Thank you, Chair, and thank you to our guests.
Ms. Picolotti, thank you for your intervention.
I note that recently, in our media, a situation in Ecuador was in the news that essentially laid out some of the scenarios that you have laid out and that Mr. Tougas has in the Congo; that is, of Canadian companies, Canadian interests, intervening in local politics, if you will. In the case that was recently in the media with respect to Ecuador, it was the pattern that seems to be happening around the world whereby Canadian companies, to protect their mining interests, are hiring local security forces. In the case of Ecuador, to quote a farmer, “This community is on the brink of civil war.” He wasn't referring to Peru exerting its interest through a civil war; he was suggesting it's between those who are farmers and locals and the mining interests.
I heard my colleague Mr. Abbott suggest that this legislation is actually a colonial Trojan horse. I juxtapose that, Madame Picolotti, with your intervention wherein you said that you approached Barrick in 2007, as environment secretary, “to exercise my jurisdictional authority”. Your authority was blocked to protect a UNESCO site—and we all know what that is—in the province of San Juan where Barrick's mine is located.
So you were actually blocked from getting access to a UNESCO site by a Canadian mining company. Is that your evidence?