Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Foreign Affairs
Issue 1 - Evidence, May 16, 2006
OTTAWA, Tuesday, May 16, 2006
The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs met this day at 5:01 p.m. to examine the development and security challenges facing Africa; the response of the international community to enhance that continent's development and political stability; and Canadian foreign policy as it relates to Africa.
Senator Hugh Segal (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Honourable senators and minister, welcome to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs. Today's meeting is a special one, as it is not only our first meeting in this new Parliament, but it is also the relaunch of the Africa study.
[Translation]
It was indeed in December 2004 that the former Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Pierre Pettigrew, launched this study on Africa, which over the course of the months became a most interesting and stimulating study under the remarkable leadership of my friend and colleague, the Honourable Senator Peter Stollery.
[English]
I think it is important to stress the incredible amount of work the committee has put into this study. During the last Parliament, the committee always made a conscious effort to hear from firsthand sources about Africa, be they farmers or heads of state. In this context, the committee heard from over 100 witnesses, including many Africans visiting Ottawa.
The committee also underwent a long and challenging but extremely moving fact-finding mission to Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, and Mali, not only visiting capital cities, but also the countryside and managing to hear from ``real'' people.
[Translation]
In doing so the committee managed, sometimes in quite difficult conditions, to meet over 150 people. Finally, the committee also visited three international organizations of primary importance for Africa, that is to say the United Nations, the World Bank and the IMF, where it obtained, once again, crucial information for our study.
[English]
Honourable senators, to relaunch this important study we have the honour and pleasure of having with us the newly appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, the Honourable Peter MacKay, for whom today's meeting is certainly a special one, as it is the first time that Mr. MacKay appears before a parliamentary committee in his new ministerial capacities. He is accompanied by Mr. Ian Ferguson, Director General, Africa Bureau; and Mr. Tim Martin, Senior Director and Deputy Head, Stabilization and Reconstruction Task Force (START) Secretariat.
I am delighted that Ms. Wendy Gilmour, Director, Peacekeeping and Peace Operations Group and Sudan Task Force, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, could also join us at the head table.
The minister has agreed to make an opening statement of about ten minutes. He will then answer your questions, in the time that we have, until about six o'clock this evening.
Hon. Peter MacKay, P.C., M.P., Minister of Foreign Affairs: Honourable senators, it is an honour to be with you at the commencement of this new Parliament. As was pointed out, this is my very first opportunity to address a parliamentary committee, so I am quite happy that it is a Senate committee and one that has had a long and abiding and admirable interest in the subject of Africa.
In expectation of some of the questions, I have focused and tailored some of my remarks to Sudan and Darfur, but I know this committee has taken a much broader view of Canada's role in Africa. I look forward to your questions on the subject of Canada's foreign policy with regard to Africa.
[Translation]
I commend the committee for its decision to continue its work on Africa, building on the timely visit last October of some of your members to Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali and Nigeria. I also appreciate your by-partisan approach — Africa is one region where all can agree that the needs are great and where we should be working together.
Mr. Chairman, Canada's fundamental objective in Africa is to help reverse the region's social and economic marginalization, which has grave effects on human development, human rights and good governance, and could fuel threats to regional and global peace and security.
[English]
Mr. Chairman, I also would report to you that I had the opportunity this past weekend to attend the Francophonie summit for foreign affairs ministers, which was hosted in Manitoba. Perhaps in our discourse here, we will have an opportunity to talk about some of the discussion that took place at that summit. Many of the countries that you have visited, and which are the subject of this discussion, were represented. Their foreign affairs' representatives and personnel were there. It was an informative debate about Canada's role. They were most appreciative of the fact that Canada had taken the initiative to host this important discussion of the Francophonie in St. Boniface, Manitoba.
I want to return to Sudan and Northern Uganda, where major challenges remain. They are clearly two of the world's worst humanitarian crises. In fact, in an article published this weekend in The New York Times, Secretary- General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, described it in just those terms as far as Sudan is concerned.
I can assure you that Canada will continue to do all it can to help achieve peace in Sudan, as it affects not just that country but the entire region. This is a major policy priority for Canada; and I am deeply concerned by the continuing violence in Darfur, especially attacks on innocent civilians. The reports of the viciousness and the deliberate nature of these attacks — the dismembering, the raping and the murder of innocent people in this region — are particularly disturbing to anyone with a conscience.
Therefore, we are pleased that with the conclusion of the Darfur peace agreement in Abuja, there has been a semblance of peace declared. Unfortunately, two of the participants in those talks did not sign. Yet there is an indication that this has achieved a semblance of stability that will require further work.
Canada played an important role in the conclusion of this agreement and believes that it is essential that we continue down the road of a lasting peace for the people of Darfur. Our Ambassador to the United Nations, Allan Rock, and our High Commissioner to Nigeria, David Angell, were instrumental in finalizing this agreement. They participated in and witnessed the signing as a testament to their role on behalf of Canada.
