Thank you to the committee for inviting me. My name is Todd Gordon and I am an assistant professor of contemporary studies at Laurier University in Brantford.
My background is in political science and political economy. My research is focused on Canada's political economic relations with the global south on the increasing penetration of Canadian multinational corporations into the south, the social and ecological impacts of Canadian foreign investment, the response of communities in the south to this investment, and how Canadian foreign policy toward the south is framed by this dynamic.
Most recently, my research has focused on Canadian relations with Latin America. Part of this research, though not exclusively, includes Honduras. Others have spoken forcefully to this committee about the immediate and ongoing human rights catastrophe in Honduras, part of a long historical trajectory of violent suppression of dissent in the impoverished central American country dominated, as it is, by a small economic elite.
In the contemporary setting this involves the targeting of and the assassination of political opposition, the repression on a terrifying scale in the Bajo Aguán region against peasants fighting land expropriation, including the murder of a peasant activist just this past May 17.
It also includes the sexual assaults, the threats, and the daily indignity suffered by political opponents to the post-coup regime. Those other witnesses have also spoken about the impunity with which perpetrators are acting, which suggests the policy of the state. Indeed, according to the human rights organizations on the ground in Honduras—such as the committee of the relatives of the detained who disappeared, as well as members of targeted groups—the main perpetrators of this violence include part of the Honduran state security apparatus.
What we've seen in fact is the reappearance of death squads as Honduras tumbles back to the dark days of the Central American dirty wars, when death squads comprised of military police and sometimes civilians scattered the country eliminating dissidents. Juan Carlos Bonilla, who has been implicated in the torture and disappearance of a number of people in the 1990s, was named head of the national police by the Lobo government.
President Lobo recently named Arturo Corrales adviser to the Micheletti dictatorship as minister of security, and Corrales subsequently named three retired military colonels to key security posts.
I want to bring this back to the question of the Canadian government and multinational corporations, and their implication in this. This repression, the appalling state of human rights in Honduras, is the context in which the Canadian government is building its ties to Honduras, and Canadian companies are advancing their economic interests. The consequences of this should give us serious pause.
During two brief visits to Honduras in the last few years, and during the visits of Honduran activists to Toronto, I've had the opportunity to meet and interview a number of Hondurans resisting Canadian multinational corporations, and to discuss the social and environmental impacts of Canadian foreign investment.
I have met a number of Hondurans, for example, who for more than a decade have been involved in the struggle against Goldcorp, as well as activists with the Siria Valley environmental defence committee who blamed Goldcorp for polluting the local water system and poisoning inhabitants of the valley. They point to deforestation, diversion of natural waterways, starving of poor small farmers of scarce water resources, and food security for the small farmers in the region.
Studies of the mine closure by engineering experts from Newcastle University have identified acid mine drainage and other shortcomings, which place at risk the local water system. Studies of the water used for human consumption in two of the valley communities found levels of arsenic, lead, and hexavalent chromium, well above World Health Organization acceptable levels.
Rights Action reported that the ministry of the environment's own study—which it sat on for four years—found that 46 of 62 people tested had dangerously high levels of heavy-metal poisoning in their blood that would have required immediate and sustained medical treatment back in 2007.
Clinical studies by Honduran doctor Juan Almendarez have, to quote him, “revealed serious skin and hair loss problems, respiratory track, nervous system and eye problems—all of which can be attributed to contamination by heavy metals that are dangerous to the health of the present and future generations.”
Opponents of the San Martin mine have, through the years, faced harassment and intimidation. In the summer of 2011, 17 people were charged with obstructing a forestry project on land for which mineral concessions were previously granted to Goldcorp. They say the logging is a possible initial step towards new mining activity. The charges were recently dropped as most were not even present at the site and the day related to the charges.
Conflict has also surrounded Aura Minerals' San Andres mine in Honduras. Hondurans with whom I've spoken express real concern about a new wave of Canadian mining in their country. Despite the positive report by a Gildan representative to this committee, human rights activists in the maquila sector paint a different picture. In Honduras, I spoke with an activist who described Gildan as one of the most exploitative companies in the maquila sector, whose practices worsened after the coup. They cite a number of problems and violations of their labour code. I know Karen Spring has spoken to the committee on this subject and she is much more knowledgeable than I am.
