committee's benefit—I have already advised the clerk—that he might be able to appear after tabling his report, if the committee has time. So, I wanted to bring this to the committee's attention immediately.

    The Clerk of the Committee: Mr. Chair, obviously, it is a matter of time. I know that, next week, the subcommittee will be hearing from the Secretary of State for Latin America, Africa and the Francophonie, Mr. Paradis, and there will not be a meeting the following week because the main committee will be traveling. Then, there is the recess in May. If I understand correctly, the subcommittee wants to have a draft report for, I think, May 27, the last week of May. The subcommittee must decide if it will find time to hear the witness. I presume that the subcommittee can always find an hour somewhere.

    Mr. Yves Rocheleau: At least his report can be tabled, and then we can see how much interest it generates.

    The Chair: Yes, that is true, and we can read his testimony in his report.

    Mr. Yves Rocheleau: It could always be less than one hour, perhaps 45 minutes, but we shall see. I wanted to inform the committee, in any event, in case I mention this again or perhaps it might be possible to send his report directly to the clerk, who could talk to the committee about this and, perhaps, schedule a meeting. In any case, I wanted the committee to be aware of this possibility.

    Mr. Svend Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr. Chair, I suggest that this student submit his report perhaps to Mr. Rocheleau or directly to the clerk, that it be translated and distributed to the committee members. Frankly, I do not know if there will be time to hear this witness, but his report can be circulated and if, for example, Mr. Rocheleau wants to call a meeting somewhere for those members who are interested, that would be possible.

    The Chair: I think that might be the best option, for now.

    We will now hear the first witness.

[English]

    I'll invite Mr. Taylor to begin.

    Mr. Bernard Taylor (Executive Director, Partnership Africa Canada): Thank you very much.

    The last time I had the privilege of speaking before the standing committee was in November. It was during the passage through Parliament of Canada's draft legislation on the diamond trade. We were very pleased that this legislation passed successfully.

    I would simply say that the Kimberley process is up and running and there's a meeting of the process now that is resolving outstanding difficulties. I want to report, from our perspective, our appreciation of the efforts of the government in that respect.

    I would like to make a few points about the humanitarian crisis in Africa, as viewed by Partnership Africa Canada. These points will necessarily be fairly general, with some specific points in them, but perhaps in ensuing discussion more specific ideas will come out.

    In our opinion, the overarching crisis affecting Africa is that of endemic poverty. There are many problems caused by this poverty that perhaps have other causes. These problems help to perpetuate and sometimes deepen this poverty. Amidst this poverty there is tremendous human suffering. There is despair, but there is also some hope.

    The solutions to this complex problem are to be found both inside African countries and internationally. In our opinion, Africa's poverty is a shared responsibility.

    Some of the major problems characterizing Africa and the humanitarian crisis may be summarized in the following way. Africa has many weak states, weak democracies, and resulting weak institutions. All too frequently this results, in many parts of Africa, in repression, human rights abuses, and sometimes conflict. In recent years there has been frequent intrastate conflict, as opposed to interstate, causing massive internal displacement and refugee flows.

    The economic agendas of some of these conflicts are a very worrying trend. Pandemics such as HIV-AIDS are reversing decades of development indicators. This comes on top of major health problems, such as malaria, which kills more than a million children a year. These problems have yet to be adequately tackled at the international level.

    There is chronic food insecurity in too many parts of Africa, with inadequate food production, food storage, and food supplies, leaving large populations at risk.

    The majority of countries have weak economies with huge debt burdens and underdeveloped production capacities. Inter-African trade and trade with the rest of the world remains very limited.

    The list of problems facing various countries in Africa is a long one, but this is not to say they cannot be overcome and this is not to say there cannot be room for hope. For problems to be solved, steps have to be taken, and some of these are the responsibility of Canada, or shared responsibilities.

    It is sad, however, that the current international climate appears less favourable to Africa than it was in 2001 and 2002. The multilateralism that can help Africa is being overshadowed by a more selfish unilateralism. This has major implications for government budgets, especially defence, throughout the world, and including Africa, and it will very likely impact negatively on investments and financial policies towards poorer countries.

    On Canada's role with respect to Africa's humanitarian crisis, we would submit that despite this gloomy scenario, Canada can play a more dynamic and influential role in helping to ease the humanitarian crises in Africa. This will necessarily entail hard work at the policy level, together with additional financial resources.

    Some examples of policy areas and action that Canada could invest more in are the following. Canada should vigorously reinforce the multilateral agenda, ensuring that, for example, international programs, such as the Global Fund, are adequately funded. Canada's contribution to this fund should be increased, and Canada should encourage others to do the same.

¹  (1550)  

    Canada should help ensure that the various food emergencies in Africa are adequately dealt with by the international community. In addition, it should work more to help African regions develop regional food security programs.

    Canada should use its unique position in the United Nations, the Commonwealth, and the Francophonie to do more to resolve some of the more unacceptable crises in parts of Africa today, such as that in Zimbabwe, Congo, the DRC, and the neighbouring countries, such as Sudan.

