THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, February 8, 2024
The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade met by videoconference this day at 11:31 a.m. [ET] to examine and report on Canada’s interests and engagement in Africa.
Senator Peter M. Boehm (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Good morning, honourable senators. My name is Peter Boehm. I’m a senator from Ontario and chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
Before starting, I would like to invite the committee members participating in today’s meeting to introduce themselves, starting on my left.
Senator Gerba: Amina Gerba from Quebec. Welcome.
Senator Ravalia: Welcome to you all. Mohamed Ravalia from Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator McNair: Welcome. John McNair from New Brunswick.
Senator Boniface: Gwen Boniface from Ontario.
Senator Coyle: Mary Coyle, Antigonish, Nova Scotia.
Senator M. Deacon: Welcome back. Marty Deacon, Ontario.
Senator Woo: Yuen Pau Woo from British Columbia.
The Chair: I wish to welcome all of you here and all of you across the country who may be watching us today on Senate ParlVU.
Colleagues, we are meeting to continue our special study on Canada’s interests and engagement in Africa. As during our meeting yesterday, we will focus today on international development, because we are marking International Development Week this year from February 4 to 10.
For the first part of our meeting, we are pleased to welcome, from Global Affairs Canada, Christopher MacLennan, Deputy Minister of International Development; Cheryl Urban, Assistant Deputy Minister, Sub-Saharan Africa Branch; Marcel Lebleu, Director General, West and Central Africa Bureau; Caroline Delany, Director General, Southern and Eastern Africa Bureau; and Susan Steffen, Director General, Pan-Africa Bureau.
Welcome back. I think you’ve all been here at one time or another. It’s good to have you back.
I would also like to acknowledge that Senator Cardozo from Ontario and Senator MacDonald from Nova Scotia have joined us in the process.
Before we hear your remarks and proceed to questions and answers, I wish to ask members and witnesses in the room to please refrain from leaning in too closely to your microphone or removing your earpiece when doing so. This will avoid any sound feedback or pings that could negatively impact committee staff and, of course, our interpreters who are doing their usual great job in interpreting what we say.
We will move to opening remarks, which will be followed by questions from senators.
Deputy Minister MacLennan, you have the floor.
Christopher MacLennan, Deputy Minister of International Development, Global Affairs Canada: Thank you, senator. It’s great to be back among you, particularly during International Development Week.
Thank you for the invitation to speak to you on behalf of Minister of International Development Ahmed Hussen, and happy International Development Week. The minister sends his regrets that his schedule didn’t allow for him to engage with you today. I believe he is in Regina today.
The committee’s study is timely as the department is thinking strategically about how to advance Canada’s interests through our international development engagement in Africa.
Africa’s potential is staggering. Within the next three decades, one in four people on the planet will be living in Africa. The continent will see the fastest increase globally in working-age population, with a projected net increase of 740 million people.
[Translation]
Abundant African resources are key to the green economy transition and planetary health.
Africa houses 30% of critical minerals, 60% of solar energy potential, 25% of global biodiversity and a larger carbon capture potential than the Amazon.
[English]
Of 55 African countries, 54 have signed the African Continental Free Trade Agreement, or AfCFTA, to create a free trade area of 1.3 billion people and potentially increase GDP by US$3.4 trillion over the years to come.
[Translation]
At the same time, it’s undeniable that Africa’s progress is often impeded by ongoing and complex challenges.
Under current conditions, most, if not all, of the world’s least developed countries will be in Africa as of 2030.
[English]
The deterioration of democracy, conflicts, inadequate infrastructure and unfavourable fiscal environments — coupled with unsustainably high national debts — make achieving sustainable development gains a significant challenge.
The lack of market-driven skills and employment opportunities seriously hinders the continent’s ability to benefit from its demographic dividend.
Climate change and challenges to peace and security continue to heighten vulnerabilities, particularly among women and youth, further threatening the futures of Africa’s young people.
Continuing high burdens of disease, compounded by weak health systems, mean that maternal and child mortality rates in Africa remain the highest in the world.
[Translation]
Africa needs investments to harness the potential of its natural resources, to train and upskill its dynamic youth, to develop sustainable and climate-smart infrastructure and to meet basic needs, particularly in health, education and food security.
In Africa and across the globe, Canada is and will remain a leader and trusted partner in gender equality and feminist approaches. With the Feminist International Assistance Policy, we have put gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls at the heart of our international assistance efforts. It’s the most effective way to foster a more peaceful, inclusive and prosperous world.
[English]
Canada has made a 10-year commitment to increase global health funding between 2020 and 2030, to reach an average of $1.4 billion annually by 2024. This represents Canada’s largest and longest sectoral commitment in international development assistance. In 2021-22, two thirds of these health investments were directed to sub-Saharan Africa.
[Translation]
Canada has long been committed to supporting education in Africa. Education is a human right and a key to gender equality, peace and economic prosperity. We have championed access to inclusive and equitable quality lifelong learning opportunities for girls, adolescent girls and women, especially those who live in regions affected by conflict and crises.
We’re actively listening and evolving our engagement with African countries and institutions to reflect the continent’s expressed need to redefine our long-standing relationships, while continuing to work together to address key challenges on the continent.
[English]
We are achieving meaningful results in Africa thanks to the on-the-ground presence in 18 countries, regional and multilateral programming, as well as valuable and long-standing relationships with Canadian civil society partners. You will hear from two of those important partners today: Kate Higgins of Cooperation Canada and Julie Delahanty from the International Development Research Centre, or IDRC.
The following are some examples of the impact of our development efforts. In Ghana last year, nearly 240,000 adolescent girls and boys had access to quality sexual and reproductive health services — including family planning, sexual and gender-based services — thanks to Canada’s support. When women are empowered to make decisions about when they want to have children and how many, they stay in school longer, have higher earning potential, are more resilient to food insecurity and are better able to determine their own futures.
In Kenya, we supported the participation of over 1,000 women in political leadership activities and decision making, including young women and women with disabilities, making it easier to express their needs and interests as voters, candidates, electoral administrators and party supporters.
Through Canada’s partnership with TradeMark Africa, more than 170,000 women traders and farmers have been linked to new markets and trading opportunities. Almost 23,000 women cross-border traders have shifted from informal to formal trade and are significantly increasing their sales in environments where extortion and sexual violence are no longer the norm.
Canada’s international humanitarian assistance is also a key future of our engagement in Africa. Responding to life-threatening situations on the African continent, Canada disbursed $452 million through trusted humanitarian partners in 2021-22. Humanitarian needs in the world, as in Africa, are increasing, and Canada continues to play its part.
Canada will continue to work with our partners to address the root causes of poverty and inequality in Africa and support African countries’ and institutions’ efforts to achieve sustainable development. We will engage in collaborative and innovative partnerships that build capacity and empower our African partners to address the pressing issues of high youth unemployment, gender inequality, food security and responding to the needs of their population.
I’ll end there.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. MacLennan.
Colleagues, you have up to four minutes each for the first round, which includes questions and answers. I would like to ask the senators and witnesses to be concise. We can always go to a second and perhaps a third round if we have time.
[English]
Senator McNair, you’re visiting us for the first time as an observer. You too are entitled to ask a question. Usually it’s after committee members would want to ask their questions, so you’re welcome to ask a question as well.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you for being here today. It’s greatly appreciated. You should know we had some interesting testimony yesterday.
I am thinking about a couple of things. The first one is this: On our next panel, we are going to hear from members of Cooperation Canada who have been working with Global Affairs Canada, or GAC, on a strategy to look at reinvigorating our relationship with African nations. In their document, The Future of Canada’s Engagement with Africa, they suggest engaging more with civil society in Africa when it comes to development.
In your roles, you represent the Canadian government. I suspect some governments in Africa might not be receptive to GAC engaging with organizations that may be different from or opposing some of these policies. So I’m wondering what this would look like. Would you use Canadian groups or NGOs as a sort of go-between? How are we going to work through that, ultimately?
Mr. MacLennan: One of the things that is true of our development assistance around the world is that we use multiple partners. The reason for using multiple partners is quite simply that there are a multitude of circumstances in each of the countries in which that mix of partners actually comes to the forefront in terms of how you decide what is the most effective way to deliver assistance.
