Thank you for your question.
I think that is an appropriate point. There is no question, given the evolution of our negotiations with country and free trade agreements, that the labour side of the agreement has always been dealt with as an addendum to the agreement. It's not a core part of the trade agreement. I think in the context of how they have continued to address them and treat them, they are separate. I think if there is a commitment on the government's part to give real meaning and teeth to protecting labour--as there is on the part of the countries that we're negotiating with--then it should become a formal part of the agreement. It should be a part of the core of the agreement.
Similarly, we should put measures within those agreements that would have the same weight in regard to denying special status in terms of their products, but that would also give us the ability to have countervailing provisions should they not meet the requirements.
The core issues that we're seeking to protect, and which Canadian negotiators have been promoting, are really agreed to within ILO conventions. Canada is not asking Peru to do anything different than what Peru is obligated to do legally in regard to its obligations under ILO. I think we consistently get bogged down in this debate. Somehow we have to cajole them, somehow we have to encourage them, somehow we have to educate them. Peru is not a country, with all due respect, where there's a lack of knowledge or education. They're quite sophisticated. They fully understand their responsibility. But for some strange reason they can't seem to muster the political commitment to say that they are going to enforce their rules equally, as they're expected to do as part of the ILO agreement.
I think it's only fair for us to say that, given the different nature of the treatment of labour, it is quite understandable that these governments don't take these matters as seriously as we would like them to. Similarly, the same argument applies on the environment. I don't think we're asking Peru to do anything different than they're obligated to do in their responsibility under international treaties on the environment. But because it's an addendum to the agreement, it doesn't have the same weight or the same commitment.
I think it's critical that we at least have an agreement on this point, because it also provides an opportunity for these countries to undercut and set some different rules in terms of how we compete with them in the same market. I think if we're going to have a level playing field, we should have a level playing field. There should be some timeframe and process for us to get there. But it's fair for us to say that it shouldn't be any different for Canadian workers than it is for Peruvian workers if you're going to participate and benefit from trade agreements.