    Canada should increase its efforts in working to bring an end to the many conflicts affecting Africa. This can be done by active diplomacy and by strengthening Africa's ability to develop a common security framework.

    Canada should strengthen its peacekeeping capacities by considering, for example, creating a specialized peacekeeping unit in the Canadian Forces, one that is adequately staffed and equipped and permanently prepared to be of service internationally. This force would help develop similar capacities in African countries.

    Canada should reverse more quickly the decade of cuts to international assistance, and persuade others to follow this example. The new Canada Fund for Africa is a step in the right direction, but it remains too small a step.

    Canada should double the number of countries of concentration in Africa, to at least twelve from the current six, with adequate resources for its programs. And Canada should develop a regional focus in its African development programming in Africa, rather than a country-by-country basis. It should base this regional focus in its African development program on countries of concentration, and include initiatives within neighbouring countries to prevent problems spilling over borders.

    Finally, Canada should encourage the richer industrialized countries to help foster much greater economic production within Africa, supported by favourable international trade policies. This should be accompanied by urgent action with respect to Africa's debt burden. Unless some sort of Marshall Plan is developed, the market will largely ignore most of Africa.

    In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, let me say that Partnership Africa Canada and its member and partner organizations firmly believe in Canada's ability to influence positively the international agenda with respect to Africa. Canada's support for the NEPAD initiative, its leadership on Africa within the G-8, and its current international assistance program, Concentration on Africa, are indications of clear priorities with respect to Africa. Despite the continuing crises in Africa, there is much that is positive, and this has to be built on urgently.

    Thank you.

¹  (1555)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Taylor.

[Translation]

    We will now hear Mr. Mugiraneza.

    Mr. Charles Mugraneza (Director of Overseas Programs, Alternatives Canada): Thank you, Mr. Chair and all the hon. members present.

    On behalf of Alternatives Canada, the organization I am representing at these consultations, I want to again thank the committee for having invited us. After listening to the discussions about the report to be tabled by that individual who wants to appear before this committee, I consider it a privilege to be able to appear before this committee.

    With regard to the humanitarian crisis in Africa, currently, there is a kind of wave crossing Africa from east to west, and from the Horn, via the Great Lakes region, to Angola, going up through the west as far as Sierra Leone, via the Ivory Coast. I could call this a storm front, where wars, conflicts and social and economic disintegration are occurring everywhere in the African countries within this storm front.

    It is a chilling picture. These are longstanding atrocious wars that threaten human lives. There are thousands of displaced persons. This is the case in the Democratic Republic of Congo where non-governmental organizations' reports mention 3 million direct or indirect victims of the conflict, which has involved its neighbours such as Rwanda and Uganda. These wars are creating very complex regional and internal situations that are mixing all kinds of nationalities and ethnicities in profoundly reactionary and explosive cocktails, as is the case in the Ivory Coast, where the war is mixing together all kinds of identity, religious, regional and other problems.

    Then comes the destruction of local economies and urban structures. After these wars, the populations are crushed by conflicts, but also, simultaneously, by development, which has atrophied and become disjointed. At the same time, there are continual attempts at manipulation by the major powers, such as the former colonizing countries, as in the Ivory Coast, where France is sufficiently involved in the conflict, but there are regional players too. I mentioned Uganda and Rwanda in relation the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    This boils down to extremely prolonged conflicts on the African continent, a prolonged multi-faceted and complex crisis, which knocks down and destabilizes the people and organizations working for independent development and the promotion of human rights in those countries. In the case of identity-based conflicts, populations are being increasingly held hostage. Civilians have become the means with which to wage war. Communities are being uprooted, deported and expelled. For example, in 1994, in Rwanda, more than one million people fled, and were used to shield the flight of those responsible for the genocide.

    Beyond war, the other humanitarian crisis in Africa, which must be addressed this afternoon, is AIDS. The United Nations estimates that, by the year 2020, 55 million Africans could die prematurely of AIDS. Sexual abuse of women and girls, orphaned by AIDS, has contributed to the spread of this disease among women and frequently in countries experiencing conflict. The spread of AIDS is high in countries in conflict, and a report published by Human Rights Watch in collaboration with a partner in eastern Congo showed how, as a result of the current crisis, numerous women are being raped in that region. A large share of the population is currently suffering from the AIDS pandemic.

º  (1600)  

    Briefly, I must say that these humanitarian crises are enhanced by a wide range of catalysts; without spending too much time of them, I want to mention the impact of neo-Liberal policies, driven by the Bretton Woods institutions, which have led to greater poverty in Africa over the past thirty years. Following the introduction of these neo-Liberal programs, which have resulted in structural adjustment problems, there has been, for example, a high rate of young girls without access to education, and the majority of uneducated young girls are forced to work, often as prostitutes, and this has contributed, once again, to the spread of AIDS.