There are countries within which we have fantastic partnerships. We’re very supportive of what the country’s plans are. We believe that in a democratic context, for example, we can get behind the plans that the country has, and in those circumstances we can use everything, including sector budget support, for example. Literally, we will flow money, usually through a trusted partner, directly to countries so that they can undertake the work that they’re undertaking.
In other contexts, we have to have a different partner mix.
In all of the contexts within which we work, we do recognize the importance of local actors, the importance of civil society actors, who are working at the grassroots to bring change. Those are kind of a bedrock partnership that we have in all countries. However, because of exactly the type of issue that you’re raising, there are some countries within which it’s easier to work than others, and that does require us to change the mix of partners we choose.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you for that. I’m also going to ask a question that’s in a different lane than that piece; I’m going to shift to climate and our world. Canada can certainly work with Africa not only to assist with respect to climate change’s effect on the continent, but also to discourage these emerging economies from relying on fossil fuels to fuel their growth. There is a sense of unfairness, as the Global North can be said to have been burning through fossil fuels to get to where they need to, but if a continent the size of Africa is looking for any part of that gain, the effects on the climate will be disastrous. We can’t say, “Make sure your economies are green.” We’ve got to do more than that and help with this.
What might that assistance or support look like from your end?
Mr. MacLennan: Very quickly, I’m sure we will come back to climate change. You’ve put your finger on the real difficulty. Sub-Saharan Africa, in particular, is not a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, but they are suffering from the impacts of climate change. The demands of most of our sub-Saharan African partners are very much about help in adaptation, adapting to climate change, whether it be drought, disasters caused by flooding or extreme weather events. At the same time, we all recognize that all that potential that I talked about in my opening remarks, about a burgeoning population and an economy that has the potential to grow — we want that potential to grow in a green way. It requires a mix —
The Chair: Thank you very much. I gave you a few extra seconds.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Thank you and welcome. My question is for Mr. MacLennan. You provided a good overview of Canada’s current presence and current and future engagements in Africa. It’s impressive to hear you speak, especially since we can’t see or feel this on the ground. Yesterday, witnesses called for more engagement from Canada.
Obviously, all your work in Africa seems to go unnoticed.
My question concerns the disappearance of the Canadian International Development Agency, or CIDA. CIDA was a signature brand for Canada. In the new strategy being prepared by various departments, without taking a step backward, shouldn’t Canada have some type of signature brand for economic development assistance? You said it yourself today. Africa has tremendous economic development potential. Could another type of contribution, different from CIDA’s involvement, represent a signature brand for Canada in Africa?
Mr. MacLennan: Thank you for the question.
First, CIDA folded into Global Affairs Canada 10 years ago. However, our work has never stopped. Yes, CIDA ceased to exist, but our work in Africa has never stopped. Canada has had a growing presence in Africa for a number of years. We have a visible presence. We have a development presence and we’re providing more and more assistance. Clearly, for example, the situation on the continent is evolving. We must evolve within these new parameters.
I spoke about the agreement signed by 54 of the 55 countries. This constitutes a milestone for the future of Africa. We’re working hard to find ways to join forces with the African Union to determine how to support these efforts, both directly with the lead organization, the African Union, and with the member countries.
We’re making progress. We believe that this partnership will continue. The visibility of our assistance remains an issue in Africa, the Americas, the Caribbean and Asia. We’re working hard to resolve this issue. The minister is currently participating in a cross-Canada tour to talk about all our work around the world. It’s a long-term undertaking, but we’re committed.
Senator Gerba: In the CIDA era, a Canadian investment fund was created. Would a possible solution involve making this fund visible again to companies, for example, that want to support Canada’s work in Africa?
Mr. MacLennan: This fund was a great innovation 20 years ago. Right now, we have two other mechanisms that serve more or less the same purpose. We have FinDev, a development tool for financing. This organization allocates a great deal of its financing to Africa. It focuses its efforts on other parts of the world, but also on Africa. Our department also has new tools available for the same type of thing. They aren’t advertised as Canadian investment funds for Africa, but these tools still exist.
[English]
Senator Coyle: Thank you again for being back with us. Welcome. Thank you for your work.
You’ve spoken about looking at your future directions in Africa. You’ve described some of the situation in Africa and some of the work that you’re currently doing.
Could you outline for us the Canadian government investment trends? What is going up and what is going down in terms of funds — and I don’t mean sectorally; I mean multilaterally, bilaterally and through partners — and where you think that might be going in the future? What have the trends been to date and where do you anticipate them going in the future?
Mr. MacLennan: I don’t have the specific data in front of me, but across the types of partners we use in Africa, the trends are relatively stable.
We spend a significant amount of our humanitarian budget in sub-Saharan Africa. Particularly in the humanitarian space, not surprisingly, often it is the large multilateral organizations that are best placed to respond to the needs.
In many other places, large partners — such as the United Nations Development Programme, or UNDP; the United Nations Children’s Fund, or UNICEF; and the Global Fund — are the partners that, simply due to their shape and size, are able to act at the type of scale that we want to in Africa.
I don’t know the numbers specifically for Africa, but year on year, Canadian partners, for example, receive about a quarter of all of our funding in Global Affairs Canada. That’s around the world. They serve a different purpose and act at a different scale, but they often can act at a more local level and engage directly with local partners.
The trends are relatively stable and driven largely by the scale of activities that we need to be able to fund.
Senator Coyle: My first question is whether you expect those trends to continue to be stable. Second, with the absolutely enormous humanitarian demands that are out there, what are you seeing in terms of your ability to respond to that? Are the increasing resources that are hopefully going there taking away from the development pot or any other pots that you’re dealing with in the assistance envelope?
Mr. MacLennan: I see the trends probably staying relatively stable. There may be changes from one country to another and slight changes over time, but I assume they will remain stable because they’re structurally built that way.
Your comment on humanitarian demand is exactly right. The humanitarian needs continue to grow at almost exponential rates around the world, and Africa is no different in that space. This places a tremendous pressure on most budgets for donor agencies around the world.
The way Canada is built and our budgeting works, we have been relatively lucky in the sense that additional resources, when they’ve been needed, have been additional.
Some of our European nation colleagues, for example, have a set percentage that they commit to and then that budget has to be allocated. Over the last number of years, because of Ukrainian refugees — in particular, in Europe — they’ve been forced to divert money, which comes from their official development assistance, or ODA, budgets, to other issues.
Where we have increased humanitarian assistance, it has come from the use of either our Crisis Pool, which is a permanent fixture in our budgeting system to allow us to surge when we have to, or, when that has not worked, we’ve had additional funding provided to us from the fiscal framework.
Our development assistance budget has remained stable, and we plan and build around that.
Senator Cardozo: Could you share with us your analysis of China and Russia in Africa? There is a sense that their presence is growing there and that the West’s is not as much, or is pulling back a bit.
Could you tell us about the diversity of your staff in international development? To what extent does the staff reflect the countries that we are engaging with?
Mr. MacLennan: Your first question is obviously a very detailed one.
Both Russia and China are in Africa. They are increasing their presence and their activities, probably for very different reasons.
Since May 2014, Russia has increased, and taken advantage of, the insecurity that is taking place in some African countries, particularly in the Sahel. They have used that as an opportunity to insert themselves into the political situation there.
China has been increasing its presence in Africa for a very long time. The Belt and Road Initiative is one example of that, which is largely about their interests in investments and the construction firms that they have. Some of it is state capital. Some of it is private capital — if there is private capital in communist China — but of a sort.
That has been ongoing for years, but much of it is driven by the same recognition — namely, the recognition that countries in the Global South, including sub-Saharan Africa, are global players and they’re important.
The same drivers that lead Canada to want to increase our relationship with African countries and increase our gain have, quite honestly, led Russia and China to do the same. We need to be cognizant of that, recognize that is the case and be there ourselves.
In addition to being the Deputy Minister of International Development, I’m also Canada’s sherpa for the G20. The G20 is a table at which I sit. You see on a regular basis, every day, that the interests of the Global South are now global interests. Countries like Canada have to take that seriously, up our game in these countries and increase and better our relationships in order to better understand how global issues are going to play out at the big tables.
