Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Ambassador.
Thanks to all of you for being here today.
The fact that we're having discussions on a free trade agreement that give us the capacity to discuss these rights issues and aboriginal and indigenous peoples' rights issues I think bears out the thesis that in fact economic engagement does help to increase and strengthen human rights engagement. But for that to be the case, we need answers and to understand the incident and the broader issue much better than we do now.
With foreign direct investment, and investors investing in oil, forestry, or other industries, there are allegations that governments have been slow to settle the Indian land claim and title issue, and a lot faster to grant concessions to the oil companies and the loggers. I'd like some indication from you, and a report from you, as to the progress around land claims issues with your indigenous peoples, and a comparing of the rate of settlement on land claims for indigenous peoples with concessions to investors, the extraction sector, and the oil companies.
I think it would be very helpful for us to have some better clarity around that. We in our own country of Canada have challenges around aboriginal land claims settlement. We have taken far too long in addressing these issues respectfully.
I guess the concern we have is that as much as many of us believe that economic engagement strengthens human rights engagement, we don't want to see economic engagement in some way create further delays in land claims settlement for aboriginal people or in some way compromise their rights, sacrificing them largely because of the economic pressures created by trade. We want to make sure that trade can be and continues to be a capacity builder economically, socially, and on rights, on aboriginal and labour rights and these other issues.
Would you be able to provide us with a progress report around aboriginal and indigenous peoples' land claims and also give us a better understanding of how the system is working in Peru?