Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Nov. 7th, 2006

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you for recognizing me, Mr. Chairman. It is very much appreciated.

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning.

I find rather peculiar your requests concerning public statements about the 60 detainees who are presently incarcerated in Cuba.

Have you asked Canada or the U.S. to free the five Cubans who were sentenced to prison? Have you made representations on behalf of those five Cubans who are imprisoned in the United States without any reason? Did you make such representations?

[Brian Dijkema]

Is the question whether we have done anything regarding the Cuban five, the prisoners in Cuba?

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

My question deals with the five Cubans who are jailed in the United States for practically no good reason.

[Brian Dijkema]

That's a very fine question.

If I may speak, our concern is with the CUTC and the independent trade unionists in Cuba. There may be some improprieties on the part of the United States--I don't know; I have not investigated those. Whether or not the arrest of those five legitimizes the arrest of the 60 or 75, or more, and the continued repression in Cuba is another question. Even if those five were arrested without cause and were being held without charge in the United States—and Madame, I don't know, because I haven't investigated that, because we have no affiliation with them—I don't believe that is grounds for us to stop criticizing Cuba for the arrest and imprisonment of these 60. I think the arrests in the United States are being used by the Cuban government to draw attention away from its rights violations.

Madame, if the United States has acted improperly in this regard, then I would expect other nations to criticize them in this regard. If Parliament wants to form a committee or a subcommittee on the issue, then I believe that's where it should be addressed.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

I find your request rather peculiar. You should know that there is an American embargo against Cuba.

Do you know that Cuba has not been allowed to trade with the United States for the last 40 years? Are you aware of that situation?

[Brian Dijkema]

Yes.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Are you aware that Canada is protecting itself against an American intrusion in its territory? Are you aware of that?

[Brian Dijkema]

Are you suggesting that the arrest of the—

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

No.

I want to say that I find rather peculiar the request you are making today to this Committee. We must not forget that Cuba has been trying to protect itself for the last 40 years. It cannot trade with other nations. Only communist countries and Canada have accepted to help Cuba.

Canada is trading with Cuba. Fortunately, Canada has sent people there with expertise and experience. This has help Cuban people. Cuba has the best doctors in the world and a very good education system. The only thing it doesn't have is money. If the United States lifted their embargo, this might help them.

Maybe you could put pressure on the United States so that they accept to give Cuba some freedom.

[Brian Dijkema]

Madame, I find this line to be very interesting, because Cuba does trade with countries other than communist countries. It trades with Spain. It trades with numerous countries in Europe and in other places, in Africa.

I agree that the American embargo has been very hard on the Cuban people. Our union's position is not that we are seeking an embargo. Nonetheless, the question is whether the rise of the embargo would result in.... Your line of questioning seems to be implying the embargo is directly tied to the arrest of these 60 people. I find that inconceivable. I'm sorry to be so aggressive, but our union is not in agreement with the American embargo.

Our union's position is that we want the release of 60 people, particularly nine people who are attempting to do something Canadians do here on a regular basis, and that is have independent organizations that stand up for the rights of Cuban people.

If rights are being oppressed and abused by the Cuban government, by its own government, if they want to say the American reasons for that, that's not justifiable. Our position is that the nine need to be released, the 60 need to be released. And the political prisoners of conscience who have been listed by the United Nations, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Freedom House, and numerous organizations, including, I may say, trade confederations, the ICFTU, which is typically a more socialist type of body, have also criticized Cuba in this regard.

That would be my response.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

To conclude, Sir, when I heard Madam earlier, saying that the situation might improve if there were changes, particularly—

We know that Fidel Castro is ill and aging, but in Cuba there are also people that are very sensible, just like Fidel Castro. You just need to think of Ricardo Alarcón who is a very logical man. Just think about the government and the members of Parliament who represent the people and who defend their freedom. They want their people to progress. There is also the solution they recently found: while no one wanted to help them, they however succeeded in buying goods from certain countries. They want to be helped.

I understand that people are imprisoned, but before coming here to speak about human rights, maybe you should consider that if that government had received more help in the last 40 years, it wouldn't have to watch carefully everything that happens in the country in order to protect itself.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Do you want to answer?

[Christina Warren]

Just very quickly.

I think the point is, though, that we have to look at today and the future and not the past. The embargo is in place. One can criticize it in many ways. I would like to see it gone. However, what does one do about it?

It would be useful for Canada to work with the international community, including the United States. The United States would be receptive to a thaw of U.S. policy if Cuba were to make certain moves--for instance, releasing political prisoners. You're not going to get everything at once, but at least some incremental movement in the right direction. Canada should be working actively on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Merci.

We're going to pass now to Mr. Obhrai.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Thank you very much for coming.

I am curious to know this. You talked about a big carrot and we talked about Canada's re-engagement policy that is now being criticized. I personally would look at these as two separate issues. For example, on the imprisonment of the trade unionists and all those guys, yes, that is the right way for us to protest and to say this is not acceptable. That is breaching human rights on the issues of free speech and what we in Canada have as core values. On freedom of speech, it is the right thing to talk to the Cubans about it and tell them we are protesting.

