House of Commons Hansard #28 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was colombia.

Topics

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I fundamentally disagree with the hon. member and his party's position on this free trade agreement. There was a tiny hint of honesty in his statement. He did at least admit that the human rights situation is better in Colombia. I stated in my earlier remarks that we have to measure this based on the progress that Colombia has made.

What the NDP and the Bloc are expecting from Colombia is perfection. They want there to be a perfect human rights regime before Canada ever does business and enhances its trade opportunities there.

I want to again refer the member to the example of Chile. As he knows, Chile had the worst human rights record in South America and perhaps in the world in the 1970s under the Pinochet regime. Today it has the lowest murder rate in South America. In fact, our trade with that country has almost tripled since we signed a free trade agreement with that country.

I would ask the member to comment on the example of Chile, which is not far from Colombia, which has a similar context in which it has developed.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Bloc

Robert Carrier Bloc Alfred-Pellan, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member from Abbotsford for his question, which gives me the opportunity to elaborate. Protecting investors is included in the proposed agreement, which means that investors can take a foreign government to court for any policy it might try to introduce in order to improve things for workers or to protect the environment. That is the most contentious part of the proposed agreement. Without such an agreement, a government like Canada's could influence Columbia more to improve the lives of the people there. Canada would have the power to persuade Colombia to improve human rights, unlike what will happen with an agreement that gives investors all the rights.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:30 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to speak to this bill and to how the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement and the parallel agreements on labour and the environment fit into Canada's engagement in the Americas.

It has become increasing apparent that Canada's economic prosperity, our commitment to democratic governance and the security of our citizens are linked with those of our neighbours. It was with this in mind that our Prime Minister announced in the summer of 2007 that the Americas would constitute a key foreign policy priority for our government. He stated clearly that Canada's vision for the region and our strategy of renewed engagement in the Americas would be based on three interconnected and mutually reinforcing pillars: first, strengthening and reinforcing support for democratic governance; second, building a safe and secure hemisphere; and third, enhancing the prosperity of citizens.

With strong leadership in the Americas, we can ensure that Canadians are safer, more secure and more prosperous. We all know that greater prosperity cannot take hold without security or without the freedoms and laws brought about through democratic governance.

On the democracy front, Canada's efforts in the region have included contributions to numerous Organization of American States electoral monitoring missions. We will continue to work hard to strengthen the capability of this organization in the area of democracy support.

Canada has also provided assistance to non-governmental partners in the region to deepen citizen participation and has also strengthened its diplomatic capabilities in the region.

This past fall we launched a new Andean unit of democratic governance in Lima, Peru to support regional efforts to enhance democratic practices, transparency and good governance.

Our decision to strengthen our engagement in the Americas actively and constructively is being noticed around the world. We are a key regional player. Canada is now firmly on the radar screen of our partners who are increasingly realizing that Canada is present to support their efforts.

Our government has provided leadership internationally by encouraging free trade and open markets. Our commitment to opening doors, not closing them, is a key component of our engagement in the Americas and around the world.

As host of the G8 and co-host of the G20 this year, we will ensure that prosperity in the Americas constitutes a topic of discussion at these meetings. We are committed to our efforts for free trade, not protectionism, around the world.

In addition to our commercial engagement in the region, Canada also has a significant investment presence. In fact, Canada is the third largest national investor in the Americas. Our investment presence is strong in the financial sector and also in the extractive sectors.

In recent years, Canadian banks have increased their presence throughout the Americas. Canadian mining companies have substantial operations in many countries throughout the region and some mines have become very important contributors to national revenues, job creation and local capacity-building. Our investment presence in the region also serves as an example of the best practices of corporate social responsibility.

Similarly, democratic governance cannot be consolidated in the context of persistent poverty and social exclusion or when personal security is threatened by crime and violence.

With regard to security, Canada's key objective is to enhance regional stability by addressing threats posed by drug trafficking, organized crime, health pandemics and natural disasters.

Our efforts focus on Central America and the Caribbean, the area where criminal activity constitutes the most direct threat to Canada. Activities include support for training of local police, the purchase of equipment and the provision of technical and legal expertise. We will also look to increasing our anti-crime programming in the region, focusing specifically on corruption, money laundering, narco-trafficking, security sector reform and human trafficking.