I was, at that time, engaged with the parties in the discussions via telephone and encouraged their agreement of the draft, which was put forward by the African Union mediation team.
Now to the implementation and reconciliation that must follow: I would suggest this must be swift, efficient and effective. Canada will be there to support these continuing efforts.
[Translation]
In Darfur itself, Canada has assumed an internationally recognized leadership role in support of the African Union's peacekeeping mission, motivated by our broader objectives to enhance civilian protection, including the ``responsibility to protect'' principles.
We have committed $170 million in logistic, financial and equipment support and the deployment of military and civilian advisors, in addition to humanitarian and development assistance.
The AU peacekeeping mission has achieved a great deal under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. However, the situation now demands a new level of international engagement.
[English]
Canada supports the earliest possible transition from an African Union to a United Nations mission and also calls upon the parties to secure greater humanitarian access, which was previously unacceptably restricted by security and bureaucratic impediments. As you would know, there is now a Security Council chapter 7 resolution referring directly to this situation.
In Northern Uganda, around 1.7 million displaced persons live in squalid, insecure camps. The Lord's Resistance Army, the LRA, has abducted 20,000 children over the past 20 years, forcing them into armed conflict and sexual slavery. Each week, 1,000 civilians die from war-related causes.
The international community and the state parties must execute the International Criminal Court warrants. Canada will play, and has played, an active role in these processes. In the next few months, we will increase Canada's diplomatic efforts to partner with countries to address the humanitarian crisis, along with efforts that we hope will also help in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo. As you know, there is very much an interrelationship among the activities of these countries.
The government accords priority to Africa's needs. Since assuming office, we have acted in a significant way. The Prime Minister has reappointed Ambassador Robert Fowler as his G8 Personal Representative for Africa. G8 leaders will receive a progress report at their meeting in Russia, and the G8 summit is just a few months away.
The budget reaffirmed funding to meet Canada's commitment to double international development assistance from 2001-02 levels by 2010-11, which will see aid rise by about $4.1 billion in 2007-08. Africa will be a major beneficiary of that increase.
The government is fulfilling Canada's commitment to the G8 Sea Island Summit global peace operations initiative for building peacekeeping capacity, focused on the African Union and African sub-regional organizations.
The government will also deliver up to $320 million in further funding, including to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and the polio eradication program. In addition, it will continue Canada's work to mitigate the illicit exploitation of natural resources in Africa, which can be a driver of conflict. We will work with African regional organizations, states, civil society and international organizations to promote the legal and physical protection of civilians.
We have maintained our leading role as Co-chair of the ``Group of Friends'' of the International Conference of the Great Lakes Region. I can tell you, having met with many of the foreign ministers and representatives of African countries, that they were lauding Canada's leadership in this area.
Our special envoy is now in the region, looking at ways to ensure follow-up to the summit expected later this year following elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo. I spoke directly to the foreign minister from the DRC and he was optimistic that the elections will occur on time. As you know, Canada is participating, in the sense that we will have observers there; we are supporting this election process, as we have in other regions.
We have also maintained our active contribution to the Kimberley process to prevent conflict diamonds from entering the legitimate trade. This is also a source of funding for some of the violence that takes place.
Since I have taken up my duties as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I have also welcomed the transfer of the ex- President of Liberia, Charles Taylor, to the Special Court for Sierra Leone. In view of the security concerns raised by states in the region, Canada has supported the physical relocation of his trial to The Hague.
In the face of ongoing crises and challenges, we must not forget that the record includes progress. Through the African Union, Africa's political leadership is increasingly committed to promoting socio-economic development and integration, peace, security and good governance on the continent.
Countries suffering from years of war, such as Burundi, Angola, Sierra Leone and Liberia, have moved into peace building and reconstruction. Some 980,000 refugees have been afforded the ability to go home. African armies are now contributing to peace efforts on a significant scale; in fact, close to 30 per cent of UN peacekeeping soldiers worldwide are now African.
Democracy and elections, albeit imperfect in some cases, have spread to more countries. African parliamentarians are speaking out on issues of corruption, human rights and women's equality. Also, reflecting better economic performances, 16 countries have achieved annual GDP growth in excess of 4.5 per cent since the mid-90s.
The economy of Africa grew by almost 5 per cent in 2005 and is projected to grow by 5.9 per cent next year. Annual aid commitments to sub-Saharan Africa are likely to be between $10 billion and $13 billion more in 2007 than in 2004. The World Bank expects highly credible G8 pledges to double aid to Africa by 2010. On debt and African countries, Canada has forgiven more than $2 billion in debt owed to it by developing countries, including some $700 million owed by African countries. We have also cancelled all debts owed by ten African countries and no longer collect debt payments owed by reforming countries in Africa.
In conclusion, nearly five years ago, Africa's leadership proposed the NEPAD. Africa proposed a partnership; Africa committed to improving governance through political and economic reform, in the hope and expectation that investment would follow and developed countries would help Africa through increased aid, reduced debt and an improved international trading regime.