Now let's go to the second aspect of that, which is the engagement policy and the embargo of the U.S. by isolating Cuba, and Fidel Castro being in power for 40 years and nobody could do anything for 40 years to get him out. I'm curious to know this. If we go on the route that you're saying, how much of your NGO is engaged in Cuba itself? If we become tough in Cuba, the NGOs will probably not be allowed to come in. The NGOs are the best hope the people of Cuba have for furthering their life within the context of the lack of freedom. If we carry on.... I would like to hear your experience, as you're an NGO. How much are you involved in Cuban life?

Forget the government aspect. I've just talked about the government and what we want to do. But as civil Canadian societies, how much are you involved in day-to-day Cuban life? What will then happen is that you would be persona non grata in Cuba and you won't be able to go there. It would be a case of how good of an engagement can we do. Where is the point, from your perspective, not from the political aspect of a political prisoner, but from your point of view? Where do you want to go so hard that the engagement process falls off and NGOs are unable to enter to make any change in that country?

[Ian De Waard, Regional Director, CLAC Ottawa, Christian Labour Association of Canada]

I can only speak from our own experiences as a trade union that's affiliated with the international trade union movement. We're already being denied at the door. Our colleagues from this organization and other organizations in Europe have been turned back upon arrival. We can't get in now, and I suspect that's the experience of other organizations like ours, be it in the trade union movement or otherwise. I don't know if that problem would be created. I think it already exists in many ways.

To pick up on where you started, it's important that we acknowledge and recognize Canada's very good relationship with Cuba already, with Cuba's people and Cuba as a nation. We've done incredible things there and have the potential to do great things. I think we need to start with the fact that we have that good relationship. And with Mr. Castro and his cohorts, as we would with other organizations in which we have a fraternal relationship, we should gently call them to account on the areas where they've been in stark violation of rights, such as the nine and the 60 that are still in prison, as Canada once did in 1997, if I'm not mistaken, when Mr. Chrétien publicly called Mr. Castro to account, as you would a good friend. That's the kind of relationship that we have with Cuba.

It's important that Canada maintain that relationship. We're not asking that Canada remove itself from Cuba. We think that an American-style embargo would be a deplorable place to end up at in terms of Canada's relationship. Nonetheless, we have a good relationship, and as we continue to trade with Cuba, as we continue to provide federal investment, we can leverage that money in some respects, as a good partner can, to say we will continue on this relationship, but we can set in place some benchmarks, some goals that Cuba will achieve if it wants to continue to receive the amount of money and trade that Canada has been providing for 30 years.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

I think Mr. Sorenson wanted to split his time, Mr. Obhrai.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

All I'm saying to you here is there is a limit to how far we go to ensure what you're talking about, a good relationship, a good friend. We don't want a good friend to turn into a negative side, where we lose the overall objective of helping the people of Cuba.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

Mr. Sorenson, do you want to come in on this, so you get in within your seven minutes?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

I have one quick question, following up on what you said.

You just mentioned that Canada has had good relationships, that we have been active in trade, that we have developed some markets there or are involved in trade, and you want to continue what we've done. But Madam Warren said that what we have to pull out is the golden carrot with Cuba; we have to have this golden carrot. If we're already doing well, how much gold and how much carrot? How much more would we have to do?

I'm not a big believer that just throwing money at the problem is ever going to solve it. In countries like that, where governments have, it would seem, very little appreciation for the civil society there, I'm not certain that Canada really gets bang for the buck, do we?

It's easy to come here and say “Bring out the golden carrot”, but what are you talking about? Are you talking about doubling what we've done?

[Christina Warren]

I'm talking about mobilizing support internationally--let's say, with the World Bank or the Inter-American Development Bank, and with other countries, like Spain--see how one can try to mobilize support to put a package together. I don't mean just money, because part of the golden carrot can be technical expertise, but basically to provide that security and suggest that there's a better way forward and we will help. Canada doesn't necessarily have to pay for all of this itself, but to work with others to make this contribution.

As to other parts of the golden carrot, there are so many issues, such as the question of outstanding properties originally confiscated from the United States. This can be part of the golden carrot as well in terms of trying to resolve these issues now, have some plan in place to make people on the island feel secure about the potential for the future.

[Brian Dijkema]

The carrot is important, but we also have to realize here that there are 75 or more people in jail, and the question is whether or not a large, continuing investment in Cuba, which we have been doing for a large number of years, is going to be the thing that works. So what we're looking for is that we're not necessarily suggesting bringing out the stick, but we have to realize that there need to be both ends, and if certain things like rights are going to be violated on a regular basis, we need to know as Canadians, and we need to know as organizations that are trying to hold our government accountable for its policies, when we're going to start speaking out and start taking action against regular violations of rights.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

What specifically would our dollars buy? What specifically are our dollars buying right now? They're not buying respect for independent organizations or human rights in Cuba.

[The Chair, Conservative, Jason Kenney]

We're going to end that round there.

Mr. Marston.

By the way, I'm an equal-opportunity softie. Everybody has been going over time.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Being a democratic socialist might set the tone for a bit of this. First of all, I agree with a lot of the things you've said. I come out of the Canadian trade union movement myself.

I think part of the problem we have today is that these good folks have come here talking about a specific issue and they've stumbled into us discussing the broader issue of our policy. I think that has put them in an awkward position.

Just as a quick question, how many of you have been to Cuba, have actually visited?