In addition to these efforts, we enhanced our diplomatic resources in the region by launching a regional office for peace and security in Panama late last year. This unit will work to advance Canada's efforts to develop and implement an integrated regional strategy for addressing public security issues in the Americas.

All Canadians, and indeed the world, were shocked by the huge tragedy in Haiti. Canada's rapid and comprehensive response to the devastating earthquake in Haiti earlier this year is also indicative of our commitment to the region and, specifically, to those people in Haiti. To facilitate international coordination of a response to the crisis, on January 25 Canada hosted the Montreal ministerial preparatory conference on Haiti. At this conference, consensus was achieved around a set of key principles that will serve to guide international efforts going forward.

During the subsequent pledging conference held in New York, Canada confirmed our long-term commitment to Haiti and announced a contribution of $400 million for humanitarian and reconstruction work in Haiti.

Canada is committed to supporting Haiti for the long term. However, Canada is committed to doing humanitarian and reconstruction programs around the world. Recovery and construction efforts will take years and Canada will stand by the Government of Haiti and the Haitian population to build a better Haiti. Our common vision with Haiti and the international community is a country built squarely on the foundations of security, sovereignty, rule of law, economic prosperity, equality, inclusion, social well-being and human rights.

Haitians must have ownership over their recovery. Haiti's government, community and business leaders must act as agents of change, putting the interests of the Haitian people first. There is much work to be done in Haiti.

As we continue to enhance our renewed engagement in the Americas, we intend to continue to build on the successful achievements to date, and there is work to be done. However, progress will not be easy as we will be dealing with a region currently grappling with numerous challenges and uncertainties.

Today we heard a couple of the opposition parties dwelling only on those challenges. Insecurity is a serious concern, particularly in Central America and the Caribbean, where gangs and organized crime groups pose serious security in government's challenges. Health pandemics, as well as natural disasters, also pose significant threats to regional stability and security. Weak democratic institutions in several states throughout the region is a concern. Declining trust among citizens of politicians and political parties is troubling as well.

Of course, the challenges to democratic governance and ensuring security that we currently face in the hemisphere are set against the backdrop of a thin and uneven economic recovery in a region of the world already facing huge income disparities. It is part of the world where there are massive challenges.

The Canada-Colombia free trade agreement embodies many of the different areas of focus for Canada's engagement in the Americas. Canada has an active agenda for the future of our engagement in the Americas. We believe that we have a real opportunity in Colombia to bring our Americas agenda to the world stage. The safety, the security and the prosperity of Canadians depends on it.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Nicole Demers Bloc Laval, QC

Mr. Speaker, is my honourable colleague aware of what is happening in Colombia today? Does he know that one of the biggest scandals to hit the Colombian government has just come to light? The secret police has embarked on a program of disinformation, a program to discredit, scam, fabricate false ties to the guerrillas, falsify documents, sabotage, threaten, blackmail and commit terrorist acts against opposition parties, NGOs, political leaders of the opposition and others in the country. It is scandalous.

Is my colleague aware of this? Does he not wonder why Mercosur—the South American common market encompassing Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay—does not want to do business with Colombia?

I know why. It does not want to do business with Colombia because it is a corrupt country that does not respect human rights.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, I believe that Canada is the greatest country in the world, as I am sure the hon. member would.

One of the differences I see is that we get stronger and better when we reach out, which is what we are intending to do through this agreement. Our economy is based on an open, free market system where trade agreements are sought and where there is less government intrusion and much less regulation and red tape. That is on our side.

The member is pointing to corruption. In my speech I acknowledged that there was corruption in many of the American states. However when we watch the evolution of Colombia and see how it gained independence from Spain, how it was part of a greater community called Grand Colombia with Venezuela, Colombia and maybe Ecuador, it has progressed since then.

A turning point came in 2002 when the new President Uribe took power. He came with a view to opening markets. He came with a view to lessening corruption. We saw poverty drop by 22% in Colombia and unemployment drop by 27%. We saw hope instilled in Colombia. Free trade agreements similar to this one would enhance both that government and our country as well.

In the region, with Venezuela and some of the other countries around, when we can support--

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

Order, please. Question and comments. The hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

NDP

Jim Maloway NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, the speaker for the Conservatives actually admits that the human rights record in Colombia is bad. In spite of that, they are basically pushing ahead with this deal because they want to support the investors and their positions.