[Translation]
We have made progress since then, but much remains to be done. Canada will do its part to keep Africa on the international agenda and to provide financial and political support. Donor and African governments have made long- term financial and political commitments.
[English]
Today, more than at any time in the past, there has been an alignment of vision, political will and financial resources among the international community to make progress on key obstacles to Africa's progress that have existed. We will be open to ways to improve the effectiveness of our own programs and our diplomacy.
At this time, I welcome your questions and comments.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Minister MacKay.
[Translation]
Senator Dawson: Mr. Chairman, may I congratulate the new minister on his appointment; I am myself a new player on this team. I will in fact let my colleagues examine the African issues in depth because they have greater experience.
I was somewhat disappointed, Minister, when I saw that you had ignored the Francophonie in your document. I think that with the weekend we just had ignoring the topic is a little surprising. All the more so since the procedural faux-pas and diplomatic incidents which occurred unfortunately attracted people's attention. A very important conference was taking place where Darfur and security were on the agenda. I do not want to raise the issue anew — and I hope that the matter is closed — but what will your department do regarding protocol to ensure that this type of incident will not be repeated?
Mr. MacKay: I agree with the concept. This incident was very regrettable, but Minister Verner and myself have spoken directly with the Secretary General, Mr. Diouf. He accepted Canada's regrets. According to me, the incident is now over. The investigation continues to ensure that such a thing will never happen again.
[English]
I can assure you that the Secretary-General was quite sincere in his compliments on the hospitality that he received in St. Boniface. He commented in particular that he appreciated the efforts made to accommodate him and make his visit an enjoyable and productive one.
While I acknowledge that this was an incident that we would have hoped to avoid, it is more important to avoid such incidents in the future.
[Translation]
Senator Dawson: I am happy to know that where protocol is concerned, steps have been taken to avoid the repetition of such an incident. One of my friends sent me an email earlier telling me that he had been ``dioufed'' at the Toronto airport. It has become a verb.
[English]
He was body searched at the airport. That will now become a verb in both the English and French vernacular.
You have some engagements to look forward to arising from the summit. Since they did not get the deserved coverage at the conference, could you elaborate on steps to be taken following the conference?
Mr. MacKay: You could more appropriately pose this question to Madame Verner in terms of the process of la Francophonie. This particular conference was hosted by ministers of foreign affairs and came about as a result of a Canadian initiative.
As you know, the full Francophonie summit will take place in the next six months, I believe, and Quebec City will be hosting it.
The discussions that took place at the summit resulted in a resolution, of which I would be pleased to provide a copy to the Senate committee if you have not received it already.
There were important discussions on issues with which you are all familiar, including child soldiers, peacemaking and enforcement of existing regulations — all humanitarian efforts focusing on how we can make the greatest difference, particularly for women and children. That theme continually arose. They seem to be the predominant focus of violence.
There was considerable agreement at that conference that the world community had to do more, and that comes about in a number of phases. The humanitarian effort can only be achieved with proper resourcing and only when there is security on the ground. The efforts around the transition that is currently taking place in Darfur, in particular, are at a tipping point. They need to make this transition as quickly as possible into a UN-led mission. Much of the discussion, both at the conference and on the margins, was focused on how quickly that could occur.
Senator De Bané: Minister, I would like to tell you that I am most happy that you are the minister in charge of the foreign policy of our country. I have every reason to be optimistic that you will project around the world the values that are dear to us all. I extend to you my best wishes.
On the unfortunate incident in Toronto, my conclusion is that that happened because another department, the Department of Transport, is in charge of safety screening. I was told by CATSA, the Canadian Air Transportation Security Authority, that they are in complete control of screening and that the only people who are exempted from screening are heads of state.
It would be a good idea, Mr. Minister, for you to review the matter with your colleagues in the Department of Transport and ensure that people invited by your department are, to a great extent, under the control of your department rather than CATSA, who are not experts on issues of protocol.
On the issue that is at the heart of your testimony today, I recently attended a meeting with the President of the World Bank that was organized by his institution for parliamentarians. He told us that as the new President of the World Bank, the African continent is his absolute priority. He will concentrate all the efforts of his institution on that suffering continent. He said that the World Bank would put more money into infrastructure in Africa, because they lack infrastructure. He also said that they will have to earn our assistance.
He said that where corruption is rampant, we will have to be adamant that they improve their governance.
I know that over the years, Canada, along with Ambassador Fowler, has been pushing the NEPAD program, where African leaders must themselves pass judgment on the ethics and governance of their colleagues. I have the impression that they are reluctant to pass judgment on the behaviour of their colleagues.
Can you tell us anything about what Canada will do to insist that, while we will double our budget, we still want them to govern in a proper way?
[Translation]
Mr. MacKay: Thank you, honourable senator. I appreciate your confidence and supportive remarks a great deal.
[English]
I will also respond briefly to your suggestion for further engagement with the Minister of Transportation as well as with the CIDA minister to ensure that there will not be a repeat of such an incident.
