You have several questions. The answer to the first question is that to our knowledge, there is only one case of a community or members of a community filing a complaint with the Canadian government. That case is Cerro de San Pedro. I tried to broach the subject in my presentation, but I ran out of time. The community members went to the Canadian Embassy with letters. They contacted the ambassador. This happened three times: in 2007, 2008 and 2009.
In my opinion, the ambassador's silence gave them their answer. There was no investigation or even any follow-up. The community then came to Canada. The people felt it was important to speak to Canadian officials about one of these companies. In their mind, there is a very close link between the companies and the government. This happens all over Mexico and Latin America. Canada's reputation and the reputation of Canadian companies slip a little bit when these complaints are not resolved.
So these people came to Canada. Some MPs offered moral support and made some gestures of support, but in terms of real gestures, there was no mechanism for taking action. In my opinion, the bill that has been tabled here was not made to regulate the industry or interaction between the industry and communities, whether or not those communities suffer harm. It is there simply to regulate the government's response to the question whether the government will continue to invest in companies that can be clearly shown to have been involved in human rights abuses, violation of other rights or inequality. The bill exists solely to assure Canadians that their pension fund managers and the government will not support some companies in some cases. We are talking a minority of cases here. There are 13 cases, one of which has been referred to the Government of Canada.