We have had people and organizations solidly opposed to this trade agreement. The Council of Canadians, CUPE, B.C. Teachers Federation, Canadian Labour Congress, Canadian Auto Workers, United Church of Canada, Public Service Alliance and many more organizations across the country have studied this free trade deal and have recognized that it is a bad deal and that the government should not be proceeding with it.

Why is the government proceeding in the face of all of this opposition against it?

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, the fact that the member would stand and read out a number of the organizations that would oppose it does not surprise me. The opposition to this by most of those organizations would not surprise me.

We will support this because, first, it is in the best interests of Canada. It follows our focus on the Americas. It is matched to a greater plan of providing stability to the region and providing a country that borders Venezuela with a little more hope when it is next to a regime that really forgets about human rights and walks away from many human rights.

There is hope in Colombia and hope with the new president. We have seen a drop in crime. We have seen a drop in a lot of things since 2002. Free trade agreements would enhance that even more.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, about 45 years ago I had the opportunity as a student in the United Kingdom to watch the first debate that took place in the U.K. on the question of the common market and Britain's membership in the common market. It was very interesting to watch that debate, because the trade union movement lined up consistently against Britain's joining the European community. The Labour Party, of course, was very badly divided, but generally speaking on the left-hand side of the spectrum the universal view was that any kind of expansion of a free trade zone was going to be a bad thing for trade unionism, a bad thing for human rights, a bad thing for British political institutions.

It is very interesting today if we go back and talk to the trade union leadership in the United Kingdom. We find the strongest Europeans are the leaders of the British trade union movement. The people who believe the most strongly in the need for broadening trade areas, for expanding trade opportunities, can be found in the British labour movement.

What I find both interesting and troubling is that the same evolution has not taken place in this country. We have to recognize that the issue of trade is fundamental to the prosperity of Canada. More than 50% of the wealth of Canada, of the GDP of Canada every year, comes from our international presence. It comes from trade. If we were to be cut off from trade, from investment, from a world of international engagement on the economic front, our prosperity as a country would be literally cut in half.

Again, I know there will frequently be people trying to see partisan issues or partisan advantage in here, but for me the question is: What is in the broad public interest of Canada? We are a trading country. We are a smaller country. We are not a big superpower. We cannot impose our trade conditions on other countries. We do best when we have strong multilateral agreements, and if I had my druthers, if I had my preferences, I would say we would like a Doha round that is going to produce greater, stronger multilateral engagement, much stronger multilateral protection, much stronger multilateral rules for Canada, and that would be the direction in which we would want to move.

However, the world reality is that we do not have stronger multilateral agreements as a real possibility today. The Doha round is frozen, and there is no particular progress being made in that regard. Governments in this country, both Liberal and Conservative, have over the last 15 to 20 years asked how we can expand the world of not only freer trade, but trade that is governed by the rule of law, trade that now is increasingly expanding other relationships in terms of our social and political relationships. How can that take place?

Over the last while, we have had free trade agreements with Israel and now with Jordan. We have had free trade agreements with Chile and with Peru, which has just been passed, and we have other agreements that are being carried out.

For its part, the Government of Colombia made an important decision to open its market by signing free trade agreements with Andean nations and all of its neighbours except Venezuela.

It is also discussing the possibility of signing an agreement with the European Free Trade Association, EFTA, and with the European Union in general. Such an agreement would be very important for Colombia, which also wants to sign agreements with the United States and Canada.

I hear a lot of criticism about this, mostly with respect to the human rights situation. The Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party say that the human rights situation in Colombia is so bad that it would be unthinkable to sign a free trade agreement with Colombia.

The member who just spoke said that Colombia is so corrupt that we should not even consider signing a free trade agreement with it.

However, I would say that it is precisely because a country like Colombia has problems that the rest of the world should make an effort to negotiate agreements. Trade would then be carried out in accordance with international law, and we would have the opportunity for ongoing dialogue about labour rights, workers' rights, union issues, violent crime, drugs and human rights. That is what this accord sets out to do, and that is what the committee will discuss.

I am not suggesting that there are no problems in Colombia. On the contrary, there are. But will a free trade agreement really cause more problems? I do not think so. I think that, on the contrary, it could improve the situation. With the amendments proposed by my colleague, the member for Kings—Hants, this agreement will finally give us an opportunity to take a closer look at the human rights situation.