I have done a significant amount of travel in the past two to three months, and I am not excusing or trying to diminish the incident in any way, but I have met with various degrees of security around the world, depending on the country. As a minister from this country, I have gone to places where I have been asked to remove my coat and to submit to a search. I personally accept the reality that security is now the new normal, and Canada is a country that takes the concerns around security seriously. We know that one of the principal weapons of mass destruction was flying aircraft into buildings, which is why Canadians and, I think, the world community, have accepted the need to be particularly mindful and diligent in our efforts to secure air travel. That is all I will say on that, other than we will try to do whatever we can to strike the proper balance, and when diplomats are involved, there are particular protocols that should and will be followed.
To answer your question, I certainly agree that a number of Canadians have expressed an elevated level of concern about the delivery of funding to the designated or intended recipient. In many cases, money donated either by private citizens or corporations or designated by governments does not always make it to the intended recipient because it is diverted and, in some cases, deliberately used by governments for another purpose. That has, in some cases, shaken the confidence of donors at all levels. It will require a further effort by Canada and other countries working with the United Nations, NGOs and some of the current mechanisms, including banks in some cases, to ensure that the money not only gets to the designated recipients, but is also used for its intended purpose. I would suggest that accountability has been and will be a recurring theme for this government. We want to see that the money is properly handled and received and that there is a follow-up. I am perhaps speaking too generally here, but one of the issues that we can all agree on is that there must be more follow-up to see that the programs have been administered and that the results are what we all want to see, namely, peace building, democracy building and, in some cases, just the basics — water supplies and the construction of roads.
You referenced in your remarks the needs of many countries for basic transportation. If they are to get goods into a marketplace, that is a lifeline. I have just returned from Afghanistan, and as you are flying over that country it becomes evident that they do not have basic roads to get between their towns and villages or to move freely around the landscape. There is so much to do, but it is very much an issue, as you have correctly identified, of following up and seeing that the money is used for its intended purpose; and Canada can and will do more.
Ian Ferguson, Director General, Africa Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade: I would add that the World Bank Institute has done some interesting research on the link between corruption and economic growth. It can give you a number on how much it costs. Because it can be translated into economic terms, the World Bank can now take it into account in their loan policies, and some interesting work is being done there.
I would mention also with respect to the African Peer Review Mechanism, 26 countries have now signed up. They have turned away countries that do not meet minimum standards. It is still separate from the African Union. Ghana's review is completed. It created a lot of space for the private sector and for civil society. A lot of internal debate went on when they drafted their report. They went before their peers. Rwanda has also completed its report, but because the head of state did not go to the summit in Khartoum, they refused to hold the hearing. They want the head of state there. It has been a slow start, but I think it is showing some promise.
Senator Andreychuk: Minister MacKay, welcome to the committee. I am pleased you have chosen to come before this committee first and that you are highlighting Africa. That is a good sign, as we often turn to issues in Africa, but only when it is in crisis. I trust we will do it on a more consistent basis.
You have highlighted Sudan and Northern Uganda. The exploitation of children in Northern Uganda and the Sudan are not new issues. I am pleased to see there is now more international impetus and that Canada is front and centre. The issue of Darfur should have been dealt with three years ago, and we are only now coming to it; it is genocide. It is a crime, and one that the world community needs to be made accountable for.
I will not ask you a question on that. I want to ask you why in your summary you have not included Zimbabwe, which is a constant disaster, an economy gone wrong with people who are suffering. Human rights violations are growing, and I want to know your position on that.
You talked about NEPAD and the oversight role. NEPAD should be commended for the peer review mechanism, but it is decidedly lacking in oversight. Your government has been strong on accountability and parliamentary involvement. What are your future directions on supporting and assisting parliaments in Africa, as I believe they have been forgotten in all of this? We in Parliament should take into account your suggestion as to how to tackle that.
Mr. MacKay: You have in part answered your own question as to why I did not necessarily focus on Zimbabwe. There are a number of countries that I did not list or specifically mention in my introductory remarks. That is not to suggest that any is more deserving than the other, but it is to suggest that some are, perhaps, in more dire need of focus at this point.
Clearly, had we the ability and the capacity to do more in every instance, we would.
One thing I discovered early on in this portfolio, having interacted with some of the international community who have been doing their level best to improve the situation in Africa, is that there is no bottom to the well of compassion and the desire to make a difference. In Canada's case, I would suggest that the challenge is to focus on where we can make the most difference, as opposed to, and I say this respectfully, spreading ourselves so thinly that the difference will not be felt in any significant way.
There is a danger of that, and in the past, perhaps we have tended to say too much and do too little, raising expectations and giving the world community — again, I am choosing my words carefully — false hope that Canada would carry more of the load in more of the countries, and then coming up short. I would far rather, and this is the general theme emerging from this government's approach, under-promise and over-deliver, and put more emphasis on getting things done than talking about the accomplishments before they are actually achieved.