One of the largest Canadian projects that often doesn't get enough scrutiny in Honduras and is currently under development is owned by Life Vision, whose owner Randy Jorgenson is a close associate of President Porfirio Lobo's brother Ramon. The project, which will include a new $15 U.S. million cruise ship dock to bring tourists from around the world, is being built near the north coast city of Trujillo on land to which afro-indigenous descendant Garifuna communities claim title. The environmental permits for the first two projects were reportedly actually granted under the coup dictatorship in January 2010 before Lobo was inaugurated. People in the community spoke of not being consulted, of being ignored by the company and government. Those who have spoken out most, including people I've spoken with—and one of whom criticized the project on his community radio program in Trujillo—also spoke of receiving death threats and of being followed by company security.
The two patterns I've raised about Honduras here, the dire state of human rights in general and the track record of Canadian mining in other countries, create a very dangerous situation for Hondurans. The Canadian government's intervention since the coup, I would argue, has not helped. It's made things worse. From Peter Kent's placing some of the blame for the coup on Manuel Zelaya and criticizing his attempts to return from exile; to Canada's strong support for the recognition of the presidency of Porfirio Lobo, despite his election taking place in the context of a coup and dictatorship, violent repression, and a boycott by the anti-coup movement; to Canada's subsequent ongoing support for the Lobo government in spite of the continuous violence; or to Canada's contribution to the funding and training of Honduras' security forces including a proposed partnership with Colombia whose own security forces have an extremely problematic history of their own.
But that strong support for the Lobo government, starting at a time when the majority of governments in Latin America refuse to recognize it, laid the grounds for Canada's successful push for the free trade agreement and the new mining law. Fittingly President Lobo's slogan has been, “Honduras is open for business”. The free trade and the mining law are good examples of this, as is his charter city project—enclaves that will be run by independent boards obviously influenced heavily by foreign investors and largely independent of the national government and its various laws and organizations and regulations. These things are designed—to use the language of Foreign Affairs and International Trade—to lock in market access for Canadian companies, which I would argue, puts the rights of these companies above those of the people of Honduras and their environment.
Implicating them more, mining companies will now be paying taxes for the aforementioned Honduran security sector. But these conflicts in Honduras, it's important to stress, aren't isolated, particularly as it relates to mining. They are part of a systematic pattern of conflict in Latin America—and in fact globally—involving Canadian multinationals and backed by a Canadian foreign policy aimed at supporting Canadian companies' aggressive pursuit of profit regardless of the consequences. By my count since mid-2009, 15 people have been killed in Latin American conflicts involving Canadian mining companies. The most recent being a few weeks ago in Guatemala in a conflict with Tahoe Resources that ultimately lead to martial law being declared in the community surrounding the mine. Right now a civil suit against Hudbay resources is ongoing in Toronto for its alleged responsibility for the murder of an opponent, the shooting and paralysis of another, and the gang rape of several women in Guatemala. In January, Guatemalan Goldcorp security guards opened fire on protesting workers.
A study conducted for the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada, not publicly released by them, but leaked instead in 2010, found that Canadian companies compared to their international counterparts have been far and away involved in the most conflicts of the past 10 years. For these reasons, there are emerging national and transnational movements against Canadian mining in Latin America—from blockades to national environmental campaigns to community referenda against Canadian mining in several countries.
As I wrap up here, we need to be clear. In Honduras and beyond in the global south, there is a history of conflict between Canadian multinational corporations and local communities. Regardless of what the mining industry or Neil Reeder might say to this committee, or what the Honourable Julian Fantino might say to the Canadian public, there is a wealth of academic research demonstrating that mining does not help in the economic development of poor communities. In fact, there are many studies that show it leaves them worse off.
I would add that there is also ample research challenging the claim that maquilas—enclave free trade zones for sweatshops—contribute in any meaningful way to a broader improvement in the standard of living in poor countries. The politics of aggressive free markets, strong foreign investor rights, the aggressive defence of Canadian mining companies—these things will not help poor Hondurans, Colombians, Peruvians, or Guatemalans. Indeed, I don't think they're designed to do so. They will only make an already vulnerable population more vulnerable.
Thank you.
