Globe editorial Searching for CIDA From Wednesday's Globe and Mail January 23, 2008 at 6:29 AM EST The question mark still hangs over the Canadian International Development Agency. Talk to CIDA, and you will hear all manner of good things about the work it is contributing to in Afghanistan -- more wells, better roads, greater literacy, reduced child mortality. But those who seek a clearer idea of what it can actually put its name to from the $1.2-billion Canada has pledged in Afghan aid between 2002 and 2011 are left exasperated. Last summer, the international Senlis Council asked whether millions of dollars in aid was spent as CIDA intended. Yesterday, Senate defence committee chair Colin Kenny told CBC Radio that trying to get straight answers from CIDA is like grasping at air, and that when committee members went to Kandahar to see projects for which Canada could claim credit, and to ask village elders whether such projects were of value to them, the word from Ottawa was invariably that it was too dangerous to go into the field. Yesterday's report from the panel led by former foreign minister John Manley makes the same point. CIDA staffers themselves have trouble visiting sites in Kandahar because CIDA's headquarters in Canada won't let them for security reasons. The panel urges CIDA to let the officials in Kandahar assess the risks. "It makes little sense to post brave and talented professional staff to Kandahar only to restrict them from making regular contact with the people they are expected to help." As for the achievements of which CIDA boasts, it has to trust others for most of those. It spends less than 15 per cent of its money directly, for "locally managed quick-action projects" that immediately improve everyday life for Afghans or for projects readily identifiable as supported by Canada. The rest goes to multilateral agencies such as the Red Cross or to programs run by the Afghan government. The reality is that CIDA must take much of what those groups do on faith -- the wisdom and efficiency of the spending, or the amount that actually reaches intended recipients. If CIDA cannot get more heavily involved, or better investigate the projects it is funding, it might as well just pop a cheque into the mail. The Manley panel urges CIDA to direct more of its energy to projects of direct benefit to the Afghan people, such as a hospital or major irrigation project "identified with Canada and led by Canadians." Related Articles Recent Analysis: PM asked for advice, but can he afford to follow it? Ottawa must dictate terms to NATO, panel says Experts comment on the report's recommendations 'It's an indescribably poor country' Slain soldiers' families support call to stay Globe editorial: Demand the help of NATO partners Jeffrey Simpson: A game of chicken with NATO Christie Blatchford: The full, bloody truth Roland Paris: A call for stronger Canadian leadership Internet Links Full text: The complete report by the panel Canada's mission: Globe stories, photos, interactives, tributes to The Fallen Beyond that, as the panel says, the government should "conduct a full-scale review of the performance of the Canadian civilian aid program." Some things are too important to be taken on faith. Recommend this article? Hubert LeBlanc, consultant
Forum