International Trade Committee on June 12th, 2012

[Augusto Solano]

No. We are basically within the standards that are established by the Ministry of Labour. The Minister of Labour recently attended a meeting of our board of directors, and basically what we want is to respect the standards that have been established by the government in all areas.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Solano.

Ms. Moore, I get the impression that we are being asked to trust all kinds of people, but that we are not being given evidence to support what they are asking us to believe. Without becoming partisan, I'll believe it when I see it. Personally, I have to see something to believe it, but I have the impression that my colleagues on the government side say that you have to first believe and then see. I find that's a bit rich.

I can show you the part of the report on human rights, which was presented last week. It's a bit much to ask us to believe that everything is going well. Based on the description provided by Mr. Solano, the flower industry in Colombia is like a Club Med where well-dressed workers work in fabulous conditions, but I am rather doubtful of that. When I watch European media reports on this industry, I do not find them very reassuring.

Could the reason there was no report be because it was so troubling that it could have called our agreement with Colombia into question?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

That was a question for whom?

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

It goes to Ms. Moore.

[Jennifer Moore]

I certainly can't comment on the Colombian flower industry, and I kept my comments focused on Canadian investment in the mining sector. Certainly I do think the report that was tabled in May was a bit of a “see no evil, hear no evil, say no evil” type of report.

Clearly my comments are based on the complaints and the evidence we've been gathering over the last number of years. We published a report of four case studies in the Canadian extractive sector in Colombia in 2009, together with Colombian partners that demonstrated evidence of forced displacement in repeated cases and serious threats to the livelihoods and lands of people living in different parts of the country. We knew we were just scratching the surface of what was going on and the potential that greater harms could come to pass, the harms I tried to emphasize to protections that could be put in place to remedy what has gone on and what could go on, obstacles that could be created with the free trade agreement.

My comments were coming from the sort of evidence we've been gathering. We were very disappointed to see that the government's not taking the indications seriously, to be able to deepen and create a baseline we could build on in the future.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Hiebert, you have a minute and a half or so.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Mr. Dade, my question is to you, because I'm a little confused. I heard you state in your testimony that there was really no link between a trade agreement and human rights. Did you not say that?

[Carlo Dade]

Whether they're linked is questioned. It has to be reviewed in the context of the agreement, the context of relations between the countries, and the only way to firmly establish it is survey methodology, surveying firms to prove that linkages have been there.

I did say there are cases where it's obvious historically, such as the ending of the slave trade. The slave trade was obviously tied to some of the most serious human rights violations. So it depends on the agreement, the countries, and the implementation.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Then how would you explain what you described as dramatic changes that have occurred since 2002 within the nation of Colombia? Is there some explanation, other than trade, you would attribute the drops in homicides to and increased opportunity for Colombians?

[Carlo Dade]

There was a closer causal relationship between interventions and reforms undertaken by the government: the placing of more police officers, better training for police, the creation of new units by the government. The dramatic drop in deaths of people who have some union affiliation or happen to have membership in a union could be tied to the provision of protection for union members.

So you can look at specific actions undertaken by the government in specific circumstances and find a closer correlation.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

How do you correlate what you say is the drop in union member deaths with the statement by Ms. Moore and others who have said that Colombia is the most dangerous place in the world to be a member of a union?

[Carlo Dade]

The homicide rate in Colombia was 14,700 last year, which was about 30-some per 100,000. The rate for trade unionists or people somehow affiliated with the trade union I believe was five per 100,000 or four 100,000. So it's safer. People have made this argument, not I but others, that it's safer to be a member of a trade union in Colombia than to be a member of the general population, if you just look at the raw statistics on homicides per 100,000.

Indeed, the homicide rate for people associated with trade unionists has fallen in sync with the fall of the overall homicide rate in the country. As the government has spent more on security, as the security situation has improved, you've seen the rate for homicides for unionists fall accordingly. Then the government puts in special measures to protect unionists or people associated with unions and their homicide rate falls faster than that of the general population. So that's the closer causality.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

I apologize that Mr. Gonzalez Rúa and Ms. Solano won't be able to hear me; we lost the connection right near the end. I certainly appreciate their participation as guest witnesses. And Mr. Dade and Ms. Moore, thank you for being here.

With that, our time has gone.

This meeting is adjourned.