I have heard some things said about this agreement, but there is one argument in particular coming from my friends in the New Democratic Party that I want to deal with.

I have heard it said by many members of the New Democratic Party that the amendment proposed by my colleague from Kings—Hants essentially says this. Colombia will do its own review of its own human rights situation, and Canada will do its own review of its own human rights situation, and that is the extent of the monitoring that is proposed in the amendment. I want to say that is categorically false.

That is a false description of the amendment and of what is proposed. For the first time in a free trade agreement, we have a very clear indication that the question of human rights in Colombia will be reviewed by the Department of Foreign Affairs, NGOs in Canada, any international organizations that are hired by or contracted by either the Government of Canada or any human rights organization in Canada that wants to do so. It is allowed to come forward to Parliament, and Parliament is allowed to discuss that. These are the reviews that are anticipated in the amendment and these are the reviews that can take place.

When I look at the situation, no one on our side of the House is saying that the human rights situation in Colombia is great and that there are no social or economic problems in Colombia. We are not saying that.

What we are saying is that the steady extension of the rule of law as it pertains to commerce, human rights, the rights of labour and the rights of environment, the steady pushing of those frontiers from a Canadian base is the best we can do right now, because the multilateral agreements that we have been looking for, such as in the Doha round, are not possible.

It is not possible to put up our walls and say we are not coming back. Let us just say this agreement were to be defeated, that the House voted against it. Would trade with Colombia stop? No. Would investment in Colombia stop? No. Would there be more or less monitoring of that trade? There would actually be less. When have we debated most significantly the human rights situation in Colombia? Right now as a result of this legislation.

This is what puts the spotlight on human rights in Colombia. This is what puts the spotlight on human rights in Latin America. This is what puts the spotlight on the connection between trade, the environment, human rights and the rights of labour. I would rather be doing it this way than leaving it in the darkness, which my friends in the Bloc and the New Democratic Party seem so happy to do.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC

Mr. Speaker, it all becomes clear. The Conservative-Liberal coalition, or the Liberal-Conservative coalition, is taking shape. Never mind principles; money and investments are being protected and that protection has nothing to do with the free trade agreement with Colombia.

They simply want to protect investments. I totally understand the hon. member who just spoke and quite handily avoided talking about this, but we get the impression that investments in mining are being protected and that this has nothing to do with free trade with another country.

I also understand that other people are talking while I am, even though they are not allowed to do so, but that is another story.

I would like to know what the hon. member has to say about being so quick to abandon his principles regarding what is going on in Colombia in order to protect investments.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to say two things. First, in a modern economy, there is nothing wrong with wanting to protect investments, and it is not a sin to want to protect property rights.

At the same time, it is very important that we respect all general human rights and labour rights. Furthermore, there are more than just property rights. It is not simply a matter of protecting the investors, because investors are always protected. They are already protected and they have no problem.

Do Canadian foreign investors in Colombia think that they have no protection in Colombia? On the contrary, they are already there because they are protected, and they will not disappear if there is no agreement.

What really matters to us is how we will do it. We will expand the notion that rights are applicable everywhere, and that they are shared throughout the world.

Is that the opposite of property rights? I do not think so. Is it limited to property rights? I do not think so either.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, given the dirty tricks that happened in the House last Friday, every single Liberal member of Parliament should be standing up this evening and voting against this agreement on that basis alone. The reason why the Conservatives are bringing in dirty tricks is that the public is clearly not on their side.

As the member well knows, in Toronto just a week and a half ago, there was another standing-room-only crowd coming forward. Many of his constituents and constituents from other Liberal-held ridings in Toronto were saying no to this agreement. The reality is that there is not a single independent human rights organization on the planet that agrees with the Liberal Party.

My question is very simple. I do not want any skating from the member, even though he has said in the past that he likes to skate. Given this amendment that is being put forward and given the fact that so many organizations are saying they want to come forward to the trade committee and have their voice heard on the amendment and on the agreement themselves, will the member say publicly that the Liberal Party will support full and comprehensive hearings at the trade committee, if it takes weeks or months, so everybody's voice is heard?

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am sure we will have a full and ample discussion at the committee. There is no question about that. There is no reason to insult anybody who either appears or does not want to appear in front of the committee. We very much look forward to a full and open discussion.

