Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much for your presentation; it was very thorough and refreshing.
I'll touch on the point Mr. Rowlinson made earlier, which is the issue of the race to the bottom, because this is a critical component when we talk about the trade regime.
Since 1989—we all know this because Statistics Canada tells us—80% of Canadian families earn less now than then. So obviously there is something fundamentally wrong with the picture—that the trade regimes increase exports, but generally for the Canadian public and Canadian working families, they're worse off now than they were in the 1980s. That's a fundamental problem. So this race to the bottom is a fact, it's something we have to deal with as a trade committee, and we appreciate your bringing it forward.
I have three questions stemming from that. The first is the issue of what are the enforcement measures that have taken place or been put into place in other parts of the world? You mentioned that Europe's enforcement measures have been put into practice over a series of decades. How would they apply to Canada? How would they apply to the agreements we might care to put in place?
Secondly, you referred very specifically to some of the most egregious impacts of fundamental labour rights, such as the abolition of child labour. But how do we move to actually raise labour standards? How can we do that within trade agreements, so that in a sense the populations are better off in other countries--for example, in Central American countries?
And thirdly, in our last committee we had a hearing on the issue of the CA4 reference to Glamis Gold and that tragedy in Guatemala. In that example, or in any other specific examples, how would a provision for enforceable labour rights make a difference in communities impacted by the actions of Canadian companies?