McLeod Group Blog

Being Back Demands a More Fit-for-Purpose GAC

Being Back Demands a More Fit-for-Purpose GAC

McLeod Group blog, November 19, 2018

This year, the theme of the Canadian Council for International Co-operation’s annual conference was “Is Canada Back? Delivering on Good Intentions”. A confident community of civil society organizations (CSOs) felt now was the time to challenge the Trudeau government on how well it was delivering on its promises.

The concern is that bold words were not being turned into pro-poor, gender-sensitive implementation. A much strengthened effort is needed for effective programming on Canada’s two bold and complementary agendas: the UN Agenda 2030 with its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and International Development Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau’s Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP).

However, “walking the talk” has not been a strongpoint for Global Affairs Canada (GAC). It is still struggling to swallow the more delivery-focused Canadian International Development Agency, having already sacrificed the latter’s international identity and lost key professional competences in the digestion process.

What was the McLeod Group contribution to the conference? The title of our session was “Building a Fit for Purpose GAC”. Our panel comprised moderator Ted Jackson and four panellists: John Sinclair, Hunter McGill, Diana Rivington and Kirsten Van Houten. Each panellist presented a distinct sub-theme, summarized below, while exposing complementary perspectives. Audience and panellists came together in parallel freewheeling discussions on how Canada can improve its game in each of these areas:

1. Stronger and more inclusive partnerships

Canada needs to improve its capacity to work with partners in developing countries to become fit for purpose. Programmatically, we need bolder steps attuned to the much evolved status and capabilities of those countries, including more decentralization, more delegated authority, less hierarchy, more trust and, not least, more financial predictability. Some in the audience felt new approaches were now working, but promises are not outcomes.

However, as a middle-power donor, we first need to rebuild trusting partnerships with a compatible array of developing countries. The trust that comes with such partnerships can also serve as the foundation for potential future Canadian economic and political partners. To this end, we should diversify our relationships with the United States and other traditional Western partners by being open to adding, over the next decade or so, strong links with emerging economies such as Ghana, Bangladesh and Ethiopia, in the Global South.

2. Key messages from the OECD peer review of Canada

The recent peer review of Canada by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Development Assistance Committee (OECD/DAC) recognized that the FIAP will now set the overall direction for Canada’s development cooperation on gender equality and women’s empowerment. But operational and programming guidance on how to meet these goals is largely missing in current policy. The DAC noted the challenge of reconciling present approaches to bilateral programming with the principle of partner ownership, where performance indicators are declining.

While noting Canada’s strong humanitarian aid performance (22% of official development assistance, ODA), the DAC highlighted the declining overall proportion of ODA to gross national income (GNI) since the last peer review in 2012. The report urged the Canadian government to set an ambitious target for ODA/GNI to support delivery of FIAP and our Agenda 2030 commitments.

3. Canada’s failings in adopting key international human rights agreements

Canada’s human rights record was recently evaluated by the UN Human Rights Council and found to be seriously flawed. Two examples from a long list are Canada’s failure to sign the convention against torture and key international agreements on the rights of migrants. Operationalizing the proposed new Ombudsman for Business and Human Rights would signal that Canada is trying to move forward rather than just being back. Continued failure is certainly not a good advertisement for our candidacy for a UN Security Council seat.

4. Gender Equality as a major programing priority

The Trudeau government’s adoption of FIAP has exposed important lacunas in both knowledge and skills. Most of this is due to cumulative neglect of human resources and expertise in recent years in an institutionally fragmented GAC. FIAP might be a political high priority but without new knowledge capacities, the Department’s goals will not be delivered, leading to frustrated partners and reputational risks. Action is needed to rebuild these capacities, with a focus on operational skills, or bringing them in through consultancies or academic linkages (with appropriate resources attached).

The panel’s essential message was that without a new burst of action, Canada will be hard-pressed to succeed in meeting its key development goals. Ambitious, well-intentioned “talk” matched by some limited “walking” does not constitute “fit for purpose”. It will not convince important partners, developed and developing alike, in a fast-changing world that Canada is “back”.