What I find fascinating when I listen to the members of the hon. member's party is that they are literally frozen in time when it comes to this question of trade. Every single social democratic party in Europe has moved on. The one party that has not moved on and that is proud to wrap itself in the ideology of the 1950s and the 1960s is the New Democratic Party of Canada. That is the reason it is stuck in time, stuck in place and stuck in the polls, and that is where it is going to stay.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Oxford Ontario

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate the opportunity to speak about the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement.

Let me take a moment to tell my colleagues that since 2006 the Government of Canada has achieved a number of important milestones in the area of international trade. We have concluded new free trade agreements with Colombia, Peru, Jordan, Panama, the European Free Trade Association, and the countries of Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein. We have launched negotiations on a comprehensive economic and trade agreement with the European Union, the world's largest market by GDP, and we have begun negotiating with a range of countries on foreign investment promotion and protection agreements, air service agreements, and science and technology partnerships.

Our government's aggressive free trade agenda is crucial for a lasting economic recovery. We are ensuring that Canadian business can compete. We are ensuring they can compete responsibly.

I would like to speak to the issue of corporate social responsibility as it relates to the agreement. The Government of Canada takes matters of corporate social responsibility very seriously, which is why this free trade agreement, as well as parallel agreements on labour co-operation and the environment, includes CSR.

Responsible business conduct reinforces the positive effects that trade and investment can have on the communities in which they operate. It can improve human rights, labour standards and the environment, while increasing the competitiveness of firms.

Not only do these agreements advance the government's policy to promote corporate social responsibility in Canada, but they also encourage our treaty partners to increase corporate social responsibility. By signing on to these agreements, Colombia has indicated that it is committed to promoting the same principles of corporate social responsibility within its business community. Both Canada and Colombia have agreed to support positive corporate social responsibility practices and remind enterprises of the importance of incorporating that in their internal policies.

Corporate social responsibility activities address a number of concerns, specifically environmental protection, human rights, labour relations, corporate governance, transparency, community relations, peace and security, and anti-corruption measures. At its core, corporate social responsibility incorporates social, economic and environmental concerns into the daily operations of firms to benefit industry and society, with particular consideration for the community in which they are operating.

Given that Canada and Colombia have a significant investment relationship, it was critical to include corporate social responsibilities in these important agreements. Provisions in these agreements encourage both governments to promote voluntary principles of responsible business conduct within their business communities. The parallel agreements on labour co-operation and the environment also help ensure that increased business between our countries does not come at the expense of our social and environmental responsibilities.

Aside from these agreements, Canada is involved in several initiatives to help promote these principles.

Canadian extractive companies are world leaders in corporate social responsibility. Our government is committed to supporting these Canadian companies in their efforts abroad.

In March 2009 the government announced a comprehensive corporate social responsibility strategy. Today we see that these measures are working. Based on extensive consultations with stakeholders, the mining industry and non-governmental organizations, our government's strategy represents a workable, proactive and effective approach. This initiative will increase the competitiveness of Canadian mining and oil and gas companies by enhancing their ability to meet, and possibly exceed, their social and environmental responsibilities abroad.

However, that is not all. The government is supporting a new centre of excellence, independent of the government, to develop and disseminate high-quality CSR tools, training and information to sector stakeholders. We created a new corporate social responsibility counsellor office to help resolve any issues that arise between Canadian companies and the communities in which they operate. Currently, Dr. Marketa Evans, Canada's CSR counsellor, is working to address the concerns of corporate social responsibility beyond our borders.

Furthermore, Canada will continue to offer its support for host country capacity-building initiatives related to resource governance and commitments to the promotion of widely-recognized international voluntary CSR standards. Members will note that an important aspect of Canada's approach is adherence to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development guidelines for multinational enterprises.

The organization's guidelines promote CSR and have been a long-standing key element of Canada's CSR approach. The guidelines recommend voluntary principles and standards for responsible business conduct, including the establishment of a national contact point.

The role of this contact point is to resolve differences of opinion among CSR stakeholders and to promote awareness of the guidelines and ensure their effective implementation. Canadian companies are encouraged to follow these guidelines, as well as those of the international finance corporation performance standards, the voluntary principles on security and human rights and the global reporting initiative. These are multilateral instruments promoting CSR that are key elements of Canada's approach to the issue.