    Nevertheless, we cannot simply paint a dark picture of Africa, because efforts are being made to try to stop the humanitarian crisis on that continent. In recent years, it seems that in most humanitarian crises, where there is a war, the peace process has begun and is increasingly successful.

    Yesterday in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the different rebel factions in the east returned to Kinshasa to try to work with the committee for peace to restore peace to the Congo.

    This is also happening in a tiny country, such as Burundi, where President Buyoya has just agreed to cede power to the vice president of Frodebu, and the second phase of the transition is set to begin May 1, following the rotation set out in the Arusha Accord, where Canada had strongly supported this country.

    Of course, the peace processes that have begun—here we can also mention Sudan, where Kenya is driving the negotiations—are slowly showing results. But all these efforts, once again, have been somewhat tainted by the Ivory Coast, a country that is as strong and as important in Western Africa and where the crisis had just begun, I think, in September of last year.

    Despite all these efforts, despite the will shown by all those directly concerned, by the African people and its leaders, I think that countries such as Canada— Obviously, Canada has worked hard, because Canada has supported non-governmental organizations, through the network I am familiar with. This support has been significant in terms of the humanitarian crisis, such as the repatriation of refugees and the resettlement of displaced persons. These organizations greatly contribute to civil society by helping with conflict resolution, prevention and management, with support from CIDA's peacebuilding unit.

    Nevertheless, much work remains to be done, because the crises in Africa are major ones.These crises are, for the most part, not necessarily recent, but rather longstanding, so they require carefully thought out processes and lots of synergy to enable Africa's recovery, because this continent has potential. For the past ten years, since the fall of the Berlin wall, Africa has been abandoned, but despite all the crises that have occurred since that time, Africa has been experiencing a sort of rebirth, and civil society organizations in Africa are aiming for greater mobilization and a greater presence in terms of intervention, so as to try to mitigate all the humanitarian crises in Africa.

    Thank you.

º  (1605)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Mugiraneza, for your testimony.

[English]

    Our next witness, the representative for Oxfam Canada, Rieky Stuart, will not be able to be with us because of a death in the family. Therefore, we will only have two witnesses today.

    We'll begin now with Keith Martin's questions.

    Mr. Martin.

    Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca): Thank you, monsieur le president. And thank you, Mr. Taylor, et merci beaucoup, Mr. Mugiraneza.

    I apologize in advance, as I will have to leave for a meeting on the Sudan in a few minutes, but I wanted to ask you a couple of questions and make a comment first.

    You both said that poverty is an enormous obstacle to development. The continent, though, is extraordinarily rich in resources. We all know that. I would argue that it is perhaps the richest of all continents on this planet, yet the people are the poorest. What can we do and what should we do to strengthen institutions to ensure that the resource development of the continent will benefit the people of the continent? How do we do that in the face of international organizations or multilateral organizations that I would submit to you are by and large paper tigers? For example, there is the Commonwealth on Zimbabwe, and there is the United Nations, which has been absent on a whole host of conflicts on the continent that have killed millions of people, and has been unable to fulfill the wonderful treaties and obligations we've all signed on to.

    What should we be doing as a country to not only strengthen institutions on the continent, but also to engage African leaders, many of whom are kleptocrats and brutal criminals? How do we engage with good African leaders to ensure that we build up local capacities for good governance and good institutions, so that the riches of the continent can go to benefit the people of that continent?

º  (1610)  

    Mr. Bernard Taylor: The question is really complex, and the answer is probably complex as well. I probably won't do justice to it.

    As I tried to point out, the issue of poverty and everything that it entails, including what poverty causes and what causes poverty, is extremely complex. It involves poor economic performance, weak institutions, weak democracies. And each supports and feeds on the other. Therefore, any response we're able to give has to be multifaceted, including through the institutions you mentioned, which have their strengths and their weaknesses.

    If an institution is behaving weakly, it's not necessarily the fault of the institution itself and its construction, but of the players in that institution. We have a United Nations that is falling down, but I think there are major interests at play there preventing the UN from fulfilling its roles. In the case of the Commonwealth and Zimbabwe, there are players in the Commonwealth who, for different reasons, are not going as far as they should in dealing with the Zimbabwe situation.

    Canada can set an example through its bilateral actions directly with African countries, as it is doing in its approach to the NEPAD initiative, by supporting and rewarding countries who are performing well at the political and economic levels. I think it's only natural that those should be the key partners who Canada should support. Countries who are not democratic or who are falling down have to be challenged and tackled in different ways.

    I come back to the first point I made, that we must strengthen the multilateral approach, because Canada is only a medium player, and there are some major players out there who can make the difference, either positively or negatively. I think it's in the multilateral context and through our privileged relations with the United States, for example, that we can help to make a difference.

    Just as a final point, I think it's very important that Africa's efforts to deal with Africa's problems have to be respected and encouraged. It may be the solo solution, but in the end it will be the best solution. Therefore, we should support the African Union, formerly the OAU, with all its imperfections; support the positive elements in NEPAD, despite its imperfections; and work with a broad range of African countries, and not just limit it to the successful six, seven, or eight countries.

