International Trade Committee on Nov. 24th, 2009

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

It was from the unions' NGO website. They are official documents. I have all of them that I downloaded from their website. I have them cited in the paper.

Which unions and NGOs have I met? Unfortunately, it has been only in the U.S. Two weeks ago I met with Human Rights Watch's Washington office for Latin America and eight NGOs. They were very open to discuss this. They were very open to discuss this with figures, with data, with evidence.

I think it's very important that we take seriously the evidence that the unions' NGO has produced. If they have any concern about my study and want to criticize the data that I used, then let's do it on formal grounds.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Again, I would like to explain that it is quite normal for Quebeckers to call into question a study's findings.

Professor Mejía, in your presentation, you mentioned Colombia's justice system on several occasions. I would like to know more about this system. I would imagine that for every homicide, there is a murderer.

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

This is not in my study. Many NGOs that I have talked to ask me, what's the natural question after this study? I agree with them that the natural question after this study is about impunity.

Let me go to your question now. After 2006 the number of cases of killings of union members actually investigated by the judicial system was almost zero. In 2006 or 2007 the Fiscalía General de la Nación, which is the judicial system in Colombia, created a special unit, and this special unit was in charge of solving very quickly the cases of killings of union members. So it's a special unit for a specific group in the population. I think this is a very important response from an independent entity of the government to solve the issue of impunity.

As someone said before, things are not going to be solved over time. It's impossible to solve the 2,000 and 3,000 killings of union members over one month. But if you look at the tendency of cases solved, you see a huge spike in the number of cases that are being investigated by the Fiscalía in Colombia. Some of them have been solved. Some of them say it was a targeted killing. Some of them say it was a passion crime. Some of them say it was a street fight or a bar fight. It is very important that we clear this out, that we know who was responsible for the murder, and that we punish those who committed the murder, even if it was a street fight or a targeted killing in Colombia. It's not only for union members, but in general. I think it is very important that the judicial system operate more efficiently and faster.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you.

Mr. Holder.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you very much, and I'd like to thank our guests today. I think the testimony you provide is very thoughtful and very helpful in this discussion.

Through you, Mr. Chair, I think Mr. Guimond is correct. I don't think challenging research is ever a bad thing. I think that's a healthy dialogue, and hopefully it gets us to the truth. I believe the issue, even with us, with limited time, is aggressively criticizing the data without the opportunity for someone to respond. So I appreciate that you've had a chance to do that.

I have some questions. I'd like to gear them, though, to Mr. Rosero, because I find his comments helpful and thoughtful.

As I do this, I'm compelled by a few things. It's my understanding, never having visited Colombia, that violence has seemingly decreased, including mass killings, which have decreased by over 80%. Trade union murders have decreased significantly, and I pray to God that's true. Kidnappings have decreased over the last number of years. Homicide rates have dropped dramatically.

These things strike me. Moderate poverty has fallen and extreme poverty has fallen again--again from some of the research I've done. I think Colombia can be a model for education in many countries in the world: 94% of the population have their basic education and 31% are in higher education. I think those are very important things.

The level of unemployment in Colombia is 11.3%, and there are some countries that would be delighted with those kinds of numbers. I will tell you that our numbers aren't that far different in this country.

We've also provided significant aid, through CIDA particularly.

Perhaps, Mr. Rosero, with our limited time...I have some very brief questions. Not to be silly, but could I ask you this sincerely, sir: do you believe that Canada is a friend of the Colombian people? I ask that as a sincere question, Señor Rosero.

[Carlos Rosero]

I think so.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Okay.

[Carlos Rosero]

In this particular case, friendship does imply certain rules, and finally this is what we are asking for. There are rules, democratic rules, and we believe that friendship with the Colombian people, and particularly with African Colombians and indigenous peoples, could be a longer-lasting friendship.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I'm glad to hear that you believe in rules, because part of what we're trying to put in place is a rules-based system to treat everyone fairly.

When we talk about the labour cooperation agreement, Mr. Rosero, I'm struck by the fact that, again, the intention.... Perhaps I'll quote from the ILO conference in June of this year, the 98th session, where the ILO committee on the application of standards expressed “appreciation for the positive steps of the government of Colombia to combat violence and impunity to expedite the union registration process and transfer the government's authority to determine the validity of strikes to the judicial system”. I'm sure you're aware of that already.

I have a couple of simple questions. First, to your comment on rules being a good thing, do you accept that a rules-based agreement is better than a free trade agreement with no rules at all with respect to labour standards?

[Carlos Rosero]

Yes, but I'd like to openly talk about other issues. Many of the debates we've had focused on labour issues and on the figures, but they didn't deal with other issues.