Canada also supports and promotes CSR principles within the United Nations, the Organization of American States, the G8, Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation and La Francophonie. Let us make this very clear. We have appointed a CSR counsellor to assist in resolving social and environmental issues relating to Canadian companies abroad and we are establishing a new centre of excellence as a one-stop shop to provide information for companies, NGOs and others.

We will offer continuing CIDA assistance to foreign governments to develop their capacity to manage natural resource development in a sustainable and responsible manner. We will continue to promote internationally recognized voluntary CSR performance and reporting guidelines. Canadians can be proud of our government's commitment to this and Canadian companies can continue to be leaders here in Canada and beyond. We need to give them the tools to compete and succeed among the best. They can serve as an example.

Since February 2007 Canada has been a supporting country for the extractive industries transparency initiative, an organization that publishes payments by extractive sector companies to resource-rich governments and compares them with government records in an open and accountable manner. The publication of these records potentially expose corrupt transactions, as well as governmental integrity.

Honest governments that apply their revenues to benefit all their citizens are generally better governments. This government expects all Canadians operating at home and abroad to respect all applicable laws and international standards. They must also operate transparently and in consultation with host governments and local communities to ensure activities are conducted in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.

As we can see, Canada is committed to promoting CSR and is proud to encourage our trading partners to do the same. The government believes that liberalized, rules-based trade and social and environmental responsibilities go hand in hand. Corporate social responsibility is an important part of this principle. The Canada-Colombia free trade agreement recognizes this and is an important tool to create opportunities for Canadians in a socially and environmentally responsible manner.

For these reasons, I ask all hon. members for their support of this agreement.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT

Mr. Speaker, I note how the government's position is so radically different than ours in the NDP. What is the problem with understanding the nature of human rights complaints in Colombia? What sort of vision do Conservatives have over there of the situation in Colombia in which they can ignore the facts?

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Jim Maloway NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

They don't care.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT

As my hon. member says, is it simply that they do not care? Is it a real desire to see this Colombia trade deal move ahead before the next election so that the present regime in Colombia can hold it up like a flag saying, “Canada supports us, we must be doing something right?” What is going on with this?

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON

Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago I heard my colleague across the aisle talk about the NDP being locked in the 1950s and 1960s with its ideology and it certainly comes out again in this comment.

I do not know what the NDP thinks. Is it that we will build some sort of wall around Colombia that will all of a sudden change things? We already have companies trading with Colombia. We already have investment in Colombia. This is an agreement that will insist on Colombia moving forward with respect to its labour and social obligations. This is good for Canada but it is also good for Colombians, and I wish the NDP would at least get into this century.

Like I said, my colleague across the floor was absolutely right. The NDP is locked in the 1950s and 1960s.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Mr. Speaker, I want to revert to a question I asked one of his colleagues earlier. For reasons of consistency I will do much of the same. The parallel accord regarding labour and some of the fundamental policies that will ensue from the nation of Colombia regarding labour practices certainly are about to fall in line, according to this agreement, with what we are doing here.

Perhaps the member would like to provide the House with an example of some of those labour policies that we have in this country that he hopes that the nation of Colombia will adopt as well.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague has actually hit the nail on the head where those parties that are opposed do not seem to grasp. With the opportunity for Colombia to move ahead by leaps and bounds to the standards that we have in this country, some of these issues will be far better for Colombia and Colombians in that we will have that opportunity.

With the economic boost to them, to their labour, and to their social opportunities, this is tremendous. It is also good for Canadians. It gives us opportunities to trade with Colombia in a free trade agreement. As I said previously, we currently trade with Colombia. There is no reason why we cannot enhance that trade. As we do it, it will be of benefit to both countries.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague knows, and I thank him for his intervention, the NDP and Bloc members are opposing this basically because their opposition is rooted in an isolationist, socialist ideology.

My friend also knows that the NDP members today are couching their opposition in terms of human rights and labour laws, but back in the 1980s, when we were debating the North American Free Trade Agreement, they were actually opposed to that agreement as well when those issues were not at play.

