Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on May 21st, 2013

[Todd Gordon]

Thanks. That's an important question. The first thing has to be to stop support for the Lobo regime, absolutely and unequivocally: financial support, diplomatic support, security support. To stress this point, Canada has been one of the strongest supporters of the Lobo regime, especially diplomatically, since it was elected and came to power in 2010. It issued a press release, if my memory serves, congratulating it and saying it would recognize the government, prior to the United States doing so. Peter Kent visited the country and met with Lobo and high-level cabinet ministers twice before Hillary Clinton did.

There's a history here of strong diplomatic support that has to be cut unequivocally. We need to cut security funding until there is a deep, dramatic transformation in the issue of impunity in Honduras and withdraw from the free trade agreement. There's no possible way, in my opinion, that a free trade agreement with Honduras could serve the needs of Hondurans economically, human rights wise, and certainly not environmentally, given the deep asymmetrical relationship between the two countries and the poverty and impunity in Honduras.

We need to place limits and restrictions on Canadian companies' activities in the country until proper democracy and accountability for human rights are restored, and demand through both bilateral and multilateral forums that perpetrators of rights abuses under both the Micheletti government dictatorship and the Lobo government be brought to justice, and the victims of the human rights abuses be compensated.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

To follow up in the brief time I have left, on your last point on Canada involving itself in multilateral forums, is the Inter-American system able to provide any measure of protection to human rights defenders under threat in Honduras? Have their prospective protective measures under that system been effective?

[Todd Gordon]

I think they've been of limited import so far. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, as well as Reporters Without Borders, have issued various reports, communiqués, releases, and so on, about the human rights situation, calling for protection of human rights activists. Unfortunately, if you look at the precedent in Honduras, the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. I don't think it's been nearly as strong as it could have been. It's going to require much more significant measures than that to improve the situation of human rights impunity in Honduras.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Could Canada act so as to improve the Inter-American human rights system's protection of human rights defenders in Honduras?

[Todd Gordon]

I think that's fine. It's one possible avenue among many, including the ones I've mentioned, of using the Inter-American Commission system to continue to press, and press strongly, on the Honduran government to respect human rights to end impunity, and so on.

Again, just to stress this point, you mentioned that Canada is the second largest foreign investor and a very large aid donor to Honduras. I don't know what its foreign investment is these days. I haven't seen the numbers in the last year or so, but they're fairly high, particularly relative to the United States, which is a much larger country. Canada certainly has influence that it can advance in Honduras to affect it. I would think there are a number of avenues.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Wayne Marston]

Thank you very much.

At this point, we go to Mr. Schellenberger.

[Gary Schellenberger, Perth—Wellington, CPC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Gordon, for being here today. On the last statement you made that Canada could have a great influence in Honduras, you say “could”. So is working within not better than working without? If we have trade agreements and we work with the government, is that not better than working outside?

[Todd Gordon]

No. I think that is premised on the idea that the trade agreement could actually advance human rights. I know the argument is out there that more foreign investment is good for human rights. I don't believe that's the case. When people raise this issue, I refer to it as the trickle-down theory of human rights, kind of like the trickle-down theory of economics. I don't think it can actually be proven that either of those things work. Human rights, similar to standards of living, are improved when people struggle, and struggle successfully through their workplaces, through their communities, and so on, to improve their human rights, when they put pressure on power.

I think entering into a trade agreement, pursuing the mining law, is counterproductive to improving human rights in the country, and Canada's best move is to withdraw from these things and put pressure on the government that way.

[Gary Schellenberger]

One thing I've learned in this committee when it comes to human rights, and those people who are downtrodden and don't have the human rights that we're so fortunate to have here, is rule of law.

When there is no rule of law you have poverty, then murders go up. They do. This is the thing we see going on in Honduras right now, the rule of law necessarily is not there. Poverty is rampant. These things all go together.

Say Gildan pulled out of the garment industry, and I think it's roughly 40,000 they employ, or maybe it's more than that—

[Todd Gordon]

I think for Gildan it's less than that. It's around 20,000.

[Gary Schellenberger]

Whatever it is. I think roughly $90 a week is what employees get paid.

[Todd Gordon]

That's the maximum.

[Gary Schellenberger]

I think the average wage in Honduras is about $1.50 a day. Am I close?

[Todd Gordon]

I'd have to look at my notes for that.

[Gary Schellenberger]

All I'm saying is if Gildan were to pull out, and the mining industries pulled out, where are these people going to be employed?

Before you answer, I have to say one thing. When you talk about some of the atrocities and sweatshops—it's not my understanding that Gildan has sweatshops in Honduras. I do know they bought a business out in Bangladesh about five years ago, or the building was built about five years ago. When they went in to take over the building, they found there were no fire escapes, they found there was no elevator. People were going five floors up carrying things on their heads. They took engineers in and found out structurally it was not the greatest place. They spent over a million dollars in Bangladesh, which is probably quite a bit of money, and they reinforced the building. They put in fire escapes. They did these things for the safety of their employees.

You don't go into a country like that and pay them minimum wage of $10 an hour. You can't do that, when the average wage is a buck and a half.

How would you say these people are going to support themselves without some of these jobs?