Without overgeneralizing, that is the approach we want to take, not only in Africa, but in our contributions in Haiti, Afghanistan, or, specifically, in the Sudan, which according to Kofi Annan and others, is the most pressing issue at this moment. That is why we are perhaps focusing more on specific regions.
As to parliamentary interaction, I would go back to when we began this meeting and the comment on our own parliamentary committees, who have shown tremendous initiative and leadership in engaging with parliamentarians. We all know and understand that one of the most important things we can do to bring about stability, after we stop the massacres, is to allow governments in Africa to start taking responsibility for creating a functioning judiciary, for holding people accountable under that judicial system, for setting up police forces in many cases. However, all of this happens under the rubric of a government that functions democratically, that has built-in accountability mechanisms, that allows for the participation of women, and sees that regions receive representation within the Parliament. I am therefore in agreement that we need to underscore the capacity building, not only in the humanitarian areas, and, of course, security, but also in supporting and fortifying burgeoning democracies.
If I may close on this remark: Sometimes, we are in danger of supporting these democracies to a point where they just begin to function, and then we fall away, leaving them to descend again into chaos. There is a parliamentary centre in Sudan of which you will be aware, and there are other foundations and a forum that are helping to develop structures around governance. Canada has been and will continue to be involved, focusing on, in particular, the building of functioning democracies in Africa.
Senator Di Nino: This is a difficult issue. It is one that some of us have been involved in for a number of months, and I am not sure we are any further ahead than when we started. The hole is so deep I do not know how far we can go. There are two specific points I would like to bring to your attention and ask you to comment on.
In your presentation, you spoke of the transfer of the responsibility from the AU to a UN mission. One thing that we heard strongly in the Democratic Republic of Congo when we were there is that it is fine to have a UN mandate, but a UN mandate without teeth does not achieve success.
In fact, we were told by the general in charge of one of the parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo that if he had the mandate, he could deal with the problem. I believe you understand what he was trying to tell us in no uncertain terms. I would like you to comment on that.
Second, we have all discovered that after 40 years-plus of aid, we seem to have achieved nothing or little to speak of, particularly since 40 to 45 years ago, Africa was self-sufficient in food production. Now, if they do not import food, they will starve. I feel that aid does not serve the purpose. We must look at a different model for how we can participate with the African countries in solving some of those horrible problems. I would like you to comment on both of those points, please.
Mr. MacKay: Thank you very much, senator. Your insights are astute. As to Africa being a long-term challenge, I would suggest that while terrorism dominates the news, Africa will be the biggest challenge for my generation and the one that will follow.
Having said that, we have to focus on exactly what you have described, giving these African countries the ability — and it sounds almost trite — to help themselves. Part of that equation, which is like a Rubik's cube, in that it is always changing, is having alternative crops, in some cases, to what they are currently harvesting. In some countries, there is little, of course, other than subsistence.
One area in particular that interests me, because of my background, is reforestation in Africa. As a country with a strong forestry sector, this is an area where Canada can do more. There is clearly a need to share agricultural training and techniques, which is another tangible contribution that we could be making.
You are right to suggest, if I am not reading too much into this, that it is not just about cash on the barrel and saying, ``Here is money,'' because that money dries up just like water in the desert. There have to be sufficient human resources and investment in training and capacity building. There are significant NGO efforts going into this, above and beyond anything the governments do, and they are certainly to be commended.
If we were to focus on one area of government that is also ripe for expansion, it would be partnering with the private sector, with NGOs, and in some cases matching the funds that they have gathered and encouraging and embracing some of the initiatives others have taken.
As to enforcement, I will just say this: In a short time, I have come to appreciate even more the need for multinational interventions under UN auspices. Blue helmets appear to have the most credibility in countries where there is a certain fear, and in some cases, even a great apprehension about vested interests or hidden instruments. That blue helmet — and Canada has played an enormous part in establishing its reputation for fairness and equal treatment — has, in my view, become the best way to make the forceful types of interventions to which you refer.
Chapter 7 resolutions seem to be the way in which the United Nations can have the discussions at the Security Council and then legitimize the interventions that follow. Without getting into the entire issue, which we will discuss in the near future, the role Canada might play in terms of troop deployment, in many cases, is in the training, the equipment and the logistical support; for example, the heavy lift capacity that is required right now for a UN intervention in Africa.
Senator Stollery: I have two questions that will not be long.
Minister, I appreciate that this is a new portfolio for you and it is a new government, so some of these questions relate to things that took place previously. I do not expect you to be able to answer some of them, but I think note should be taken.
When people mention corruption in Africa, my eyes cannot but be directed to the report of the Security Council from October 2002, mentioned by Raymond Baker, whose book, Capitalism's Achilles Heel, was reviewed in the London Review of Books and would be actionable, in many cases, if his facts were not correct, on the problems of corruption. It was from Raymond Baker that I found out about this report, which talks about, in annex III, ``Business enterprises considered by the Panel to be in violation of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.'' I see Barclay's Bank; I see Bayer, the chemical company that manufactures aspirin; I see several Canadian companies — Harambee Mining Corp., First Quantum Minerals Ltd., Melkior Resources and several others. I know I cannot expect that you would know this, but some of the officials may have some ideas. What was the response of the Government of Canada to this incredible report, which gets great reviews from anyone interested in corruption in Africa? Was there a response? That is my first question.
