Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank you for the chance to be here today. We think the study being taken on by this committee on the Canada–Colombia trade agreement is unique and certainly very important. From our point of view, it is the first substantive opportunity to shed light on and debate a highly non-transparent and controversial deal. The terms of your study squarely address the need to consider the agreement in the context of environmental and human rights concerns. So it's very important for us, and we value very much the opportunity to be here today.
It's especially important, since I think the Prime Minister has been quite clear that Canada's motivations for pursuing this trade deal are informed by a political sensibility--specifically to back a particular administration in Colombia as a contribution to democracy and human rights in the Americas. Although Colombia is not a major trading partner for Canada, this deal has become emblematic as a “choice point” for defining Canada's role in the Americas, and indeed on the world stage.
In the United States, a similar deal has not been approved, given human rights considerations, and it has become a test case for a Republican versus Democratic orientation to U.S. policy in the region.
The political and economic situation in Colombia is itself complex, as you've been hearing, but the choice facing Canada is a fairly basic moral and ethical one. Should we sign a deal with a country with arguably the worst human rights record in the hemisphere and with a government mired in political scandal for its close links to paramilitary death squads? Our view is no.
This is not a position that is in any way anti-trade. Beyond all the issues of tariffs and schedules, a trade deal remains, at its heart, an international agreement between two governments--a statement of commitment and belief in each other as economic and political partners. So does Canada want to endorse the Uribe government of Colombia as our partner? Signing the deal will accomplish nothing less than that, and there should be no mistake about it.
The Colombian agenda is clear. The Uribe government is desperate for international recognition and approval, and a good housekeeping seal of approval from Canada would do much for their embattled reputation. But consider the situation.
The United Nations has called Colombia the worst humanitarian crisis in the Western hemisphere. It has one of the highest numbers of displaced persons in the world. The targeted killings of civilians by Colombia's security forces have increased dramatically over the past five years, along with cases of social injustices. Illegal executions of civilians by the Colombian military and paramilitary forces have taken at least 955 lives in the past five years.
One in five, or 20%, of all Colombian politicians are either in jail or under investigation for paramilitary links. President Uribe's closest political allies, including the chief of security, personal advisers, and family members, are involved. The investigations into all of this really only began in earnest a little over a year ago, so although it is already dramatic, we may not yet know the measure of this problem.
What is troubling is that in the face of all of this, the Canadian government now insists that Colombia's dark history is behind it and that a trade agreement will boost democratic development. We urge you to listen to the voices of those who are most directly involved. Colombian human rights activists, trade union leaders, and citizens have all mobilized in great numbers against the U.S. trade deal, and as knowledge grows of Canada's deal, so does the protest.
Do not be caught by the mindset that says if you don't support this government, you give power to the terrorists and guerrilla forces. This is the polarization of politics that has crippled the space for public discussion of democracy in Colombia today. Every day, with countless acts of bravery, Colombian trade union leaders, journalists, and indigenous people stand up to speak against the violence that has been unleashed on them from all sides. They are building the basis for a middle ground and for a government that can be held accountable for its crimes and held to its responsibilities to meet citizens' basic rights.
You know, it isn't realistic in this kind of charged and conflictive environment to hope for a clause or a paragraph or a side deal in the text of the trade agreement that will work as a curative for conflict. The answers lie in political will and in citizen mobilization and involvement in Colombia. Colombians themselves today are saying no to the deal, and we should be listening to them.
My colleague, Gauri Sreenivasan, is going to give you further reasons why.