In terms of our efforts within the department to have staff and personnel who are reflective of Canada’s diversity, I can tell you that the department has made great strides over the last couple of years. According to the Employment Equity Act groupings, our department is well above the targets that we would be looking to achieve. We’re right where we should be. There are some pockets where challenges remain, but we have a solid structure within the department to continue to ensure that we break down the barriers that may have been impeding some equity-seeking groups from taking part in Global Affairs Canada.
Senator Cardozo: Would that include at the senior levels?
Mr. MacLennan: Yes, though that is one of the places where it’s been slower. Some of that is about an aging demographic. The more senior you are, the older you are. My grey hair will ensure that you’re aware of that. You’re talking about a different demographic in terms of people in their fifties and sixties at senior levels versus people in their twenties. These are two very different demographics, and it’s something that we have to deal with.
The Chair: That sounds all too familiar. Thank you for that answer.
Senator Boniface: Thank you very much for being here again. I’d like to get a better sense from you — I think you said 18 countries are sort of individual countries. When you make your decisions around whether it’s regional, multilateral or individual countries, what do you see as Canada’s priority in Africa with respect to east-west, north-south or particular countries that you see coming forward? That’s my first question.
My second one is this: How do stability and security factor into those decisions in various parts of the country?
Mr. MacLennan: I’m going to turn it over to my colleague Cheryl.
This is a common question. One of the things that I would note is that in the world of international development assistance, these are long-term relationships that you have to build and maintain. International development does not happen in one, two or three years. It happens over generations. Many of the partners with whom we work and the projects that we are financing are three, four, five, six or even seven years long. Things change and evolve much more quickly than that on the ground, but we look to stay the course when we build relationships with countries. Sometimes that can lead to questions as to why we are in one country at this level and in another country — and they look very similar — at a lower level, and that explains some of it. I can let Cheryl talk about how we go about responding to those questions.
Cheryl Urban, Assistant Deputy Minister, Sub-Saharan Africa Branch, Global Affairs Canada: Just to build on that, yes, we have 18 programs in sub-Saharan Africa. We also have three in North Africa and two regional programs. Where we are and why is based on a combination of factors that we take into consideration. Some of it is based on an assessment of need that we undertake. Some of it is based on our capacity, our Canadian strengths and what we have to provide. Some of it is linking with Canadian priorities and interests. For example, with the Feminist International Assistance Policy and the commitments and targets we have within that. The part that the deputy was referring to was that we also have developed relationships and a historic presence on long-term development projects in certain countries, so we’re building on our past track record. That’s part of our decision making.
We do undertake on an ongoing basis an analysis of what the development issues are and how they are evolving. We’re looking at, for example, the state of democracy in countries within Africa, new and protracted conflicts — we’re doing an assessment of that — and the state of infrastructure. There are a number of key issues. Then we undertake an examination of what the Canadian strengths and interests are. Some examples would be that we have a good track record of advocating for foreign programming in gender equality and taking a feminist approach to undertaking initiatives. We have done a lot of health programming. Health is one of the primary areas in which we’ve undertaken projects in sub-Saharan Africa, as well as areas like agriculture, where Canada has a lot of its own history and is well placed to help.
Just to end on operating in countries of conflict, we’ve had to adjust our footprint. There are times when a country falls into crisis or there’s a coup and we can’t deal directly with the government, but we’re able to continue to help populations by working with trusted civil society organizations or multilateral organizations to provide basic support to the population. Then we keep diplomatic ties alive so that we can continue to provide and message the need for a return to, for example, democratic norms.
Senator Ravalia: Thank you for being here. To what extent is the current multipolar global landscape impacting our ability to tangibly engage with the African continent in a manner that is viewed as a positive, cooperative approach? Current global flashpoints are increasingly resulting in a new “us versus them” cold war and United Nations divisions. Are we getting caught in some sort of quagmire that will impact our ability to continue to develop and build on relationships that we currently have? Are we being viewed as potentially a negative force?
Mr. MacLennan: That’s a very good question. Everybody has witnessed and watched over the last three to four years the quite significant changes in the geopolitical world and the shift that we’re going through. Some people say that the old order is over but the new order hasn’t yet begun, and we’re between orders, and have asked what that might mean.
I can probably only speak to my own personal experience in this. The majority of our relationships with countries in the Global South, sub-Saharan Africa in particular, are actually quite complex and multi-faceted. There are moments when Canadian positions are obviously not shared by some of our partners.
My experience has been that sub-Saharan African countries are remarkably sophisticated, like most of our partners. They understand that there are going to be places where they’re not going to agree, and they feel open about explaining why they don’t agree with the Canadian position on something.
At the G20 table, for example, with most of the countries around the table — there is one very large exception — we’re able to actually talk about where we don’t agree and understand the positions that we have. But then there is a long list of areas we do share common perspectives on things, and one is not an impediment to having the other. There is a real importance to listening and trying to understand the positions. I know one of the questions — it’s less of a live issue now but was very much a live issue in the immediate aftermath of the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine — was how countries voted in the UN votes. There was a lot of concern about why countries we thought were democracies and supportive of Canadian and Western positions took different positions.
The important thing we’ve learned is that you need to listen and understand where those positions are coming from. It’s a part of diplomacy and the work we do at Global Affairs Canada almost every day. We fight to have those sophisticated relationships with other countries that permit us to build and still have working relationships, which are in Canada’s interests, by the way.
Senator Ravalia: Very quickly, this is a question about migration, both economic and climate related. With respect to the large number of individuals escaping the Sahel, ending up in places like Tunisia, Algeria and Libya, often in camps where human rights aren’t being observed at all, are we monitoring some of those situations and providing assistance to individuals who are in such a desperate situation?
Mr. MacLennan: Obviously, I’m not certain about specifics. It would really depend on where they’ve ended up, quite honestly, but this is an issue that we absolutely track. We have some very good partners who work very directly. The International Organization for Migration and the International Committee of the Red Cross are very active in dealing with migration issues, and they are partners we use. In those circumstances where people unfortunately end up in large refugee camps, obviously that enters into our humanitarian space. The issues themselves are growing, changing and dynamic. They require us to constantly assess what the proper response is.
Senator Woo: Good afternoon. Going back to the question of visibility, can you give us a sense of where Canada ranks? Not to fetishize ranks, but how does Canada compare with our peer groups in terms of international assistance to Africa, staying away from quality and just sharing quantity? Again, I want to stress that recognition and visibility should not be the only measure of our contribution, but I want to get a sense of where we rank.
Mr. MacLennan: I agree that rankings are worth what they’re worth. We have rankings for overall spending. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD, maintains that, and it’s statistical rankings. Canada is one of the larger donors in terms of actual sums of money. I believe Canada is ranked somewhere between eighth and ninth in the world in terms of total amounts. Percentages are ranked differently, obviously, and percentages versus GDP are ranked differently as well.
Comparing within geographical regions is much more difficult. This is because different donor agencies have different priorities. For example, Norway, which is a very large donor, prioritizes Africa. Many European countries, such as Italy, prioritize Africa. They do not have a big presence in either the Indo-Pacific or the Americas.
Canada is probably much more like the U.K. and the United States in the sense that our geographic distribution is a bit wider, so it’s difficult to say the ranking.
That being said, sub-Saharan Africa represents our single largest investment in terms of geographic presence. It is the one that we recognize. The trend lines clearly demonstrate that the majority of the poorest countries in the world will be in sub-Saharan Africa. The needs in terms of poverty alleviation are going to drive all donors to work in sub-Saharan Africa.
Where that becomes a bit shifted is on the question of where you need to act on climate change, because that doesn’t necessarily align perfectly with levels of poverty, and where you need to react with questions of humanitarian assistance, which is again sometimes driven by climate issues themselves but also sometimes driven by conflict. Therefore, that is a driver that changes the geographical distribution for all donors, and for Canada in particular.
Senator Woo: Do you agree with the proposition that was advanced yesterday that, at least in relative terms, our visibility — and, more importantly, the recognition of our contributions in Africa — has declined over the years?
