Does Canada Deserve a Place at the Table?

As International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda sits down with her G8 colleagues to discuss development, Canada's international reputation is not what it once was.

When Canada’s International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda takes her seat at the table with her G8 colleagues in Halifax this week, how will they view Canada?

Will they remember Canada as a country whose international policies and programs on women’s equality in the 1980s and 1990s were on the leading edge of international practice? Or will they be more focused on the government’s vacillation on whether to include family planning services, contraception, and access to safe abortions in Canada’s G8 “Signature Project,” the Maternal and Child Health Initiative?

They know that these services are essential for effective programs that will save women and children’s lives, and would be in accordance with the practices of other G8 members. No doubt they will note that in hewing a conservative line on these issues, the government has drawn international criticism and made maternal and child health a divisive issue in Canada rather than one of social justice and good health for the world’s poorest women.

Perhaps they will be thinking about the volume of Canadian Overseas Development Assistance (ODA). Some may remember that it was Lester Pearson who recommended the aid target of 0.7 per cent of GNP, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1970. But more likely they will note that in 2010, Canadian ODA sits at 0.33 per cent, making us one of the least generous of OECD DAC donors. Other countries have managed to maintain their aid performance despite having to deal with more serious impacts from the global financial crisis than we have. Three G8 countries, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, have all committed to achieving 0.7 per cent of GNI on or before 2015. Canada has no such plan. Instead, the government announced a freeze on aid in its March budget statement, in spite of our new commitments to reconstruction in Haiti, the announcements on maternal and child health care, and the Copenhagen fund on climate change.

The G8 development ministers will certainly be aware that Canada announced its intention to withdraw from several poorer African countries and that our government plans to support wealthier countries in Latin America where Canada has strong commercial interests. They may also have heard from their African colleagues that despite relationships that go back decades, African officials heard about the Canadian decision from the newspaper.

The Copenhagen climate change conference in December 2009 may be fresher in the development ministers’ memories. In the lead-up to Copenhagen, Canada came under intense international criticism for its low level of ambition, coupled with its insistence that developing countries take on near-term commitments that most see as unrealistic or unfair. Canada was accused of obstructing the climate change negotiations, and has now been downgraded to a bit player, if not an opponent of change. British journalist George Monbiot scolded Canada for its “wrecking tactics” leading up to the conference, saying that “Stephen Harper and Jim Prentice threaten to do as much damage to your [Canada’s] international standing as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney did to that of the United States.”

Canada is a "global leader and continuously demonstrates this by honouring its international commitments," says the government’s budget statement, but that is not likely what the other ministers are thinking.

Canada once earned a place at the G8 and the G20 by adding real value at the United Nations, by promoting human rights and peacekeeping, by fighting against apartheid and landmines, by taking a principled stand on international issues, and by championing gender equality and the plight of Africa in our development assistance programs.

Now Canada’s foreign policy is an embarrassment. A partisan agenda that cannot be advanced domestically in a minority parliament is being implemented internationally. That agenda includes the suppression of discussion about human rights, promoting an opportunistic Middle East policy, turning our backs on much of Africa, cutting our aid budget, backsliding on gender equality, and lapsing on environmental issues.

Perhaps the development ministers are wondering whether Canada even deserves a place at the table, much less the position of chair.