[Translation]

    Mr. Charles Mugraneza: Thank you very much.

    I think that, at the beginning of his presentation, Bernard said, at one point, that the responsibility for this situation and the crises in Africa is shared. As the hon. member mentioned, Africans do bear their share of responsibility, for management and corruption, for example. This is one continent that has experienced some corruption; there are thousands of examples.

    But we have to look at the flip side of the coin. Poverty in Africa has other roots, for which the Africans bear no responsibility. This is what I said, among other things, about policies and institutions, including the World Bank's and the International Monetary Fund's policies. Today, everyone knows that the policies of these institutions have led to greater poverty in Africa. Even United Nations organizations such as the UNCTAD recognized this last year. The UNCTAD wrote a report severely criticizing the new method for contributing to development in Africa, by way of the PRSPs or poverty-reduction strategy papers.

    So, with regard to who is responsible for poverty in Africa, a continent filled with resources, with sufficiently well-educated human resources to be able to contribute to its own development— To everyone’s surprise, it has remained an extremely poor continent. But we must look beyond these neo-Liberal policies that I mentioned earlier.

    For example, last week, I went to the Gap to buy a pair of jeans for my daughter. There were jeans from the Réunion and jeans made in Canada. I took the jeans from the Réunion. I asked how much they cost, and was told $70. Similar quality jeans, made in Canada, cost $40. I asked the clerk why the prices were so distorted, and she told me that there was an additional 22% tax on the jeans from the Réunion.

    All this to say that, yes, there are all the elements of international policy and tariffication and everything too that can hinder production and that does not allow African producers to have access to international markets as they should. This is just one of many examples relating to poverty; we could also mention the poor allocation of resources and the poor redistribution of resources within Africa, where there are very significant gaps because there are no resource redistribution policies as there should be, and the Africans should do their homework in terms of redistribution.

    What can a country like Canada do? We have all the mechanisms for international cooperation, which must not be solely central, profit-seeking mechanisms, but also mechanisms able to support the transfer of Canadian know-how and the Canadian way of doing things. There are interesting experiences relating, for example, to resource redistribution, which can be profitable in countries where the necessary mechanisms are not yet in place.

º  (1615)  

[English]

    Mr. Keith Martin: Thank you.

[Translation]

    The Chair: Mr. Rocheleau.

    Mr. Yves Rocheleau: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you Mr. Taylor and Mr. Mugiraneza, for your testimony.

    There are three things, Mr. Chair, that I want to bring to Mr. Mugiraneza’s attention.

    First, briefly, what about Alternatives Canada and its activities, its mission, its way of doing things and its role? That is my first question.

    Second, you alluded a few times to the Ivory Coast when mentioning France’s role, which not everyone does. I would like your comments on this, particularly on the Linas-Marcoussis agreement, and what you think will happen with regard to the implementation of this agreement, particularly in terms of compliance, in letter and spirit, with its two major principles: the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Ivory Coast.

    Third—you just alluded to this point, but I am still going to ask the question—you had talked about neo-Liberal policies. Are you satisfied with the role played by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, in other words, whose interests are being protected: those of underdeveloped countries or developed countries? Do you think developed countries should perhaps better monitor the IMF's and the World Bank’s activities or demand that they protect underdeveloped countries? Unless this is a utopian ideal.

    Mr. Charles Mugraneza: Thank you very much. Alternatives Canada is a NGO, like many others in Canada, working in international development. We work at essentially two levels. We help our partners in developing countries increase their capacities and meet their needs on site. In Canada, we work with the general public on awareness, education, training and information so the public is well aware of the issues related to development. We operate essentially at these two levels: mobilization, awareness and public education here in Canada and international development, as well as supporting our partners in developing countries.

    I will now address the second question concerning the Ivory Coast. As I said in my presentation, the crisis in the Ivory Coast exploded in September 2002, which was last year. This has been a crisis in the making for many years. In fact, 2002 was only the tip of the iceberg, and then things exploded.

    The Ivory Coast, in my opinion, is not an isolated case. It resembles nearly all the events that have occurred and that, probably, will continue to occur on the African continent. I am speaking personally here; my understanding of the situation is based on what I have read and my frequent discussions with nationals from the Ivory Coast in Montreal.

    There was a political change in the Ivory Coast when Laurent Gbagbo came to power. He wanted to alter, to some extent, the direction of economic partnerships and diversify his country's partners. It is no secret that the former colonizing countries and the colonies—which are now independent countries—have maintained, in many cases, a quite close relationship. This is true of France and the Ivory Coast. France has maintained some presence in the Ivory Coast, particularly with regard to the economy. Most French companies with contracts in the Ivory Coast had reached the end of their fiscal year. The President wanted to renew somewhat his economic partnership with, among others, countries such as China.