Mr. MacLennan: I’ve not experienced that. It is one person’s impression over another’s. The fact that the government has made a determined effort over the last two years to increase our game in the Indo-Pacific gives the impression that we’ve stopped doing things elsewhere. That’s absolutely not true.
In the Caribbean, for example, we are a very active partner. We always have been and we will continue to be. The importance of Small Island Developing States is critical to the question of responding properly to climate change, but it hasn’t been what we’ve kind of trumpeted over the last couple of years because we’ve been devoting a great deal of effort to the priority of the Indo-Pacific — for very good reasons.
Sometimes there are those elements of relative visibility at any point in time, but when I travel in Africa, I have not noticed any difference in the way I’ve been received, for example.
Senator MacDonald: Mr. MacLennan, it’s good to see you again. Looking at the numbers, 46 of the 54 countries are low-income or lower-to-middle-income countries. Am I right to assume that Nigeria would not be one of them? Would that be correct?
I’m curious. We’re allocating funding, and there’s so much to do in sub-Saharan Africa. We’re giving $152 million to Nigeria, which is a significant oil-producing nation. Why would we be giving them that much money when other countries who may need it more are apparently not getting it?
Mr. MacLennan: I don’t know if Nigeria is a middle-income country or not. I don’t have that in front of me. I do know that the majority of our funding that’s getting to Nigeria is through multilateral organizations. That is driven in large part by the sheer size of the population. Nigeria has a huge population.
For example, when we work with an organization like the Global Fund to Fight Malaria, Tuberculosis and HIV, their support is based on the level of need. The larger the population, the larger the level of need, and the larger amounts of money that are required. It’s a lower-to-middle-income country. I don’t know exactly what that means.
Your point is important, though: There is a difference between the types of programming and the types of efforts we need to undertake based on what the country’s development status is.
In sub-Saharan Africa, the majority of the countries are low-income countries, which means you’re looking at more traditional types of development assistance where we use grants, work with local partners and address the most pressing needs first: health, education, food and agriculture.
As you move up the chain — and Nigeria, largely because of oil, is moving up that chain — different tools become more available to you in terms of what the right balance of supports is. My assumption is that with Nigeria, it’s driven by the sheer size of the population.
Senator MacDonald: The free trade agreement started in 2018. How much traction does it have? Is it making a difference?
Mr. MacLennan: That’s a great question. I’m going to hand it over to someone who knows the details.
Ms. Urban: I believe you are referring to the African Continental Free Trade Area. We have been supportive of this and think it has tremendous potential. It’s getting off the ground. A number of countries recently ratified and see the potential for inter-African trade — especially its impact on women, because a large percentage of inter-African trade is done by women traders.
There are projections in terms of how the AfCFTA will have an impact on economic growth and business. It’s expected to increase the GDP by US$3.4 trillion once it’s more fully implemented. There are 47 out of 54 potential signatories. Essentially, the AfCFTA is eliminating tariffs, and this will have a beneficial impact.
Canada is working in supporting the AfCFTA Secretariat and sees this as a key piece of the puzzle. It may also help in terms of increasing Canadian investment into the African continent, which will help with economic growth because you would have a better trading environment.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We’ve come to the end of round one and I’m going to use my privilege as chair to ask a question.
I know that all of you have read the report of this committee on the Foreign Service that was issued at the end of last year. In our report, we tried to grapple with the issue of the generalist versus the specialist in terms of the work that is undertaken.
My question is very simple. If you are interested in international development, does that make you a specialist? Can you pursue a career as a development specialist through the entire system?
Mr. MacLennan: It’s a simple question that will not receive a simple answer.
The short answer is yes. Young Global Affairs Canada recruits who are passionate and trained to work in the field of international development can have a narrow path if they want to and focus explicitly on development assistance, working with partners and in postings abroad. We have about 160 posts abroad that are dedicated to international assistance.
There was mention of the Canadian International Development Agency, or CIDA. It’s no longer within a development that does nothing but development assistance. If you were a young recruit and went to CIDA, if you had a desire to do anything other than development assistance, you would be in the wrong place. You would have to leave that department.
The advantage we have with Global Affairs Canada is that you can, if you want, have a narrowly focused career and stay in development assistance. There are ways to do that. But in a world in which developing countries are no longer shunted aside or in a separate category but, rather, are global players at the same tables, I would argue that the skill set we need to expand across the department is understanding the development challenges of countries we face across tables like this — that that’s where they’re sitting and that’s their perspective on the world.
I think the development staff at Global Affairs Canada have done remarkably well when they have ventured out into foreign and security policy teams or done things such as consular services. They understand developing country contexts. It’s a great benefit to the department and, quite honestly, to the government.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I won’t use my full four minutes because I’m conscious of my colleagues’ wish to ask more questions. We have about eight minutes left. So, make your questions really punchy, and I would say the same to our witnesses in terms of response.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Yesterday, one of our witnesses said that Canada needs Africa more than ever. He was specifically referring to the potential for technology transfer in areas as vital as infrastructure.
As you know, the African Development Bank has launched a program called The High 5s. Canada is one of its key financial partners. Does the strategy being prepared include a special section for implementing the African Development Bank’s five objectives? The objectives are to feed Africa, light up Africa, integrate Africa, improve living conditions for the people of Africa and industrialize Africa.
Mr. MacLennan: Simply put, the African Development Bank must play a pivotal role in investment and development in Africa. Canada is one of the bank’s major financial backers. The bank is one of the leading regional development banks in the world. It’s also one of the most innovative banks. We use it in a number of places, and we support it.
The bank’s role is simply too significant and vital. It must play a part in our future development assistance.
[English]
Senator Coyle: We’ve been talking about trends and a little bit about climate change and responses to climate change. You’ve mentioned investments to help countries with adaptation. We’ve heard about loss and damage, and we know that Canada is on the loss and damage side of things as well. We’ve heard about the refugee situation. What about investments in industries in Africa? Where is Canada on renewables there or anything else related to African interests in their own industries in the green sector?
Mr. MacLennan: As I mentioned in response to one of Senator Gerba’s questions, since 2018 we’ve had a couple of new tools to enable us to act in that space of what’s called “blended finance.” These are private sector activities that you’re talking about. How do you find ways to drive investment into those sectors that we — and African countries themselves — would like to see developed?
Access to energy is critical for development. That just goes without saying. Now, we want that to be as green as possible, and therefore, driving money into those sectors, you need certain types of tools. Our development finance institution, along with some of the tools we have within the department, have enabled us to do some interesting projects — I think one is in Kenya, if memory serves correctly — that have enabled us to actually act in that space.
Now, it is difficult. First of all, getting and blending finance means you’re actually driving private sector finance in. In many parts of Africa, unfortunately, as a result of the political situation and the stability that’s required to drive large investors for long periods of time — because a return on investment takes time — it’s difficult. We continue to try to find ways to do that, most often acting at a smaller scale. We work directly, for example, with credit unions and financing mechanisms for, for example, women entrepreneurs. We continue to try to find those kinds of up-the-stream opportunities to the best of our ability.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Cardozo: To continue the conversation that my colleagues Senators Gerba and Coyle have started, could you give us more information on how we move the whole discussion about Canada-Africa relations from one of aid to economic interaction and trade? I wonder if you could give us more examples in that area, such as helping investors here to find suitable places to invest in Africa and so forth.
Senator M. Deacon: Just a quick comment in the vein of the last few senators’, our report is to examine and report on Canada’s interests and engagement. Yesterday, it felt like Canada was not in the game in some respects, and today, it feels like we need to up our game. So I want to really understand those specifics of things that we can be doing and really taking a deeper look at the study that helps us be strong in that game.
The Chair: What a way to end it.
Mr. MacLennan: I’ll make two quick comments. First, you have to look at the short-to-medium term and understand what it looks like. To Senator MacDonald’s point, many countries in Africa are still going to require basic development assistance as they work along the path to address the needs of women and girls, to address their health and education needs. The future in Africa still has a predominant part, in terms of what Canada — and the Government of Canada, I should probably say — can bring, that will rest on traditional development assistance. That’s for the short-to-medium term.