Mr. MacKay: I appreciate the question, senator. Let me just begin by saying it is reprehensible that companies in Canada would be participating in the type of corruption you have described and that is outlined in this report. I will be frank with you; I have not seen this report from 2002. However, let me ask my officials whether there has been any official response from Canada.
Senator Stollery: One of the authors was a Canadian.
The Chairman: Perhaps you could ask the department to get back to us on that.
Mr. MacKay: I will be glad to, and to see if we have any official response.
Senator Stollery: I know that at the moment people are talking about Darfur. I understand that. Any tragedy is bad. We all agree with that. However, this committee had direct experience with the old Belgian Congo, where today 1,000 people died; where according to The Lancet, the medical journal, 38,000 people died in January; where it is said that between Katanga and the Congo, 4 million people have died in not too long a period of time. It is the largest UN force in the history of the United Nations — around 16,500, but of effective troops, about 5,500 or 6,000. They are mostly Pakistanis and Indians, although we met some others. It is all on the UN website if anyone wants to look it up.
Canada was asked — and I know it was not this government — to send four people to help train that ragtag Congolese army and the Department of National Defence turned down the request for security reasons.
These are supposed to be soldiers. We had half a dozen aging senators touring the area in October — aging senators like me — and National Defence could not find four trainers. I have a copy of the correspondence, in case there is any doubt. We know Darfur is in the press, so everyone is saying yes, we have to send people there to help with stabilization, and we are quite aware that the African Union has asked for UN assistance; but why are we so selective and why do we wait until the situation becomes an international story? If it is unpleasant and they are poor, black African peasants, nobody cares. Is it because they are just black African peasants that National Defence does not care?
Mr. MacKay: I would certainly hope not. I would hope that it would never be the case that any decision was made based on the country of origin.
I cannot speak for the decision that was made by the previous government. I understand this was part of a request made in conjunction with Belgium and other countries; and that for reasons that are unknown to me Canada did not send those four individuals.
I do know that there is some financial aid currently being given to the Congo and that an RCMP officer is part of the current deployment there. You are right to suggest that there have been requests in the past for Canada to send more personnel. I will not pretend that I know the status of the requests right now. I am not aware of any recent requests for personnel to go to the region.
I know that the embassy works closely with other representatives, including from the European Union and the international committee, to support the effort there. However, in most cases, it is my view that Canadians are most generous in their intent to help where they can. The Congo, Zimbabwe, Sudan, all of these regions are asking for more; and Canada is sometimes faced with making difficult decisions as to how much we can give and how much we can spread that resource over a needy and deserving continent.
But you are right; four members is a minimal request as far as I am concerned.
Senator Stollery: Perhaps I could ask Ms. Gilmour, who is familiar with this.
The Chairman: As I mentioned earlier, I have senators Corbin, Downe and St. Germain on the list, which may take us a little beyond 6 p.m. if the minister is able to indulge us.
Mr. MacKay: I will stay.
The Chairman: That is very kind.
Wendy Gilmour, Director, Peacekeeping and Peace Operations Group and Sudan Task Force, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade: We can provide further information for you on this particular project, if you wish. However, it is important to note that in this situation, as with all of the other requests we receive for individual contributions to different types of activities, the most important thing is to ensure the security and safety of the Canadian personnel who will to be engaged, irrespective of whether they are Canadian Forces, diplomats or development personnel. This particular project was intending to deploy our officers to a very remote region where they would not have been within range of appropriate medical care, force protection elements or the logistical capacity to sustain them.
As I am sure you realized during your visit to the region, the logistical capabilities inside the Congo are limited. What is available for a visiting delegation has to be that much more when it is a smaller deployment of people in a remote area. Therefore, we were not able to support this particular project, but we do still have Canadian Forces officers deployed in the Congo with the United Nations mission. We also have one police officer deployed with the European Union mission; and we have on offer further capabilities on the police side, if there is an appropriate role and the conditions are appropriate for their deployment.
Senator Stollery: I have to add that I know the Congo well and have been in all kinds of remote areas there. If I was a member of the Canadian Armed Forces, there is no place in the Congo where I would be afraid to go.
[Translation]
Senator Corbin: Because of the financial requirements they impose on national administrations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have caused disasters in Africa. I may to a certain extent be referring to past events, but the effect of those policies persists today.
Canada has representatives at the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. I do not know if they work in the field or not. The Minister of Finance certainly attends the annual or biannual meetings of these institutions which generally take place in Washington.
The evidence heard by the committee and the testimony we heard during our travels in Africa contained virtual horror stories. I would like to ask the minister to give particular attention to the operations and policies of these two financial institutions. In the past, they have created unbearable situations in the name of the West's great democratic principles.
