Actually, I'm interested in pursuing more or less the same issue. I see the direct link between what you're both talking about as well.
I want to ask two very specific questions. I've just come back from the parliamentary group that went to Haiti. Again and again it was explained to us that one of the reasons for the massive police corruption, quite apart from the past history, is that it's not uncommon at all for police to be working for months and months with no pay, and that given the choice of not feeding your family and receiving bribes to feed your family, it's fairly understandable why people take bribes and engage in corruption. I see it as completely linked to the issue of economic development.
The second thing is that although I think most of us would agree that the participation of civil society is actually quite important both in terms of genuine economic development and in terms of human rights protections, I was actually quite alarmed by what looked to me as a fairly deliberate kind of strategy to generate civil society organizations--and I say that in brackets--that were actually both business-driven and driven by U.S. interests, to have actually a fairly exogenous kind of force that was speaking on behalf of Haitians.
I asked, where is any indication of a trade union movement, which often is quite important in standing up for human rights? Absent. Where is any indication of primary producers, of peasants who are organized as small producers? Absent.
I'm wondering if you could comment on that, because it seems to me that both of those need to come into play if the two major concerns you've brought to our attention are in fact to be addressed.