At the same time, the long term is actually now on the horizon. You can see it. A lot will have to take place. Support for things like governance is critical. Stability, security and governance will be critical in the Africa of the future, if you want to drive the type of large-scale investment that is needed for infrastructure and all types of economic development needs that you have.
In the meantime, what some countries like Canada can do is work at smaller scales with those innovative financing tools. We need to get better at working in difficult places, and we’ve been doing that over the past five years. Quite honestly, we have some interesting results and places it didn’t work, but we’re learning. Over time, as countries move up that scale, you’re going to see a shift in terms of the preponderance of the types of tools that we’re using and the types of financing that we want to rely on, similar to the way it’s worked in other parts of the world.
The Chair: Thank you. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank our witnesses: Christopher MacLennan, Marcel Lebleu, Cheryl Urban, Caroline Delany and Susan Steffen in the back for joining us today. It was a rich discussion. We appreciate what you’re doing. Certainly, your testimony has helped our deliberations.
For our second panel, we are pleased to welcome, from Cooperation Canada, Kate Higgins, Chief Executive Officer; and Carelle Mang-Benza, Policy Lead. From the International Development Research Centre, we’re fortunate to have with us today, Julie Delahanty, President; and Marie-Gloriose Ingabire, Regional Director, West and Central Africa, who is joining us by video conference from Senegal.
[Translation]
Welcome and thank you for being with us. We’re now ready to hear your opening remarks, which will be followed by questions from senators.
Kate Higgins, Chief Executive Officer, Cooperation Canada: Thank you and good afternoon. Cooperation Canada is an independent national coalition of over 100 Canadian international development and humanitarian organizations working together to inspire programs, policies and partnerships for a safer, fairer and more sustainable world. Our members have partnerships and extensive experience on the African continent. We’re honoured to have the opportunity to share some thoughts with you today.
[English]
You heard yesterday from our colleagues at ONE, from Cuso International and, today, from Global Affairs Canada, who have spoken on responding to the development financing gaps in Africa, the huge potential of the continent, the enormous humanitarian needs and the reach and impact of Canadian development assistance.
Today, my colleague Carelle and I would like to build on these interventions by focusing our remarks on two specific points: first, the importance of investing in and supporting civil society; and second, the importance of policy coherence in Canada’s engagement with Africa.
Civil society plays a key role in driving change, seeking justice and building democracy. Economic development does not equate to nor automatically result in better social outcomes for people. A strong civil society is a formidable force for holding governments to account and ensuring positive social change.
In Africa, civil society is growing in size and complexity. It is broad. It is diverse. It is a heterogeneous ecosystem. Its importance and role cannot be ignored or undermined. However, according to a recent report by CIVICUS, civic space in Africa is under increasing threat, with the intimidation of civil society documented in at least 23 countries.
Canadian organizations have rich and long-standing relationships with African civil society partners. Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy has enabled the deepening of some of those partnerships, particularly with women’s rights organizations and feminist movements.
We would encourage any strategy or framework on Canada-African relations to lean into these partnerships, supporting African civil society partners in the driver’s seat as they chart their priorities for their communities, countries and continent.
Investing in and supporting civil society is one of the surest ways to sustain and protect economic and social development gains and secure peace and democracy.
Let me pass it on to my colleague Carelle to discuss the importance of policy coherence in Canada’s engagement with Africa.
Carelle Mang-Benza, Policy Lead, Cooperation Canada: Thank you, Kate. Senators, thank you for the invitation.
[Translation]
When it comes to policy consistency, any strategy and engagement between Canada and Africa must involve a consistent approach. Consistency means deliberately and collaboratively linking any development strategy to the Feminist International Assistance Policy and to all aspects of Canada’s foreign policy — diplomacy, trade, investment, defence and, of course, development. The development aspects mustn’t be overlooked. Without them, economic and security gains simply won’t come to fruition. This involves and requires investment, in particular to maintain ongoing and predictable international assistance.
Consistency also means taking into account the changing world and the changing African continent, the partner being discussed today. A key question is the following. How does Canada decide to engage in Africa? Is it as an ally, partner or lecturer? If we’re serious about the regional engagement in this development strategy, we’ll need to look critically — and probably somewhat uncomfortably — at when, if and how we decide to engage not only in Africa, but with Africa. This includes how we discuss in global forums issues such as debt relief, tax fairness, domestic resource mobilization, the effectiveness of cooperative interventions and all the other structural issues that still, unfortunately, constitute the root causes of unequal, unjust and non-inclusive development.
Thank you for your attention. We look forward to your questions.
Julie Delahanty, President, International Development Research Centre: I’m pleased to be here today. Thank you for the invitation to speak to you.
I’m Julie Delahanty. I’m the president of the International Development Research Centre, or IDRC. Its mission is to encourage research and innovation in low-income and middle-income countries. IDRC allocates over half its budget to Africa — an Africa with a growing economy and increasing geopolitical significance for the future.
My colleagues at Global Affairs Canada and Cooperation Canada, with whom we work closely, highlighted the intersecting crises on the continent that threaten Africa’s stability and prosperity.
[English]
It’s against this backdrop and with scarce resources that the ability to innovate, adapt and generate solutions becomes all the more critical. If Africa is truly to be the continent of the future, then local knowledge, strengthened capacity and research designed for real-world impact will make it happen.
Here’s how Canada, through IDRC, is helping to make that African future a reality: First, local knowledge. IDRC believes that those closest to a challenge are best placed to find innovative solutions. Technical expertise is made even stronger when informed by a feminist approach and the experiences of affected communities. This combined knowledge can unlock solutions for local contexts.
We can see this in action with respect to climate change. Research from IDRC-supported African climate scientists is informing national and local adaptation strategies and making them more attuned to local needs.
On the global stage, where knowledge from affected communities is woefully under-represented, we are seeing Africa have a much stronger presence — for example, in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Inclusive, community-engaged research can help address climate change’s distinct impacts on women. IDRC-supported researchers are engaging pastoralists in East Africa on better drought forecasting and gender-sensitive climate action plans addressing specific needs of men, women and youth. Local actors and local solutions are needed to address global crises.
Second, strengthened capacity. Strong African institutions and individual talent lay the foundation for innovation. By strengthening African science systems and research centres and investing in individual capacities, Canada — through IDRC — is helping to enable an innovative and resilient Africa.
These capacity investments have knock-on impacts in several sectors, such as health, food security and governance, but are especially important in emerging fields such as artificial intelligence, or AI. IDRC is funding responsible AI for development labs across Africa, building centres of expertise while training the next generation of AI innovators. Africa is building capabilities now to tackle future AI challenges responsibly and ethically.
Third, closing the gap between knowledge and impact. IDRC supports great science rooted in localized, applied and impact-driven research. By ensuring that research is designed with policy change and action in mind, decision makers, civil society and the private sector all get the evidence that they need to effect positive change at scale.
For example, IDRC-supported research is informing cost-effective public investments. In Ethiopia, our partners tested a community-based child care model, one that enhances early childhood development while empowering women to find employment. This research is now informing the city of Addis Ababa as it plans to open 1,000 child care centres over the next three years.
[Translation]
Lastly, Canada’s approach to working with Africa is significant, not only for Africa, but also for our own national interests and for future global partnerships. IDRC works directly with African institutions and establishments. We work alongside our partners and build networks of specialists and leaders with ties to Canada.
Let me close by reminding you that investment in innovation and research can be a highly strategic way to support advances for Africa’s future and pay long-term dividends for Canada.
[English]
By supporting local knowledge, strengthening capacities and advancing research with real-world impact, Canada is making smart investments in a strong relationship with this growing continent.
Thank you.
Senator Ravalia: Ms. Delahanty, what role is the IDRC playing in facilitating partnerships between Canadian researchers and institutions and their counterparts in Africa, and how does this collaboration contribute to mutual learning and knowledge exchange?
For context, some of the key learnings for us about COVID actually came from the South African Institute of Medical Research, particularly with respect to COVID variants. I would be keen to hear what your feelings are about that. Thank you.
Ms. Delahanty: Thank you so much for the question, senator.
We do have significant programming where we work with the many elements of the Canadian research ecosystem, so with the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, or SSHRC; the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, or NSERC; and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, or CIHR. In those, we collaborate with Canadian researchers working together with researchers from the Global South. We do have a number of programs where we build those relationships between Canadian institutions and research institutions in Africa.