    One of the unfortunate events that occurred politically within that country was the following. Huge French multinationals controlled a large share of the Ivory Coast's economy. The crisis began as a mutiny. I think that 750 soldiers had to be demobilized and, suddenly, they decided to revolt; they took up arms and turned against the government.

    It is too soon to tell what the truth is, but in time, we will likely understand what really happened. But it is not certain that this is simply about a mutiny. There is probably much more to it than that. In hindsight, we realize that the crisis in the Ivory Coast is having various impacts on the subregions; for example, many people from Liberia and Sierra Leone were involved in this crisis.

    It is, therefore, very difficult to believe that this was only a mutiny. This is a slightly more serious political crisis. Over the course of events, the crisis has assimilated various adversaries, including problems between the north and the south, religious tensions between Muslims and Catholics, ethnic conflicts and so on.

º  (1620)  

    So, this crisis is multifaceted and complex. As you know, negotiations took place, and agreements were reached under France’s supervision, which gave the rebels a lot of room. Of course, the rebels control sufficient territory to be able to negotiate, but it is quite surprising nonetheless to see the rebels get so many government positions. I think this is somewhat surprising.

    I think that, until now, there has been sufficient compliance with regard to the sovereignty of the Ivory Coast because France’s intervention is, despite everything, related to the ongoing agreements between France and the Ivory Coast. I do not think that the territorial integrity of the Ivory Coast will be affected by this crisis. I do not think it will be desirable to divide the Ivory Coast. The existing uncertainty pertains more to the Congo. Probably, it would be desirable to divide the Congo into two or three regions. I do not think this will be the case with the Ivory Coast, and it would not be acceptable to the international community. Ivory Coast is not an isolated country; it operates within the family of nations, and this option would be difficult to accept.

    Now, I want to discuss the role of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. These institutions were created by member States of the United Nations. I greatly respect these institutions. I agree with their mandate, which they follow. Nonetheless, I am critical about their intervention. I said this, in particular, with regard to Africa. I talked about the issue of structural adjustment programs. I think that the negative impact of these programs on Africa has been well documented. I am also critical about the new policy related to poverty-related strategic papers. The same model is used with regard to most African countries, and most countries try to adjust to this template.

    I do not know if I have answered your questions properly.

º  (1625)  

[English]

    The Chair: Mr. Taylor.

[Translation]

    Mr. Bernard Taylor: : I want to say a few words about the Ivory Coast and the involvement of countries in the region in this crisis.

    It is interesting to see how something that seemed small, a military mutiny, has become big. There was outside involvement and, suddenly, it has become very complex. I share the opinion that, in other African countries, similar problems could arise. The revolution in Ethiopia in 1974 started with a mutiny that mushroomed.

    With regard to this crisis in Western Africa, it is very important to consider the role of the small countries surrounding the Ivory Coast, such as Liberia or Burkina Faso, countries already experiencing other crises in this region, particularly Sierra Leone and Guinea. The economic implications are also very significant; there are diamonds, softwood lumber in Liberia, and this seems to attract outside interest and intervention.

    You talked about Rwanda and Uganda, which intervened in the Congo. Why? In our opinion, it is primarily for economic, perhaps even strategic, reasons. And when it comes to economic factors, we are not far, even if we live outside these regions. Who buys wood from Liberia and the Ivory Coast? France and China. Who buys diamonds? The international network and international industry. I think, therefore, that it is essential, to properly respond to these crises, to be able to intervene at several levels. The most important is perhaps to reinforce the capacity of these regions to resolve their own problems before they become too complicated. In Western Africa— Inaudible—Editor— etc.

º  (1630)  

    The Chair: Mr. Harvey.

    Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, Lib.): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. You had talked about trying to coordinate our aid policy with international cooperation in terms of trade policy. As you know, Canada has started to exempt several dozen African countries from certain quotas and tariffs. But this is still just a start.

    I want to know if we are on the right track with NEPAD. Here, everyone says that NEPAD was created from scratch by the Africans and that the donor nations should be striving for good governance and the emergence of the private sector. Economic development must be done in collaboration with the private sector. Canada has just announced a $100 million investment program in cooperation with the private sector.

    Each country also develops its own strategic plan to reduce poverty. It seems that, over the past year, year and a half, with the millennium declaration, the various conferences, Kananaskis, the Canadian government has invested $500 million in the Africa plan, in addition to doubling its budget by 2010 or 2012.

    Are we on the right track or are the objectives unattainable?

    Mr. Bernard Taylor: I think that we are on the right track, but we must go faster and encourage others to work faster too.

    With regard to NEPAD, I think this plan or program was discussed with the Western powers, including Canada, and what civil society in Africa and four or five African leaders are criticizing is this step, which happened prior to this plan. There were comments from the West before their own countries, their own people could do so, even before other African countries could do so. So, I believe that the West is interested in this plan and greatly supports it. Its reception by African leaders in Geneva and Kananaskis proves this, in my opinion.