This is generally speaking not the African approach to fundamental problems and issues that are close to the people. Could the minister give us the assurance today that he will himself, as well as the ministers involved with these dossiers and the Minister of Finance of Canada, give particular attention to the way in which the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank operate in these African countries?
Mr. MacKay: I thank the senator for his question.
[English]
I will not pretend that I know about the internal politics of the IMF or the World Bank. That is not an area in which I would ever pretend to have an expertise. However, I will speak to the Minister of Finance to see what, if any, inquiries have been made by his department, his officials. I would be glad to provide the senator with a more detailed answer because I think this is a quite specific question that deserves a proper response. With the senator's patience, I would be glad to get back to him with specific information on what monitoring there is and what mechanisms even exist for Canada to have oversight. The honourable senator has raised an important issue in terms of the necessity for Canada to be at ``arm's length'' in terms of certain decisions being made, but Canada does have a responsibility to ensure that the way in which the IMF and the World Bank are operating vis-à-vis Africa is in keeping with proper international codes and national standards of operations when it comes to these large amounts of money involved in aid.
Senator Downe: I seek clarity on a couple of comments the minister made in his presentation to this committee.
At the top of page 3, the minister talked about the government reconfirming their commitment to double international development assistance. I appreciate that the minister is new and may not have the answers this evening, but if he could send them to the committee it would be appreciated.
Of the doubling of the funding, what percentage will actually go to Africa? It is indicated that Africa will be a major beneficiary, but it does not indicate a percentage or a dollar figure. Could you send that to us?
Mr. MacKay: I would be glad to do that, keeping in mind that the amount that will be committed to Africa will, obviously, change over time. As time goes by, we can state a specific amount that will be allotted in any budget year, but the percentage of the annual budget may change. I will, however, be glad to provide the senator with the specifics vis-à-vis the coming year.
Senator Downe: I appreciate that answer. There was a reason I asked that particular question. We had the CIDA minister in the previous government here, who talked in her presentation about the importance of Africa and how it was the priority. When we checked the funding, we found out more money was actually going to Afghanistan, which was acceptable, knowing the money was spent particularly on women and children. How could the largest amount of funding be going to Afghanistan if Africa was the priority?
Mr. MacKay: The commitments and the policy platform position for Canada's international assistance, specific initiatives within the international assistance envelope, are, as you would expect after 100 days in office, under review. We are concerned with meeting the specific priority commitments rather than making vague promises such as we have witnessed in the past. We want to see that Canada is playing a leading role in the Sudan and that the money is targeted to the areas where the crisis exists.
On aid to Africa, we want to see that the money is targeted and arrives, and we will make the overall amounts available to you in the coming days.
Senator Downe: On page 4 of your presentation, you indicate that Canada has written off a large amount of money owed to this country and you also indicate that we ``no longer collect debt payments owed by reforming countries in Africa.''
Do we actually receive any money in debt payment from any African countries?
Mr. MacKay: I cannot answer that question. I will turn to my officials to see what the percentage of interest collected is.
Mr. Ferguson: We would have to check with our Finance colleagues on that.
Senator St. Germain: I am new on this committee. I have been on a committee that deals with a real challenge and, often, horror stories — our own Aboriginal Committee. This is a file that I have been interested in and I have asked numerous questions in the Senate.
To follow along with what Senator Stollery said, I know you are new in this position and I congratulate you on having been appointed. I know you will do a good job. Historically, however, whenever something happens in Africa, it seems, to use a phrase, we are dealing with children of a lesser God. It seems that everything stalls and everybody blames the UN. Yet when it came to dealing with Serbia and Milosevic, we were able as a free world to do something. There were allegations of genocide and we activated NATO. We went in there and the situation was brought under some semblance of control. Yet in Africa, we see incident after incident. It is basically a repetition. Children are being raped and murdered. It just does not make sense that we would stand back and do nothing.
If there is a God — and I believe there is — can you imagine the judgment he will pass on us as a free world, with all our wealth and capabilities, having failed these people, these children? Why do we not at least go in with a NATO force? No one will push us around. No armies or forces in Africa will push us around. Why do we not at least do that for the children, send a significant message and deliver some form of protection?
It may sound naïve, but I have asked this question of the former administration of the Senate on numerous occasions. Minister, we will be judged on the way we have dealt with our fellow man, whether he is black, yellow, white, red, or whatever he or she may be. We seem to just stand back and become complacent. I sometimes wonder, to go back to Senator Stollery's comment, whether the protection of corporations and their alleged conspiracies with these corrupt governments is part of the problem.
I know this is a tough question to answer. I am not trying to put you on the spot, because I have worked with you for many years and I have much respect for your abilities, but I think we are now in a position to make a difference, and if we fail, we fail mankind and we fail ourselves.