The main mandate for IDRC is to support research and researchers in the Global South. The majority of our research is primarily supporting research in the Global South and particularly, in this case, in Africa.
One of the things we’re really focused on is supporting the research ecosystem. One of our big projects is the Science Granting Councils Initiative project which provides support to the organizations like ones in Canada. We have NSERC and SSHRC. Those types of institutions exist in Africa, but they tend to be weaker. So we’re trying to support those so that they can build their own policy frameworks and provide support to their own researchers based directly on the needs of Africa.
When it comes to our connection — you mentioned the work with South Africa — of course that has spinoff benefits as well for Canada, which I’m happy to speak about.
Senator Ravalia: Has this process catalyzed the opportunity for Africa to become more self-sufficient in things such as vaccines, antimicrobials and advanced therapeutics?
Ms. Delahanty: We have been supporting, for example, the Ebola vaccine. We worked with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. That is an organization that was supported here. We have been working with institutions throughout Africa to ensure that we’re able to test those new vaccines.
When it comes to the manufacturing of vaccines, I would ask my colleague Marie-Gloriose if she has any information about that. I’m not sure whether we’re working directly on manufacturing, but I can find out.
[Translation]
Marie-Gloriose Ingabire, Regional Director, Central and West Africa, International Development Research Centre: Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the committee. I wanted to add that the IDRC mainly works on building the capacity of our partners on the ground. As Julie said, the Ebola vaccine, for instance, involved capacity building in the region in particular. The pandemic emerged in the West Africa region.
For example, we have partners in Guinea, Senegal and Mali. The scientific capacity also extends beyond vaccine manufacturing, with the aim of understanding what conditions are necessary for the process to work.
We support many projects. For example, the African Union’s plans for vaccine production on the continent include a project to look at what manufacturing capacities and regulatory framework must be implemented for vaccine production, but also at why people don’t use the vaccines produced.
A range of aspects must be considered.
Senator Gerba: My question is for Ms. Mang-Benza. I gather from your comments that Canada needs a consistent approach to development in Africa. In your opinion, what objectives could ensure that Canada takes a consistent approach?
From a broader perspective, when it comes to defining these objectives, should civil society be consulted more closely? How should civil society be supported in Africa?
Ms. Mang-Benza: Thank you for your question. In our opinion, consistency is key. It helps connect the various facets that Canada displays abroad, in this case in Africa. That way, we don’t have one Canada for trade, another Canada for defence and another Canada for development and international cooperation.
For this integrated and collaborative definition of the different facets and of what should constitute a facet of Canada, civil society makes a key contribution. Both in Canada and on the African continent, civil society has already shown its capacity for innovation, for partnerships that challenge business as usual and for types of partnerships that amplify voices that aren’t always heard on major platforms. Among the hundred or so members of Cooperation Canada and the non-members with whom we’re speaking, we have a wealth of experience spanning a number of decades. This helps keep us informed of developments, discussions, changes and progress, and shows us how the continent is evolving. As a result, it would be a mistake to exclude civil society from the definition of this strategy. This would sideline players that have a great deal to say and contribute and that have vital experience on the ground.
Senator Gerba: In light of your comments, are there models abroad of this type of consistency, or of an institution where people talk to each other, work together and have the same goal? What would be your recommendations, based on what you see in other parts of the world?
Ms. Mang-Benza: There is no perfect model. I believe we have a superb platform in Canada, which is the Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP). This policy was developed with considerable input from civil society. This approach, extended to a regional strategy, is a good start. Without necessarily wanting to imitate what other countries are doing, I believe there are examples we can draw inspiration from, even in what we’ve done here to develop the FIAP. Why not take up or imitate this approach and develop a policy that wouldn’t necessarily be consensual, but that would bring several types of players around the table?
We recently had the opportunity, with Global Affairs Canada, to engage civil society, but also players from the trade and diplomacy sector around the Indo-Pacific Strategy. This is an example of civil society involvement. The difference with the Indo-Pacific Strategy is that we did it after the development, i.e., barely two weeks ago. We have the opportunity, for the regional strategy with Africa, to do it quite early, to ensure that the final product reflects not only 21st century Canada, but also 21st century Africa.
[English]
Senator Woo: Good afternoon. There’s an undercurrent in our discussions, more yesterday than today, that Canada needs to compete more effectively in our international assistance to Africa and do a better job relative to other countries. I’m not saying you adopt that view, but it strikes me that the right attitude should be about how we cooperate with other countries that are providing assistance as well. How do we have better “donor coordination,” to use the term?
Because you don’t represent the government quite as narrowly as our previous witnesses, I would like to ask you this: Can you tell us about efforts to coordinate with other donor agencies? I’m not thinking so much about the traditional ones but the new donors. Here we can set aside China if you want, but the Korea International Cooperation Agency, or KOICA, is more and more active, the Japan International Cooperation Agency, or JICA, is very active and Southeast Asian aid agencies have a presence in Africa. India is there as well. Can you comment on that, please?
Ms. Delahanty: Thank you so much for the question. I agree with you that it’s really important to see ourselves as working alongside and in partnership with our colleagues throughout Africa and the South.
In terms of collaboration, I can only speak to IDRC’s collaboration with other donors, and they are vast and wide. We have significant partnerships with the U.K. government, in particular with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, or FCDO. We work with a number of other donors, such as the Dutch, the — I can’t remember all of them, but a lot of the usual suspects. In addition, we also work with many foundations, such as the Hewlett Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. I’d have to look to my colleagues for help with some of the others, but we work broadly with many of our other donor colleagues based on the kind of work that we’re doing and the reputation of Canada and IDRC in some of the work that we’re doing. I think our deep networks in the South are what attract other donors to the kind of work that we’re doing and our relationships with our southern partners.
We do have a very strong relationship. We coordinate closely in many instances and in many different areas, mainly related to our thematic area.
Senator Woo: What about the non-usual suspects, such as donors from the Global South and the new donor community? It strikes me that the African development challenge, to the extent that it’s analogous to previous experiences, would have a lot more to learn from Asia than the Industrial Revolution of the European experience or even the North American experience.
What efforts is IDRC making to work with researchers and experts from KOICA, JICA, Southeast Asia and so on?
Ms. Delahanty: We work with researchers from all over the world. If they’re in another donor organization, probably not so much, but we certainly work with researchers from all over the world in some of the teams that we create, teams that are working, from both northern and southern organizations. Mostly our work is very focused on building capacity and working with southern organizations. We’re not so much working with other donor agencies other than through a partnership where we’re supporting some institutions in the Global South together.
Senator Woo: Did you want to comment, Ms. Higgins?
Ms. Higgins: Sure. I’m happy to add to what Julie talked about with respect to the amazing work of IDRC.
We at Cooperation Canada are the umbrella for Canadian international development and humanitarian organizations, but we work very closely with what we call our sister coalitions around the world. That is not just “the usual suspects,” as you phrased it — although there is a lot that we can learn from working with and learning from colleagues in some of those countries — but also our sister coalitions and networks around the world. These are absolutely on the African continent through our sister coalitions that are part of what is called the Forus network, which is a global network of organizations like Cooperation Canada that work together to coordinate.
My colleague Carelle can speak in a little more detail about the leadership role she has been playing in what is called the Civil Society 7, acknowledging that is the G7 countries, but there is a lot of work that she’s been doing working with our sister coalitions in G7 countries, including some amazing leadership that she took in Japan at the last G7. I think there is a lot that we can learn from that coordination.
The last thing I would say and that we haven’t really touched on yet is that we are absolutely reckoning, as Canadian international development organizations, with what our role in this global ecosystem is. Power is shifting. Resources need to be moving to the places where they’re most needed, and that includes for civil society organizations. So we’re really reflecting on how we can best contribute to this global ecosystem.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We’ll come back to Ms. Mang-Benza later because I will have a question on G7 and what you’re doing in preparation for 2025, which is coming up, and that’s our year.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you all for being here today. I’m going to pursue a question that I also brought up yesterday. This is for Cooperation Canada. In the document that you distributed, The Future of Canada’s Engagement with Africa, your second principle is to support African feminist leadership, which includes members of the LGBTQ2+ community.