    Canada, of course, has decided to increase its aid, to bring aid levels in 2010 back to what they were in 1990. This is good, and everyone applauds this. However, it is unfortunate that aid had to be cut in the first place. We understand why, but the cuts made by other countries too had the same effect: this hurt development in Africa and maintained poverty when it could have been reduced.

    Before Charles concludes, I just want to add one thing about the economy because, in fact, this is the key, to some extent. It is true that a country must have a healthy democracy to enable development. There must be peace too. But the basic economy still needs to be developed.

    I said earlier that, without a very concerted effort, this would take an extremely long time. I talked about a Marshall plan, as exists in Europe. Without a more comprehensive and more concerted plan than currently exists, it will take an extremely long time, and that is both a shame and unnecessary. Investments could be made in Africa if the conditions were right, and I think that we can help Africa to create the right conditions.

    Canada's measures with regard to quotas and tariffs are good, but it might be good to see in one year what impact they will have had. Will they have had the desired impact? I fear that exports from Africa to Canada and other countries will not increase very much, perhaps for the simple reason that production in Africa will remain weak. As the hon. member, Mr. Martin, said, Africa is rich in resources, but if the resources are not used to created value-added products, they are sold at cheap prices.

    So, I fear that even if the doors are opened and there are no more tariffs, more must be done to help Africa develop its economy, such as investments and economic partnerships. It is difficult to make the market proactive. I believe that government intervention is needed to promote certain things. The best example of this is the Marshall plan.

º  (1635)  

    Mr. Charles Mugiraneza: I want to add just one small thing, as Bernard said: faster, but also more. Canada is, in fact, on the right track. It is very difficult to say that Canada is not on the right track. The initiatives that began after Kananaskis are commendable, but I think that a bit more needs to be done.

    Take NEPAD, for example. Its success will depend on good governance. When we talk about good governance with regard to NEPAD, what type of good governance do we mean? When I read the NEPAD document, I get the feeling that it is much more about management than social aspects because, as I was saying earlier, Africa needs to have more redistribution mechanisms in place. If NEPAD targets the private sector at the expense of other sectors in Africa, there will again be gaps in wealth. Some people will become extremely wealthy and others will wallow in poverty.

    Earlier we were talking about Canada’s will, for example, to review tariffs. Yes, it is good to review tariffs, but is that enough? No, because Africans must be allowed to compete on international markets. Canada can open its markets, but African products still might not have true access to Canadian markets, given the competition, standards and many other factors.

    So, I think that much more work also needs to be done to ensure the transfer of technology and know-how, so that African companies can compete on international markets.

    Bernard covered the main points.

    Mr. André Harvey: So, it is important to look at the intermediate and long term in addition to opening our borders.

    With regard to the volume of aid, it is not always about how much money and more about how appropriate the investments are. There has been too much misinformation, Mr. Chair, about the 0.7% of GDP. Work needs to be done in terms of the quality of aid and the best way to show our African friends how to take control, how to manage. You can throw money around, it does not grow on trees, and it will not increase economic growth.

    I feel optimistic, based on existing international cooperation with donor countries, which are becoming a bit more involved in NEPAD and are appealing to Africans to become responsible. Things are on the right track.

    If you had to name other countries to include with the six countries identified as our priorities in Africa: Ghana, Mali, Senegal, Mozambique, Ethiopia, I think, and Tanzania, how many would you like to add and which ones?

º  (1640)  

    Mr. Bernard Taylor: I talked during my presentation—and I deserve this question—about doubling the number of core countries, because I think that limiting it to six— I know that the door is not shut based on what representatives for CIDA say. I think the minister herself said that it is six now, but it could be seven next year and twelve in a few years. A few years ago, we might have said the Ivory Coast, but obviously, we have to wait for things to be resolved there.

    The problem with saying which country should be a core country, is that things are in order and that sometimes it is necessary to wait. A country can be not entirely stable and can not meet all the criteria.

    Consider Ethiopia, which is one of the six. Ethiopia has many problems relating to human rights, but I think that Canada picked Ethiopia because it is a strong nation with good economic governance and good development policies, and its representatives recognize that there are human rights issues, for regional, contextual and internal reasons; there are many reasons for this. So, they accept this.

    I would say that a country like Sierra Leone, which is perhaps at the other extreme and has just come out of civil war, if you can call it that, needs a great deal of concentrated and sustained support. This country needs a concentrated aid program, but it does not meet all the criteria. So, I believe we should look at the criteria and be proactive so as to say that such and such a country is on the right track and should be supported. Currently, if you propose development programs for Sierra Leone, CIDA will say that it does not have a bilateral program. The focus is humanitarian and peacebuilding issues, or there are NGOs there. There is no bilateral aid because it is not traditionally a country that gets bilateral aid and because it is not one of the six on the list.

    So, I think we have to be a bit more open and proactive in this regard. In my opinion, the level of resources govern to some extent CIDA's analysis, because if the budget is limited, naturally, choices have to be made, according to criteria. If there were more resources, I think that CIDA could more openly support more activities in more countries.

