Okay.
Well, this is the ultimate issue in terms of the linkage between human rights and trade: what do you do first? I think the evidence in a lot of other countries is that engagement is what really matters with countries that have a bad track record when it comes to human rights and that are not fully democratic. That's why I mentioned the Chinese case. I think it's in Canada's interest, for example, in China to engage as a means to try to influence Chinese adaptation of the rule of law and more democratic practices going forward.
I can see why there's a tendency to resist that in the case of Colombia, because so much of the evidence is shocking and the abuses have been so profound. But ultimately we have to find the channels that exist and serve our interests as a way to engage.
So I would tend to put the engagement around trade first, and then use that as a means to try to influence other behaviours going forward. But I can understand why there's another perspective.