Many African governments are not necessarily friendly with LGBTQ2+ rights, and I’m wondering how Canada can best promote the rights of these marginalized groups without being seen as — “condescending” is too strong a word, maybe “talking down” — but instead being seen as working together and on an equal footing.
Ms. Mang-Benza: The feminist principle is important because, at its core, it’s about respecting rights, but it’s also about empowerment. It’s allowing those who are affected to speak for themselves and not to speak about them without them. That is essential, and that’s why it was laid out as a principle of engagement.
What you said is equally important because what we do not want to do, as I mentioned earlier, is engage with any continent as a taskmaster or lesson-giver or with an “I know better” approach. To come back to our point, this is why engaging with civil society is so important, because it allows the civil society actors of each country to define what their society should look like. It’s not for Canada’s civil society to define or dictate how civil society or the society in another country should be or become, but by working with civil society partners there, we can ensure that the voices that they represent and the needs they express can be leveraged and heard. It’s not to bring or parachute in any agenda to any country but really to make sure that civil society is healthy, which means that a diversity of voices is part of that civil society.
Senator Coyle: Thank you very much to our witnesses. I’m so proud that you’re here. I was on both of your boards at one time and know about your good work, but I’m really tuned in to who you are today, not who you were back then. You’re so much more advanced and sophisticated than when I was on your board. Congratulations on that.
I appreciated what you said, Ms. Mang-Benza, about what we’re studying here and your little nudge that we’re not just looking at Canada engaging in Africa, but with Africa. I think that’s a really important thing for us to keep in mind. As you said, Ms. Higgins, African civil society organizations need to be in the driver’s seat. I know countries working in development have always talked about the countries being in the driver’s seat, that’s old talk, but civil society organizations who are representing the grassroots also need to be in the driver’s seat. I think those are important.
I’d like to know one thing from Cooperation Canada: Do you have a map of Canadian players engaging with their African counterparts? Is there something that could show us what that whole ecosystem looks like? That’s the question for you. How would we get at that?
For Ms. Delahanty, even though I know you’ve moved on and continue to do fantastic things, we don’t hear about IDRC as much anymore. I’m wondering why that is. How is the relationship with the Government of Canada? I know your money comes from it — well, not exclusively. In fact, there was a big diversification effort back when I was on the board, and I’m glad to hear it’s continuing. How is the relationship between IDRC and the Government of Canada? What does the flow of funds to you look like? What are the trends there? Is there anything we need to know about?
Ms. Higgins: Thank you so much, Senator Coyle. Over the last year, we have done a better job of mapping where our members are engaging on the African continent and the types of work that they’re doing. Over the next year, we’re hoping to really drill down even further and identify who those specific partners are. Obviously, our 100 members have a lot of clarity on who their partners are, but for us to be able to roll that up a bit more is interesting.
If you’ll allow me to say something else very briefly, we’re also doing our very best to coordinate in Canada in our engagement. For example, we’ve been having interesting conversations with IDRC, including our colleague joining us here today, about how those research and civil society partnerships on the African continent can better support each other, lift each other up and amplify that really important work. Watch this space, but I’m very happy to share with you the information that we have to date.
Senator Coyle: Thank you.
Ms. Delahanty: Thank you so much. In terms of why we’re not known so well in Canada, I don’t think any international development organization is super well known in Canada. I think our reputation in the Global South, though, remains very strong. When you go anywhere, when they talk about Canada, they talk about IDRC. That was my experience. I’ve only been at IDRC for six months, but that was certainly my experience in the recent past.
We have been really working on thinking through how we’re going to increase our relevance in Canada and how to be more relevant in letting people know about the kind of work that we’re doing. It is on our radar that we have dropped in relevance in Canada, and we’re working on that pretty hard.
In terms of our relationship with the Government of Canada, we have very strong synergies with Global Affairs Canada. We work together with them on policy tables, but we also have programming that we work on together with them, in particular when there’s an identified priority need where GAC needs greater research and evidence. For example, we’ve worked with them on supporting research and evidence around care innovations in Africa and around the world. We have a very strong relationship not only with GAC, but we also work with Agriculture Canada and Environment and Climate Change Canada, or ECCC. We work very much within the research ecosystem in Canada, the tri-council agencies, the universities, et cetera. Essentially, we’re all working together to make sure we have a stronger role for Canada in Africa.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Cardozo: My question relates to economic development and is for Ms. Mang-Benza. You talked about engagement with Africa; regarding the Civil Society 7 (C7) Group, are you talking about development for Africa and trade between Canada — or Western countries — and Africa?
Ms. Mang-Benza: The C7 has no geographical priority; it accompanies the G7 process at each presidency by examining the impact, role and importance of the G7 in a connected world. So, without having a particular focus on any one continent, what the C7 puts forward is rather how G7 countries can and should use their influence to address certain global issues.
When you read the C7 communiqués, year after year, they focus more on structural issues. Last year, I believe, at the 2023 C7, the group went even further than in previous years to put forward systemic issues and the role and responsibilities of G7 countries regarding structural aspects; these perpetuate problems and challenges in national taxation or revenue generation, or in climate or economic justice. The C7 has no mandate to focus on specific countries. Although the C7 sometimes appears as a reference in communiqués, with certain examples, this is not its mandate.
Senator Cardozo: Do you have any recommendations for increasing trade between Canada and Africa?
Ms. Mang-Benza: Within the C7, this would not be the type of recommendation that would be made.
Senator Cardozo: The question is for you.
Ms. Mang-Benza: At Cooperation Canada?
Senator Cardozo: Yes.
[English]
Ms. Higgins: Many of our members do focus on economic development in the countries in Africa that they’re partnering with. That is around agriculture. That might be around trade. That might be around ensuring that, for example, women entrepreneurs have access to finance. A number of our members are doing a lot of interesting work on blended finance and innovative finance — how to kind of harness the private sector. There is a good collection of work that our members are doing to bolster and drive inclusive economic development in Africa.
Our mandate, really, is a development and humanitarian mandate, but we are absolutely acknowledging the important role that economic development — inclusive economic development — plays.
Senator Cardozo: It was just a point about us changing our approach to Africa — that we see it not just as a relationship of aid but also of economic development. I think the two slide into each other sometimes.
Ms. Mang-Benza: I have another point to add to what Kate said. Inclusive trade is what makes a difference. Many of our members are emphasizing inclusive trade rather than trade as usual.
Senator Cardozo: What does that term mean?
The Chair: Thank you, but we’re past time.
Senator Cardozo: I’ll come back to that.
Senator Boniface: Since my one question has been asked, I’ll let you answer the question on what inclusive trade is.
Ms. Mang-Benza: Inclusive trade is about equity. It is about a two-way relationship that benefits every party involved. It’s about looking at who’s allowed to trade and the conditions of each party in the trade agreement — the trade relationship — what they get and give out. If the winner is always on the same side, it is not inclusive trade.
Senator Boniface: Thank you. My other question was for Ms. Delahanty. It was interesting that you made some reference to AI in terms of developing research capacity and so on. Are you doing work with agencies in Africa on disinformation and misinformation? If so, can you tell me what that means? Because that will have a lot to do with the future of governance and such.
Ms. Delahanty: Thanks. That’s a wonderful question. One of the pillars of our work is around democratic and inclusive governance. In that work, we do significant work around things like the closing of civic space and ending disinformation and misinformation, including through another part of our program, which is really the artificial intelligence element of the program and analyzing that.
I can certainly send you more information about some of those specific programs, because they are fascinating. However, I think the main point I would make is that it’s really about understanding what the local context is when it comes to that kind of misinformation and disinformation and how we’re working with local partners and local research institutions to try to address that.
Senator Boniface: Thank you. My next question is to Cooperation Canada. Looking to the future and the intersection between security and development, where do you see priorities being set for the work you do?
Ms. Higgins: I can start briefly and then maybe Carelle can build on it.
It’s a really important question. Without getting too technical, a number of our members have been reflecting a lot on the changing nature of the context that we work in, where humanitarian crises are much more protracted than they were decades ago and where the intersection between security and development is very profound.
