response to
CIDA Policy Paper: "Strengthening Aid Effectiveness"
from
Primate's World Relief and Development Fund network
of the Anglican Diocese of Fredericton
Fredericton, N.B.
September 5, 2001
My name is David Watts and I want to
thank you for the opportunity to respond to this report. I am the diocesan co-ordinator
for the network of volunteers in the Anglican Diocese of Fredericton for the Primate's
World Relief and Development Fund, or PWRDF. You will hear from our national office later
in your round of sessions, but we wanted you to hear from those of us who are grass-roots
supporters.
Our diocese consists of eighty-eight parishes throughout the province of New Brunswick.
Through participation in PWRDF, the diocese and its active members numbering over 34,000,
have been active and dedicated supporters of the federal government's commitment to
delivering international aid for the past four decades. As a part of the national network
of PWRDF, our diocese has donated tens of thousands of dollars to development programs in
the most disadvantaged and deserving areas of the world. The Primate's Fund network in our
diocese is grateful for the relationship that PWRDF and the federal government through
CIDA, has enjoyed for more than thirty years.
The CIDA report states that "poverty reduction is at the heart of development
efforts." While we agree that efforts dealing with poverty in the world are of utmost
importance, we are concerned that this comment may be too simplistic. It is our opinion
that there are other factors that must be faced as well.
There is the need to support the human rights of people through indigenous citizen groups,
that will at the same time respect the cultural differences inherent in the lives of these
people. We are concerned that the focus of poverty, as demonstrated by multinational trade
and economic agencies, makes possible a response to poverty at the expense of other
important factors which allow people the ability to control their economic destiny.
We are concerned by the determination to bring developing countries into international
trading communities. It is our belief that this may lead to the impression that any given
country's or society's health can be evaluated solely by its economic status. We do not
believe this is an accurate measurement, nor wish our country to adopt such a view.
While it may be true that reducing poverty is the 'overriding concern' of the governments
of many developing countries, equality among its citizens and their access to the
formation and implementation of social change is of equal importance. The attempt to
engage developing countries in a trade-based international system can be a recipe for
de-culturalization and the beginning of a new set of inequalities leading to a post-modern
poverty which we in the North know quite well already.
The report's remarks about the deterioration of the global environment, appears to lay
blame for this deterioration on the status of developing countries. We have two concerns:
1. It denies the fact that much of the world's environmental problems are caused directly
by the industrialization of the countries of the North. 2. It forgets the fact that the
situations of high population growth and unsustainable development in countries of the
South, which are listed in the paper as contributing factors to this degradation, are
attributable to the previous relationships these countries were encouraged to maintain
with the North.
It is true that our own prosperity, based as it is on global trade, will be put in
jeopardy if the condition of poverty in developing countries continues, but more
importantly, the moral imperative is and ought to be the sole reason for "doing
development". We perceive an implied shift in mandate from one based on moral
principles to one based on trade as the motivation for development support. In that
regard, we feel that the concept of 'tied' aid should be re-evaluated to reduce or
eliminate the restrictions that such a policy places on development. From our experience
with PWRDF-supported projects, it is our belief that a shift to a more trade-based
approach could have negative implications for the very people we are trying to help.
We are concerned that the term "constructive engagement" is used as a buzz-word
that implies "to bring developing countries into a trade-based global economy" -
something we oppose as we work towards sustainable development .
The report offers a long list of successes resulting from the efforts to date of Canada's
international development work, achievements such as: a reduction in infant mortality
rates, an improvement in sustainable agriculture, an increase in adult literacy, etc. We
congratulate CIDA for the work it has supported and our diocese is proud of the part we
have played in this success through our relationship with CIDA.
CIDA's report comments on the increased awareness over the past years fostered by UN
conferences to bring more attention to human rights, gender equality, and other
socially-based factors. We believe that these facets of a holistic society must continue
to form a large part of the basis for project evaluation. They must not lose their profile
while new policies focus on a more trade-based approach. The PWRDF network in New
Brunswick continues to support the efforts of CIDA, through its policy directives, to
confront situations of inequality based on gender. The Primate's Fund's own policy is
consistent with this view. We look forward to the day when such inequalities will be
overcome and can be eliminated as goals to be achieved through development aid. Until such
time however, we are grateful to CIDA for maintaining this principle.
