Effective, Efficient Diplomatic Funding

There has been hand-wringing over many decisions on cost-cutting related to the recent federal budget brought down in the House of Commons by the Conservative-led Government of Canada.  Pundits,  opposition critics and former employees of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade have slammed the government for advising DFAIT it must engage in deep cost-cutting.

It is true that countries must be able to rely on a well-functioning, internationally respected diplomatic corps to represent their nation's interests abroad.  And Canada is interested in expanding its sphere of influence internationally.  Not that it hasn't always had that agenda, including the importance of supporting trade and export to other countries of the world, along with assisting in the immigration procurement process.

And of course there is the cultural, academic, artistic element involved, the need to aid those elements of Canada's thriving arts and academic communities in their search for a broader, appreciative audience to reflect Canada's values and talents.  There is much to be done on an ongoing basis by the country's Department of Foreign Affairs.  Much has been invested in the past, and will continue to be in the future, to advance Canada's profile among her world peers.

The current financial retrenching, apart from being a response to the global economic recession, also represents in part a bid to rein in accelerating expenses, not always geared to producing a better outcome, but reflecting the manner in which programs, not necessarily closely watched, can gain momentum, and could use a careful scalpel from time to time to achieve certain efficiencies.

It has been bruited about that some of the residences abroad owned and sustained by the federal government for the purpose of housing embassy and consulate staff could be sold off to save operating expenses.  To do so might not make good sense to the onlooker unless it has also been planned to have fewer staff stationed abroad, and this too has been recommended; the closing of some consulates requiring fewer staff.

While heads of mission do have a need to be installed in well-presented and maintained official residences, they need not quite be as opulent as some currently are.  There should be a recognized threshold for extravagant living and entertaining.  The simple reality is that many staff sent abroad will not deign to live in the housing owned by government to which they have been assigned.

They turn down residences that are well maintained and superior in size and quality to comparable residences in Canada, claiming they are not suitable to their entertaining and diplomacy requirements, forcing an issue where it is finally agreed to rent more sumptuous quarters, while maintaining that cost and also the cost of maintaining an empty, rejected residence until the next diplomat comes along who may be more agreeable to living there.

And, with respect to the chopping of some privileges relating to expenses, it is past time that was reviewed, as well.  There are many items that are claimed by diplomats abroad that do not quite fall into the permissible areas of reclaiming expenses.  Some diplomats see nothing askance in sending in monthly expense claims that include dry cleaning, take-out coffee, highway or bridge tolls - along with clothing claimed as legitimate expenses related to entertaining.

No claims too expensive to be entertained, none too minuscule to be repaid.  Even those at missions who do not actively engage in entertaining, are able to claim these expenses. But then, what these diplomats do is vitally important to Canada's interests in the pursuit of placing Canada front and centre in the regard of the international community.  And to do this, diplomats must be - well, diplomatic.  Which is to say aware of themselves.

And not all those whom DFAIT sends out to foreign destinations to represent Canada are schooled and disciplined in restraining their own egos.  Many are excellent at what they do, but by no means do they represent the majority.  Some of whom are downright contemptible and condescending toward those among whom they circulate in the function of their professional duties.

And this includes being in public, driving vehicles readily enough recognized for what they represent, thanks to their identifying licenses, and committing illegal highway traffic acts, impulsively and without regard to how they appear.  In fact, some even going out of their way to provoke other drivers, and on occasion, traffic police of the country in which they are stationed.  Diplomatic immunity is both reassuring and ego-enhancing.

So it doesn't hurt one iota for an elite government department like Foreign Affairs to have a good, hard introspective look at itself, its duties and its ability to pursue the agenda that the government sets for them.  Including paring back costs, and determining what is essential to prosecute Canada's case as a respected member of the international community.