    I am sorry, I did not provide you with the names of six countries, but I might be able to with a small study.

    Mr. André Harvey: Would you be able to provide me with a written list of additional countries that are eligible under CIDA’s priorities?

    Mr. Bernard Taylor: Yes, we would be happy to send you something.

    The Chair: I wonder if there was also a recommendation to target only a few countries specifically, and not to increase the number of countries.

    Mr. André Harvey: There are six of them. A few others are being recommended.

    The Chair: Yes.

    Mr. Charles Mugiraneza: To the countries Bernard mentioned, I could probably add a country like the Congo, which, in the near future, if peace is restored, will be stable and experience economic growth that could have an impact on at least five other countries. I think that this type of country can receive more support.

    I also really liked your idea about the quality of aid. In fact, Africa has experienced quite serious crises in recent years, but, as the saying goes, every cloud has a silver lining.

    Once again, I can take a country like the Congo, where the State had totally disintegrated since the 1980s, and without a State, the Congo had developed a strong civil society, which played an important socio-economic role, that single-handedly supported the population.

    There is not enough leeway in the NEPAD process to continue to encourage these organizations to do the work they did for twenty or thirty years, to support the population and to hold the establishment accountable, to condemn human rights abuses and intervene in the socio-economic sector.

    If, today, a country such as Canada is a functional democracy, it is because, somewhere, there was an anti-establishment movement that enabled the government to make progress and to meet the people’s expectations.

    However, this whole dimension was created during this crisis. I think that there are regions in Africa that must continue to receive support in order to achieve democracy. So, it is important to focus on civil society organizations.

º  (1645)  

[English]

    The Chair: We turn now to Ms. Karen Kraft Sloan.

    I just want to advise both the questioner and the witnesses that we have ten minutes left for our deliberations. Karen Kraft Sloan will be the last questioner, and we'll have ten minutes of question and response.

    Mrs. Karen Kraft Sloan (York North, Lib.): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    I'm a newcomer to these issues, and in many respects they're exceedingly overwhelming. Some of the concerns I would have in terms of trying to have a proper understanding of the conditions in Africa in regard to humanitarian problems--and trying to deal with the humanitarian crisis is number one.... There is clearly an urgent reality that has to be addressed.

    As well, there is a great need to try to find an approach that deals with the urgent reality and goes beyond it so we're not constantly needing to have this urgency placed upon us. We need to try to understand some of the patterns of relationships in dealing with Africa, the different nations within Africa and other countries in the world, to understand why we have come to this situation today. And the situations are varied across the continent of Africa, as you and other witnesses have identified. You can't look at it in a very unidimensional or homogenous way.

    One of the concerns I might have is that some of the patterns of history might be replicated in some of the solutions we are looking at, particularly in terms of some of the longer-term solutions. I'm thinking of NEPAD as an example. Is there a concern or a danger in replicating some of these patterns through the involvement of the private sector?

    While I agree with you that it's important to look at the economy and at providing opportunities for a transition to a healthier, sustainable economy within different African states--and you therefore need the involvement of the private sector--my concern would be with unhealthy private sector participation. Are there areas, particularly in the delivery of public goods like water, infrastructure, and the like, where some of these historical patterns that have been very unhealthy might be replicated? My first question would be on NEPAD and the involvement of the private sector.

    Second, I have a more specific question dealing with child labour abuses in cocoa production on the Ivory Coast, if one or both of the witnesses could respond to this issue and if there are concerns around it.

    My third question again goes back to my earlier introduction, Mr. Chair. It is on our analysis of the problem and on trying to come to an understanding of both the urgency of the humanitarian crisis and of what the best approach may be to deal with things in the longer term so we can avoid reproduction of some of these historical patterns as they may emerge in new mechanisms.

º  (1650)  

    Mr. Bernard Taylor: I think I'll be able to address the first point. Being with NEPAD, I agree it is most important to deal with the current emergencies as they come up, and to deal with them in a way that perhaps will prevent them coming up in the future, or at least not to the same degree.

    I was very interested to see a report--it was a television report, but I heard about it through other media--of the situation in Ethiopia, where, as you know, there is a food emergency. Ethiopia has had cyclical famines going back centuries. As the rains fail, there is great concentration of populations in food-growing areas, there's a shortage of land, etc., etc. And it's not just common to Ethiopia; other countries face similar problems.

    This recent report showed how the distribution service of the Ethiopian government had been able to foresee what was happening through early warning systems and had been able to plan, obviously with the assistance of donor countries and the United Nations systems and organizations, and with its own reserves, to distribute food to needy people while they were still in their villages. So the government prevented a situation developing where people flooded to the main roads and to relief camps, with the attendant problems of disease, etc., etc., as has happened in the past in Ethiopia.