We are pleased that CIDA will continue relationships with civil-society organizations in
developing countries. We feel it is possible that civil-society groups may find themselves
without a voice in their own governments' policy creation, either due to a lack of access,
or because they are in opposition to the administration. Without such input, many civil
organizations are at a disadvantage. CIDA's development aid must be provided with the
broadest participation possible of these areas of society, while working closely with
governments in bilateral efforts to close such gaps. The Primate's Fund has always worked
to ensure that 'local ownership' is present when supporting and evaluating any program it
approves. We commend CIDA for including this principle in its policy statement.
In the proposed policy initiative, CIDA accepts the World Bank's 'Year 2000 Development
Report', in which three points are featured: 1/ empowering people to shape decisions
affecting their own lives, 2/ an improved security against disease, violence, economic
inequality, etc. 3/ increased and improved access to the marketplace. The PWRDF network of
the Diocese of Fredericton accepts the final point only because we have faith that CIDA
will be able to maintain the spirit of the first two.
Another of CIDA's new objectives concerns 'results-based evaluation'. We feel very
strongly that such assessment must be based on results as understood by the recipients
themselves and that the donors' understanding of 'results' must remain subordinate.
CIDA notes that in order to create a climate for democratization, it is sometimes
necessary to confront the prevailing political conditions. PWRDF has a history of
accommodating projects that aim to empower people to deal with these issues, and we
applaud CIDA for its continued recognition of the value of this type of project. As noted
above, we believe that development aid must be made available with ALL of society in mind,
especially where the record has shown resources and social tools have not been forthcoming
from the recipient government.
We do not believe that an increased visibility of Canada's contribution is a necessary
objective of any development project support. The effectiveness and success of the project
should be the primary goal. However public reporting in Canada could be useful in
establishing a means for including NGOs in policy making, and a vehicle for informing
Canadians about what is being done with their own money. An increase in field presence
should NOT take place at the expense of the level of donor aid already established. Any
increase in the use of local expertise would be welcome, in our view, and would further
establish the concept of local ownership. At the same time, CIDA should make greater use
of partner NGO's both Canadian and overseas in evaluating proposals and assessing the
value of delivered aid.
As for the question of reducing or not, the number of sector areas, it is our view that
CIDA should continue to be as broad as possible in offering and providing support for any
and all worthwhile projects. We fear that a narrowing of scope will provide an open door
for the interests of the industrialized North to further establish 'trade-only'
relationships in those countries which are in the most desperate need for real social
development.
We feel that CIDA could undertake to work toward a more efficient delivery of humanitarian
aid and long-term development so long as the recipient country's cultural status is not
compromised. As well, we prefer that in the future CIDA would unilaterally "untie 100
percent of its non-food aid to all developing countries". Any desire on the part of
CIDA to establish offices of bilateral presence could be effective, but as we've stated
previously, it is our expectation that CIDA's efforts will not threaten cultural
sovereignty. We hope that all contributions by CIDA officers would be offered only in
response to a request from the local partners.
We are concerned about moving toward more private-sector development programming. We want
to be assured that CIDA efforts, on behalf of all Canadians, will be free from the
exclusive rationale of inspiring an improvement in Canadian trade and industry.
It is important that Canadians support the international development aid work of CIDA. As
the report indicates, "... Canadians support development cooperation for one simple
reason: they believe it is the right thing to do..." We ask that CIDA keep this in
mind in all its decision-making and policy-writing activities. Projects must not be
evaluated and approved chiefly on their ability to support Canadian trade.
In the matter of Canada's goal in relation to international aid, we note although that
there has been an increase in the past year in CIDA's budgeted development assistance, the
goal of 0.7% GNP has not yet been reached. We call on the government to work to achieve
that level. It is absolutely essential that we do as much as possible in providing aid to
countries where recent Structural Adjustment Programs and other constraints have eroded
the effectiveness of the aid we have already provided.
Finally, although it is not the mandate of CIDA or this report, we suggest that if Canada
is to continue to have status and credibility on the world's stage in the area of 'aid',
it is necessary to improve the relationship between our government and the aboriginal
peoples of Canada. It is clear to us that any support for Canada's development aid
internationally is at risk if compared to the lack of social, economic and political
development of our own First Nations.
Once again, thank you for this opportunity.
David Watts
PWRDF Co-ordinator, Diocese of Fredericton