Some of the work we’ve been trying to push is called triple nexus programming. This is where you’re connecting humanitarian, development and peace — or security — programming. To be really frank, one of the challenges we have is that our current aid system, including the international assistance system in Canada, is not well built or equipped to respond in those circumstances. That is something that we’re really trying to push. How can we change the mechanics of how we deliver international development assistance to better respond to the realities on the ground, where humanitarian development and security needs are all overlapping? We need to have better tools to enable us to respond in that context.
The Chair: Thank you.
We’re about to go to round two, but I wanted to ask a question. Really, it’s for Ms. Mang-Benza.
In your response to Senator Cardozo’s question, you mentioned the Civil 7, or C7. Over the years of my involvement in G7 processes, I always felt this was something that Canada brought to the table — the need to consult with civil society and not just have it as a box-ticking exercise. Frankly, in the G7 context, that was a little bit difficult because even among G7 countries, there are different levels of engagement with civil society.
As Canada ramps up to be the G7 president in 2025 and host a series of meetings, including with all of the engagement groups, such as the C7, I’m wondering — as Ms. Higgins mentioned earlier — whether the success that you have had in engaging with Japan in the last presidency and perhaps with Italy in the current one has borne fruit and whether, in the context of Africa, civil society organizations are reaching out to their sister and brother organizations in Africa and whether something could be made of that.
Also, are you prepared — a lot of questions here, sorry — to take that further in terms of your engagement with the federal government?
Ms. Mang-Benza: Absolutely. I would say yes, yes, yes to all your questions.
To give more detail, the beauty of the C7 is that it’s not just seven. It’s seven and beyond. One thing that has become a staple — a standard — within the C7 is to reach out to a wide range of civil society actors from all continents. It’s not just to bring them to the summit and to discuss, but it’s also to bring them within the steering committees.
As a civil society representative of Canada, we sit on the steering committee of the C7. Since last year, along with the Japanese colleagues, the steering committee has had within it civil society actors from other, non-G7 places. That makes a difference. Why? Because it ensures that the final communiqué delivered by Civil 7 reflects the world as it is and the global majority that is not from G7 countries. It makes a big difference in the tone, the wording and even in the quality of the recommendations.
However, it comes with a challenge. It’s something we’re considering as we’ve started discussing 2025 with our members. The challenge is how to avoid releasing a soup of priorities that is so long that no country can do anything with it — because it’s everything and everywhere and nothing at the same time. That challenge is something we’ll have to take into account as we progress toward our presidency. It’s something we also heard a few months ago. We had our own event to prepare slowly toward 2025. It’s something we are hearing from the Sherpa Office also, “Don’t give us a list that is two miles long because we won’t be able to do anything with it.”
The other point with respect to having diversity within C7 — the other thing that it brings us — is the realization that the G7 space has legitimacy but has no guaranteed legitimacy because other spaces are booming. We are able to hear that because we have that wide range of partners involved in the steering committee.
I might have left aside one part of your question.
The Chair: I’ve actually run out of time. I’m sorry. I know my colleagues will reward me for that. We can and will come back to that. We’re going to go into round two. I have a couple of senators who have signed up. More can, of course. I just want to remind everyone that we also have Ms. Ingabire joining us from Africa, from Senegal, and I don’t want her to feel lonely either, in terms of questions that we might be asking her.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: My question is for everyone, including Ms. Ingabire. I’d like to come back to the question previously asked of Global Affairs Canada, which was reiterated by Senator Woo.
Yesterday, two witnesses told us that Canada must have a greater presence in Africa and stop falling behind other powers, particularly in terms of development.
How would you explain this widespread feeling, rightly or wrongly, that Canada has not taken note of the current and future importance of Africa’s role in world affairs, and is not emerging as a more important partner on the continent? The question is for everyone.
Ms. Delahanty: We’ll start with Ms. Ingabire.
Ms. Ingabire: Thank you for the question. I have observed practically the reverse, in terms of West Africa and Central Africa, at least in the context of our work at IDRC.
I see much more appreciation and recognition of what Canada is doing, not only to build capacity, but also to consolidate its networks already in place, whether with researchers or with communities concerned with the institutionalization of evidence in decision-making.
On the continental front, we mentioned that we work with non-traditional partners. Indeed, as part of our work, we support this south-south partnership, as is the case for example with the National Research Foundation of South Africa, which helps us as part of the granting councils initiative. I’d like to emphasize the importance of these researchers and of this collaboration with Canadians.
It’s a collaboration that has grown stronger, and we can see that very clearly. Most of them have very special ties with Canada, either because they studied here, or because of these exchanges, including with the African diaspora in Canada. In our context, I would say that everything related to research and innovation and the support that Canada provides is very important. It’s well recognized by the people we meet both individually and institutionally.
[English]
Senator Coyle: That is a lot of food for thought. Returning to this point on Canada’s interests in and engagement with Africa and that being so much more, frankly, than the organizations that are represented here or the panel we had before us, I’d love to hear both of you speak about the broader example of, for instance, the human network that you’re engaged with, with IDRC, the Canadian human network and those in Africa who have been trained in Canada, and that big asset that we should be exploring further, IDRC.
In the case of Cooperation Canada, there are millions of Canadians who are supporting those hundreds of organizations that, in a whole variety of ways, are your members. We tend to forget — we always think of government assistance, but I know, as somebody who has received government assistance over the years, that was just a slice of the support we got from foundations, individuals and others who were very engaged with Africa.
Is there a way for us to get a bigger picture of the people, the engagement, the financial resources that are there that aren’t always visible?
Ms. Higgins: Sure. I can start by answering your question and then I’ll pass it to Julie.
Thanks so much for mentioning that. We talk about millions of Canadians who are supporting Canadian international and global leadership as people who donate, volunteer, advocate, write letters, speak to MPs and really engage. We’re seeking to do a better job of quantifying and mapping that, to be honest, because it is really significant and goes far beyond just government funding.
Senator Coyle: Exactly.
Ms. Higgins: It’s also very pan-Canadian and is not just in big metropolitan centres, but absolutely in rural areas and communities. As I look at the diversity of senators we have here, I think you will know in your provinces and territories that you have tens of thousands and absolutely millions of Canadians who are supporting this work. Quantifying that is really important and understanding it is super important.
To build a little on the comment from the senator, our members do feel we need a more coordinated regional effort and engagement in Africa and that, as Deputy Minister MacLennan mentioned earlier, maybe the focus on the Indo-Pacific region and strategy has given the impression of less of a focus on our regional engagement. I do think this study and some of the work that the Government of Canada is looking at is a really important opportunity for us to engage in those people-to-people partnerships and really think about the continent of Africa as a region that we need to partner with, collaborate with and build strong partnerships with.
Senator Coyle: And engage more Canadians.
Ms. Higgins: Absolutely.
Ms. Delahanty: Thank you so much for that question. Obviously, the very mandate of IDRC is to support researchers and research capacity in the Global South. There are 50 years of network-building, having individual researchers but also, more importantly, having research institutions that we have enduring and long-term relationships with. Many of the people we’ve supported over the years are now heads of state in many cases. We have such deep relationships with all those organizations. We continue to have those. We continue to use them in ways that provide us with advice and opportunities to give evidence, to be leaders, to have all those kinds of connections that we have with them.
Also, the work that we do with those institutions oftentimes comes back to Canada. In the example we heard earlier, IDRC supported the surveillance system in South Africa to locate new variants. That is what first identified Omicron, which is why it was called the “South Africa variant” in the beginning. That research and the analysis that was done was used by the Ontario government during the Omicron crisis in order to support policy-making in Canada. It’s a swirling pool of relationships that are really built on the fact that we are supporting capacity-building and local knowledge and local development in the South in particular.
The Chair: Thank you very much. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank Julie Delahanty, Kate Higgins, Carelle Mang-Benza and Marie-Gloriose Ingabire for your presentations today and the answers that you gave to our penetrating questions. We’ve all been enriched as a result. Thank you very much. We might have you back later as we further refine our study on Canada’s engagement in Africa.
Thank you. With that, colleagues, our meeting is adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)