Since the official announcement that Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs will merge with the Canadian International Development Agency, there has been little from ministers or even the Prime Minister in the way of illumination or even rhetoric about this topic.

There is, however, plenty in the way of opining from pundits and the aid industry. There appear to be two main schools of thought. The first is that with austerity in fashion, this merger is a smart strategy to bring efficiency and effectiveness to the process of delivering foreign aid. The second is a lament for Canada’s role in the international community and this opinion is often supplemented by Canada’s recent loss of its seat at the UN Security Council. Critics also cite Canada’s dismal failure to reach the call for “developed” countries to budget 0.7 per cent of GNI for Official Development Assistance. (It is now declining and sits at about 0.31 per cent, while the U.K. has managed to reach this goal.)

What we also know, because government always moves like a glacier, is that the merger is ongoing and it will be awhile before the dust settles and we can begin to assess the impact. However, this week, we received a small clue about the “Harper Government’s” foreign aid strategy. Foreign Affairs Minister Julian Fantino delivered a speech to the Canadian International Council on June 21. Most of the speech highlighted the changing global environment: many low income countries are transitioning to middle income countries and the population of youth globally is exploding- nearly half the world’s population is under 25 and the majority live in developing nations.

With this reality in mind, the Harper government sees both a need and opportunity for more jobs, so its foreign aid strategy is focusing on the economy. I give you an excerpt now from the speech, not so much for the information, but for the language:

The new Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development will further strengthen the effectiveness of our assistance. We will do this by:

combining the expertise of the two departments;
increasing our policy coherence on key issues;
placing development issues on an equal footing with trade and diplomacy; and
enshrining in law for the first time the mandate for development assistance and the role and responsibilities of the minister of international development.

These changes will make us more responsive to the new realities before us. And they will allow us to use the best set of tools available to address each country’s individual challenges and goals.

A by-product of this strategy is an increased focus on the private sector. The “Harper Government” (HG) has again attracted controversy for involving the private sector in its “extractive” efforts (mostly mining initiatives). But with its priority being “accountability and transparency,” the HG appears satisfied with involving the private sector.

The speech also focused, of course, on the HG’s successes, and by all accounts, it seems that its concentration on maternal and child health has paid off:

Our investments in health, nutrition, education, and child protection are making significant gains. In 2010, Prime Minister Harper led a G8 initiative to improve maternal, newborn, and child health in the developing world. The goal of the Muskoka Initiative is to prevent the deaths of as many as 64,000 mothers and 1.3 million children under the age of five.

Globally, Canada’s support has helped to enroll 23 million more children in primary schools, construct more than 37,000 classrooms, and train more than 400,000 teachers. Sadly, throughout their childhood, many children—particularly girls—face the risk of violence, abuse, and exploitation. As a former police officer, this is an issue particularly close to my heart.

What interested me most, in the speech, however, comes towards the end, when Minister Fantino refers to the question that apparently many people ask about Canada’s role in international foreign aid. Why should we care? Why should we give our hard-earned tax dollars to people in far-away countries? The HG’s answer? I give you the full answer now, because there is a lot to ponder:

It matters because, as the saying goes, no man is an island, and Canada is a compassionate neighbour.

Challenges in other countries affect our investments, our health, the price of our food and gas, our security, and our opportunities to trade with other countries.

Similarly, Canada’s investments abroad protect our interests here at home. When we help other countries advance their economies, we create the conditions for growth, trade, and development. When we help countries stabilize and secure their societies, we stop the aftershocks of violence, criminal activity, and terrorism from spilling onto our shores.

When we provide millions of people with access to health care and vaccinations, we all become more resilient to global pandemics. Development is an integral part of our government’s efforts to promote a more secure and prosperous world. It is my hope that in 50 years, there won’t be any need for development assistance.

It is my hope that we can collectively establish a world where every person is healthy and has enough nutritious food to eat and clean water to drink. A world where every child has the opportunity to go to school. And where every person can get a decent job, support their family, and contribute to their community and country. A world where every person can participate fully in society, free from violence, discrimination, exploitation, and abuse.

In other words, if I can ensure that my grandchildren’s children won’t need to live in a world where poverty is endemic, then we will have done our jobs.

A nice balance between altruism and self-interest perhaps?