Thank you, Chair.
I'd like to thank our guests for your testimony today. I say in all of these representations that I believe that our guests, as you provide testimony, come with the best intentions, from your perspective.
Here's my sense of this now. Firstly, it's rather interesting, we've heard some testimony that we need to hear from some other groups, from other perspectives, to ensure that we have a fulsome sense of all the issues. I just may come up at some point with a list of various other groups that may wish to attend. But I just want to remind the committee, and perhaps advise our guests who may not know this, that we've already passed a motion that allows all testimony as it relates to Colombia free trade to come into play. As a result, that's already present, and it's rather interesting.
Mr. Neve, it's great to have you back, and we appreciate your rigorous return. Three times is a charm, but I'm not sure that we'll have you back again on this particular issue. Perhaps you'll come back for another one. I don't know, but I would welcome that. In fact, there were some very thoughtful things in terms of testimony that you said today.
What I heard from everyone today, which I thought was compelling, is that you all support trade, and we can define what that might mean. I think that's very positive. I do want to make one other comment, before I ask a question. That is, personally I welcome Mr. Brison's contribution in terms of his introduction of a human rights assessment. I think there are some very credible components to it. As Mr. Keddy has indicated, that's currently being reviewed.
I should let you know that last week—and I'm looking at the blues here—we had Mr. Mark Rowlinson, a labour lawyer, who provided some testimony. He said that undeniably there has been a decline in the murder rates since 2001, since President Uribe has come into power. He acknowledges that President Uribe has provided “resources including judges to address labour cases as well as additional funding to the attorney general's office for investigation and prosecution”. To be fair, he does not support the deal in this arrangement, but he did acknowledge those things. I want to remind folks, all of us here, there are a variety of components, while philosophically or ideologically there may be some parts you don't support.
I want to remind all of us here that since 2001, since President Uribe came into power, murders in that country have been reduced dramatically, kidnappings quite dramatically, violence against union leaders dramatically decreased. It seems to me that I don't understand why we don't want to honour those kinds of things. When I had my kids growing up, you know, my Cape Breton mom always said you have to honour good behaviour. It seems to me that if we're not honouring good behaviour and efforts made, then frankly, if we're not even talking to these people because we're not prepared to put in a rules-based system, which is what we're talking about here, then I think we do the people of Colombia a disservice and of course a disadvantage to Canadians. Unless you've forgotten the other piece of this, this is all about trying to do business that supports Colombia but absolutely supports Canadians. I think that's critical.
I have a couple of questions, if you'll allow me, and I guess you have to, because it's my floor.
Mr. Blackburn, you indicated that more engagement of good companies ameliorates behaviour in countries in which you deal. You also indicated that you hired some 9,000 people with skills, and pride in their skills, they otherwise would not have had. What's your sense of what it would mean for you for this free trade agreement in Colombia? What's your sense of how that helps the people of Colombia and obviously helps your company?