    Now, this I think is a remarkable advance in terms of planning for and dealing with a crisis. I think it's something that needs to be noted and learned from, and the experience shared elsewhere. Food production crises will come from time to time in a country such as that. I think they have to be helped, though, to develop their food security. And where a few years ago Ethiopia had a bountiful harvest in parts of the country and sold food because it needed funds, a year or so later those funds were not available for it to use to help offset a food shortage.

    That's why I referred earlier on in my presentation to regional food security programs, because this is a regional matter. Ethiopia, if it has a food surplus, doesn't sell it to Great Britain, which imports food; it sells it to a nearby country, which it can transport the food to easily. So I think it should be dealt with in a regional way. I think Africa is sufficiently varied for food security issues to be solved at a regional level without huge costs in movement of food.

    I agree with the point of your question about NEPAD not replicating history. We had to learn from the lessons of the past. I had a discussion earlier this week with a senior member of the African diplomatic community here, who said that he very much admired what had happened in Quebec in the 1960s, where the electricity had been nationalized and other steps had been taken to strengthen, as he saw it, the economy of that part of Canada.

    In the example of NEPAD, where the privatization of water is being encouraged, is being made way for within NEPAD--and certainly is being encouraged by some financial institutions and some countries--many in Africa would disagree with it. It's certainly causing a lot of adverse reactions in South Africa, in Soweto and places like that, and I think we have to be very careful about seeking western solutions to African problems from certain countries.

    In fact the Québécois company Hydro-Québec has been largely involved in the privatization of electricity in Senegal, which has not been a success. Hydro-Québec is a success in Quebec, but not in Senegal.

º  (1655)  

    So I think I agree with the warning in your question that we have to take great care in imposing solutions from different parts of the world, some of which perhaps are doctrinaire solutions from certain of our international institutions.

    I can't give you a good response to the issue of child labour in Côte d’Ivoire. I know that an organization in Canada, Save the Children in Toronto, is doing quite a lot of work around this.

    I'll stop there.

[Translation]

    The Chair: Mr. Mugiraneza, final answer.

    Mr. Charles Mugraneza: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    With regard to economic development in Africa, the private sector must not be excluded, but we cannot rely solely on the private sector. I think that we must simultaneously work and support the States so they continue to regulate society. Everyone knows that Africa is the continent with the highest illiteracy rate. Everyone knows that Africa has the worst health care.

    In passing, I want to tell the committee something: on the 21 and 22, there will be a conference in Ottawa, on health and multinationals. I think the title is The Right to Health, Influencing the Global Agenda. It will be a good opportunity to see how the social role, which is increasingly relegated to multinational corporations, does not necessarily have the answer.

    So, under NEPAD—I think that this program is still open—countries like Canada can continue to intervene to ask those who started NEPAD to consider other ideas, because relying more heavily on the private sector would mean repeating the story you just described.

    It is essential to support the State so that it continues to play a social role. It is essential, too, to support civil society organizations and community organizations that have answers at levels where the State cannot necessarily respond.

    In terms of the private sector’s role, I was in Niger in April of last year, and the government had been subject to pressure from the World Bank to privatize the national waterworks. In a Saharan country such as Niger, water is an extremely rare commodity and the State is doing everything it can to provide the population with access to water. Two weeks after water was privatized in Niger, the company was bought by Vivendi, and water prices rose 22% per cubic metre. So, the company was interested in making a profit; the needs of the people did not interest Vivendi. I understand. Vivendi is right; it is interested in profits. But the reality is that there was a 22% increase in costs per cubic metre. How many people lost access to drinking water as a result of this increase? One day, we will have the numbers.

    So, I think that the private sector has to be reinforced but, at the same time, the State must be allowed to continue playing its role and also try to support the community and civil society organizations so that they can continue to play a role. I think that work needs to be done so that NEPAD is open and becomes a better program.

    With regard to child labour in the Ivory Coast, in fact, this is one of the countries where child labour is very prevalent, particularly on the cocoa plantations, and often children came from countries neighbouring the Ivory Coast. As Bernard said, there are Canadian organizations, such as Save the Children Canada, that are working in these areas, and are condemning these policies, but I think that the Canadian government must continue the work it began on children’s rights, so that these countries will increasingly consider the rights of children and so that these overly young children can go to school rather than work in the fields and have a better future.

»  (1700)  

    The Chair: I would like to thank our witnesses for their contribution.

[English]

    If you have any supplementary remarks you'd like to make--for example, which six countries and why--we invite you to submit that to the clerk and thereby we can continue to be the beneficiaries of your informed testimony. Again, I want to thank you for being with us. It's been very helpful to us.

    Yes, Mrs. Kraft Sloan.

    Mrs. Karen Kraft Sloan: Very briefly, if you are sending us something in writing, I'm very interested in the issues around environmental justice and environmental rights. I think some of the issues we have touched on directly affect that particular issue. If you have any thoughts on this, it would be very helpful to get it for the record.

    Thank you.

    The Chair: Thank you, and thank you for coming.

    The meeting stands adjourned.