[Todd Gordon]

As I said with respect to the mining industry, the mining industry is not a major employer of people. It won't be a major employer of Hondurans. It's too capital-intensive an industry. It leads to greater displacement and dislocation of people, which can't possibly be compensated for by employment in the mining sector.

With respect to Gildan and its operations in Honduras, from the people I've spoken with—and I know you've heard testimony from Karen Spring—and the different reports I've read about Honduras about Gildan there, I would say it meets the standards of sweatshop labour based on the working conditions that people describe to me, the injuries people working there have described to me, and so on. I think it's not that Hondurans don't want jobs—obviously they do—but they want jobs that they would describe as fair, as having dignity.

I think the majority of Hondurans would prefer the development of a nascent sector that is much more tied to the broader development of Honduras, in which jobs would be much stronger and more widespread. That's not possible in an enclave maquila export processing zone, because it's not set up to provide for the broader development of Honduras. It's simply not. They've displaced the industry that was set up to do that.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Wayne Marston]

Good. You wrapped up. That's a full minute over, but that's fine. It's great to have you expand on some of the information.

Monsieur Jacob.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Gordon, thank you for appearing before our committee this afternoon.

You mentioned a new political party with an agenda that included reforms. We know that Porfirio Lobo's National Party was elected in November 2010, but that no NGO oversaw the electoral process.

The next election is slated to take place soon, in 2013 if I'm not mistaken. Are you optimistic? What conditions are necessary in order for Honduras to hold a more democratic election?

[Todd Gordon]

I'm cautious. The party that you referred to, Libertad y Refundación, “Refoundation and Liberty”, is inspiring in so far as it's carving out new political space on the political terrain in Honduras. It has been shaped and inspired by the social movements that emerged after the coup, with a program to meaningfully challenge power and push for serious reforms in the country.

On the other hand, as I know other presenters have said to this committee, the level of impunity is such, right now in Honduras, that the possibility of a free and fair election really needs to be called into question at this point. A number—and I don't know it offhand—of members of the party have been assassinated. There are people who face threats and so on. So I think we should approach those elections with a great degree of caution and awareness about the potential dangers that the party Libertad y Refundación and its members face.

So we're cautiously hopeful, but very cautiously hopeful.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

I have a second question, if I may.

The Charter Cities have come under some criticism. Some argue that they are a form of colonialism in 21st century packaging. A number of civil society groups view the asymmetric trade relationships as a form of colonialism.

What do you make of those arguments?

[Todd Gordon]

I don't think the current free trade regime in our neo-liberal global world can possibly be fair or equitable. They're not written that way. As was mentioned earlier, they're designed with certain clauses around most favoured nation, national treatment, and the investor clause. We should be clear, too, that free trade agreements are actually driven by foreign direct investment, not free trade. That's the main motivator of free trade agreements, despite their name. It's foreign direct investment. They're meant to give privileged, locked-in access to Canadian and other companies into the cheap labour and the abundant natural resources of these countries. They exist in a global context of asymmetrical relations between global north and global south.

I don't believe in that context, that free trade agreements can be socially just. I don't believe they can lift people in Honduras or other parts of the global south out of poverty. That's not what they're designed to do. In fact, they were designed primarily with the interests of Canadian companies in mind. That's clearly what they've been designed for, including the right, as was mentioned earlier, to sue local governments. I don't think it's unfair to call it economic colonialism.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

I have a minute left, and I am going to use it to make the following comment. I understand why you aren't very optimistic. Honduras is not a state governed by the rule of law. People's human rights are trampled. Repeated killings are common. Corruption is rampant. Impunity reigns. Many Hondurans live on less than $1.25 a day.

In those conditions, is it possible to pursue sustainable development in Honduras right now, while respecting the environment, people and communities?

[Todd Gordon]

I think it's exceedingly difficult to do it in present-day conditions in Honduras. I don't want to rule it out entirely. There might be small potable water projects that can make a difference in poor communities that don't have access to these water projects. But it's very difficult with the level of repression that goes on in Honduras and the ways in which aid money can be very politicized too. It's worth noting. I mentioned the mining law a number of times in Honduras. I've mentioned that, in general, Canada pushes certain kinds of mining laws on to global south countries. Honduras isn't any different. Foreign Affairs, International Trade, as well as CIDA, have clearly influenced and sought to influence the mining law in Honduras.

When we talk about aid I raise this because we should recognize that CIDA money, and whatever CIDA will be in the future under Foreign Affairs, is not simply for humanitarian projects. Increasingly, it's not for humanitarian projects. It doesn't exclude those entirely. A large part of what it's doing is funding and creating what it would consider a good business climate for Canadian multinational corporations to go in and do business successfully.

As I wrap up, CIDA has committed for the next 10 to 12 years, roughly, in the global south, $255 million to influence mining policy in various ways. In Latin America it's $100 million.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Wayne Marston]

I have to cut you off there. You're a full minute and a half over. I was trying to allow you to wrap up your thoughts, but your thoughts continue on.

Anyway, at this point in time I have to see the clock. We have to get into the House.

Professor Gordon, I want to thank you for being here and for the information you brought to us. If you have anything else that you'd like to add statistically, please forward it to the clerk.