Mr. MacKay: Senator St. Germain, I very much share your concern. To say the least, it is a deeply philosophical and practical question as to how we will stop the horrors that continue to occur, the massacre of humanity. The descriptions that we have read, the images that we have seen, haunt our souls. I know from your comments here and from having spoken to you previously that you are sincere in what you say and the emotion that you display.
Mechanisms such as the United Nations, while not perfect in any way, shape or form, are, in my view, the best instruments that we have to make a difference. In some cases, we cannot do more without the affected country inviting the United Nations or at least abiding by the intervening efforts of the United Nations. That has not always been the case. In some notable examples that you have mentioned, United Nations forces have gone in with a military action. They have not been peacekeepers but peacemakers.
In Darfur, even in light of the peace process, there is still a great need to focus on stopping the slaughter that is taking place.
There is not only an increased awareness, but an increased engagement in countries like our own. I can only say that it is the intention of the government to continue not only to ensure that we are doing our fair share, but also to engage other countries to pick up the pace and, in some cases, make a greater contribution. It will take a monumental effort and will require the engagement in Canada of a multitude of sources, including Parliament and our citizenry. We want to ensure that other countries have access to the values that we hold dear, including, of course, democracy and the protection of human rights, things that we take for granted in this country. We have to do more to ensure that those things are accessible to the people of Africa.
Senator Mahovlich: Mr. Minister, I travelled to the middle of the Congo. The thing that caught my attention the most was the lack of infrastructure. The roads were simply terrible. Would it be possible to send road builders to Africa? Canada and the United States are noted for our good roads. Their roads are full of potholes. Thank goodness we were traveling in a four-wheel-drive vehicle.
I am not sure about providing financial and political support to those countries. Due to the corrupt politics there, the roads will never be fixed.
As well, women sometimes have to walk 20 miles for a bucket of water. It is very sad. There are many problems. It seems that construction of buildings is halted halfway through the job. It seems that everything is half done.
Are there countries in Africa that have had success and to which other countries can look to see that something has been accomplished? Is there any country there that has paid its debts and is successful, or are we just banging our heads against the wall and getting nowhere?
Mr. MacKay: Some African countries have achieved various degrees of success in areas like infrastructure. Some are more destitute than others. You referred to the construction of roads and buildings. You are correct in pinpointing that some of the basic necessities of life such as shelter and the ability to travel to gather water and food or for employment are sorely lacking. I believe that this area should receive more focus.
Much of the decision making around that type of infrastructure building is in the hands of the countries themselves, should they have departments dedicated to those areas. I have heard a great deal about the need for transportation links. The movement of goods and services to people is an area that we should be concentrating on.
Could you remind me of your question with regard to the debt of the countries?
Senator Mahovlich: I am wondering whether any African countries have paid off their debt and can be held up as an example.
Mr. MacKay: I am not aware of any countries that have completely eliminated their debt. Many countries have had their debt forgiven as a result of a concentrated effort by a number of individuals to raise awareness about this.
Senator Mahovlich: We forgive the debt because the countries cannot pay it.
Mr. MacKay: That is right, or the interest has accumulated such that the debt is growing.
Mr. Ferguson: Just last week Nigeria reached a milestone agreement with the Paris Club and multilateral institutions under which about half of its debt was forgiven. It is a question of a combination of different forms of debt relief and getting the debt down to a manageable size with respect to the country's economy.
When the Minister of International Cooperation appears before you, you may want to talk about some success stories. Tanzania, Ghana, Botswana and Mozambique have had real successes and are stories of hope. The new government is attaching much importance to aid effectiveness. Lessons have been drawn from the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness about host country ownership, the harmonization of donor actions and such issues.
Senator Mahovlich: Why does the Government of Congo not ask us to send people to teach them how to build roads rather than demanding money?
Mr. MacKay: That is a question best asked of the Government of Congo in terms of their priorities.
Senator Mahovlich: We should ask them.
Mr. MacKay: We certainly have people in this country who know how to build roads.
Senator Mahovlich: We have the best roads in the world.
Mr. MacKay: I do not know if I would go that far. I have driven over some roads in this country that could have benefited from repair. Perhaps they are that way in your riding, senator.
Senator Mahovlich: In Ontario you can drive all the way to Timmins without hitting a pothole.
Mr. MacKay: I will tell the premier that you said that.
The Chairman: That is not the case if you drive through Kingston, senator.
Mr. Minister, I want to thank you very much for your generosity with your time and for the frankness and clarity of your responses. You will understand the degree of expertise and the intense commitment on the African issue that colleagues around this table share. Canada has long participated in: peacekeeping in the Congo, democratic development in Ghana and Biafra, opposition to apartheid in South Africa, support for frontline states, work in North Africa and support for the re-emergence of democracy in Nigeria, under governments of all stripes. All of this indicates that the Canadian commitment to Africa has been, however financed, sufficiently or insufficiently over time, intergenerational and multi-partisan.
We appreciate the answers that you have given us today. They will help this committee in framing its final report and recommendations to the government and the country on next steps in Africa.
The committee adjourned.