Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good day, Madam, gentlemen.
Clearly, parallel or side agreements have a relative importance. I often say that the unique thing about two parallel lines is that they never meet. You all seem to agree that parallel or side agreements respecting labour or environmental rights should be an integral part of the main agreement, that this agreement should have teeth and contain obligations for the parties that are more than just pretty words.
Let us consider the following example, even though comparisons are not always a good thing. Let us say that I am an investor and I decide to open a pesticides production facility in Peru. Such an operation would entail certain risks for workers. Let us say that the country subsequently decided to raise its environmental standards and to ban the production of certain products because that could pose a health risk. Strict conditions would be put in place to ensure a safe working environment and consequently additional costs would come into play. Because of the high level of risk, higher salaries for workers would be demanded.
If such a situation arose, what would become of the labour and environmental rights side agreements? What would happen if the country decided, after signing the agreement, to raise its standards or requirements in the area of labour and environmental rights?