My understanding is that in the particular case of Canada, there are very strong mining interests. I think there are issues that could be addressed. Black people and indigenous people in Colombia--we own our lands. That's recognized by the constitution. In several cases, we have preferential rights when it comes to using these natural resources in our territories.

We would actually like to talk very directly, frankly, and openly about this, and not fit things in very general terms into the other issues or other agendas.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you.

I think I heard you say, just on that point, that you would like more participation and discussion. From your perspective, I understand that.

Could you imagine, then, that this free trade agreement being in place would improve Colombia's economy and the standard of living for Colombians? I'd like to get a brief yes or no. What's your best sense of that, please?

[Carlos Rosero]

Because of the way in which it's been drafted or developed, without the participation of our peoples or of our communities, we doubt that our particular rights will be guaranteed. This is why we want to repeat that one of the possibilities for us to see if this would actually benefit us would be to carry out a human rights impact study. It would take into account the political, social, and cultural rights of our peoples and provide us with greater certainty.

There is certainty that there will be great economic benefit because there have been studies on economic impact. No study covers the impact on human rights.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I've read this free trade agreement. That's my obligation. I'm sure you all have as well.

Mr. Rosero, is there any part of this free trade agreement that you could accept?

[Carlos Rosero]

In general, we accept trade. The presence of black people in our continent is a result of trading in the past.

I would like to insist that there are two different issues being discussed. What we are presenting arguments in relation to is the method through which the agreement was reached. In other words, we were excluded from participating in this method. We didn't get to know first-hand how the agreement was drafted. We didn't participate in that process.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I'm glad to hear that you support trade and that you like rules. I think there's some promise there.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you, Mr. Holder.

We are to go next to the Liberal Party.

Are there any questions here?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I have a question on the labour and environment agreements in this trade agreement.

These are the strongest labour and environment agreements Canada has ever signed with any other country. They are the strongest labour and environment agreements in any trade agreement between any two sovereign countries. Given that we already have a trading relationship, how can this trade agreement, with such robust labour rights provisions, do anything but help strengthen those areas?

Secondly, I go back to the issue of the drug wars and the narco-economy. The drug lords and the drug gangs aren't governed by any labour code or environmental code or agreement. I can't help but believe that any legitimate economic opportunity that helps displace the reliance that many people of Colombia have on the drug economy will help strengthen both the labour and the environmental conditions.

I would appreciate comments from both of you on those points.

[Prof. Daniel Mejía]

Thank you.

Yes. I cannot see how this can make the living conditions in Colombia deteriorate.

Regarding the drug trade, some research came out last week. It was a joint research effort of Canadian and Colombian researchers that came up with a very important result, which is that the environmental effect of our aerial eradication campaign is taking into account the environmental effect of coca production. Yes, it's true that spraying coca crops with herbicides causes environmental damage, but you should compare that.... That's what the Canadian and Colombian researchers came up with. You should compare not only the damages caused by aerial eradication campaigns for illicit crops; you should also compare that to the environmental effects of coca production. This is an uncontrolled and illegal business, so they use all sorts of chemicals. Where do they dump these chemicals? Is this a legal activity that is controlled? No.

So if a free trade agreement will promote economic activity in rural areas, it will also have an important effect in environmental outcomes, because it will drive people from coca cultivation, which will have two effects. The first one is that less chemicals are going to be dumped into the environment due to coca production. Also, why should the government, with U.S. aid, eradicate these illicit crops if there are no crops? I think this will be like a second-hand effect of the free trade agreement for environmental issues.

[Carlos Rosero]

One important point of this debate for us as indigenous peoples and Afro-Colombians is that general issues have to be examined in relation to particular perceptions, the particular perception of peoples. So for us, not only have we had a right for development being recognized, but we also have cultural aspirations. We have rights in this area, too.

So there's a nuance here that's very important for us, particularly when you invoke only the right to development and the right to trade and you don't take into account particular rights derived from the culture of the local communities. This then opens the door to a whole set of issues that cannot be controlled or handled in any way.

I'm quite sure that in the particular case of Colombia, any company, whether American or Canadian, if they're going to speak openly and frankly with black communities and indigenous communities.... If they did, let's say, they could actually reach an agreement based on people saying, look, we're going to get gold, we have 500 years of experience in extracting gold, so we'll extract gold, we'll do it in such-and-such a way, and the benefits are going to be the following--

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I'm sorry, we've run out of time. If you did want to answer the question, you're not going to have time to do it. We are at one o'clock, and the room is required by another committee.

I will again thank our witnesses for appearing. Thank you very much for taking the time to come. It's been very helpful.

The meeting is adjourned.