Perhaps my colleague could comment on that and the fact that there probably is not one free trade agreement that the NDP has ever supported in the House.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. The NDP has been opposed to every free trade agreement that I know of that has come before the House. This is just one more step in that long list of complaints that it has about free trade.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

Martha Hall Findlay Liberal Willowdale, ON

Mr. Speaker, I first want to say that I understand completely the efforts on the part of members of the other opposition parties in expressing the concern regarding human rights. I indeed applaud them for ensuring that this is such a significant part of the debate.

I want to stress that we as Liberals share all of those same concerns. This is one of the ironies of this debate, and I would suggest that this is true for most members of the House in its entirety, that we are all very concerned about human rights, that we all want to see significant improvement in human rights for all Colombians.

I suggest that the differences lie not in our collective desire to see improvement and our collective concern for human rights but our views on how to accomplish that, and in this case in particular for Colombians. It comes down to a difference of approach, whether we support the approach of using walls as opposed to windows, of avoiding versus engaging, and engaging in criticism as opposed to providing support.

I completely agree with the members of the opposition parties about human right in Colombia. We know that respect for human rights is a problem in that country. The Liberal Party wants to see change, and I believe the same can be said for most members in the House, no matter which party they belong to.

We know that there are problems and of course we want to find solutions for Colombians with respect to the human rights situation, but the question is how. How can we really help Colombia? Is it better to use walls or windows? Is it better to criticize or to provide support when that country takes action to improve the situation? Is it better to deny there are problems or engage in fixing them?

I want to speak a bit about those three different approaches.

If we talk about walls versus windows, is it better for the people of Colombia to have Canadians says that this is a problem, that we disagree with it, that we see human rights as a big problem so we will not participate? Is it better to tell Colombia to put up its walls so we will not see what goes on behind them? Is it better to say that windows are a better approach so we can see through them, so they will shed daylight on what goes on, so they can be opened and allow in fresh air?

These are serious issues. These analogies may seem somewhat simplistic, but they do make the point, in my view, of whether it is better to raise walls and hide behind them and pretend that we do not see what goes on, or whether it is better for Colombia to have an opportunity to open those windows to allow the light in, to allow us to participate in a dialogue.

Is it better to criticize, or is it better to support Colombia? We could say no to this free trade agreement thereby limiting our economic engagement with Colombia. We could say from that perspective that we do not agree with what happens there, that it should be changed, but it is all just criticism.

The alternative is for Canadians to provide support, and the only way for us to support Colombia is to engage with Colombia. It is absolutely a difference between a philosophy of trade and an opportunity to engage, as opposed to some people unfortunately viewing trade as somehow encouraging behaviour that we do not support.

I stand here on not only a very personal basis, but on behalf of the Liberal Party as well. We feel very strongly that trade gives us the opportunity to participate and support the government of Colombia, the businesses in Colombia, the Colombian people when they engage in activities that further human rights as opposed to us standing back and criticizing. I would venture that it is all too easy for us to sit back and criticize rather than get involved, do the work and provide support when it is needed.

The other option is avoidance versus engagement. We could just avoid the problem, or we could engage.

As one of my colleagues said a little while ago, if we do not sign this free trade agreement with Colombia, we could all go home and pretend that the problem never existed. However, what on earth would Canada and Canadians be able to do to further human rights and enhance them if this agreement goes off the table? If anybody in the House believes that Canadians and Canada will have any further influence, that there will even be any attention paid to the challenges faced by Colombians, then he or she is naive, with all due respect. It will simply not be part of the discussion any longer.

On the contrary, if we engage, if we sign this free trade agreement, if we involve Canadian businesses with Colombian businesses, if we involve Canadians with Colombians, then it would give us the opportunity to work on a regular basis with the Colombian government, Colombian businesses, Colombian non-profit organizations, Colombian labour movements and the Colombian people to move the whole issue of human rights further. It would give us the opportunity to enhance economic activity, which we believe is fundamental to improving human rights, and to continue, rather than avoiding, rather than having it disappear from anybody's radar screen.

Thanks very much to my colleague from Kings—Hants, we now have an amendment to the agreement that would force an additional level of engagement specifically on some of these issues.

I have full respect and admiration for all of my colleagues who have engaged in this conversation, because this is an issue about which we are all concerned. It is a difference of approach.

I will therefore be supporting this bill, specifically because in our view those concerns warrant a much greater level of engagement than simply saying that we are not interested any more.

The Liberal Party truly believes that fuller economic engagement will allow Canada to exert its influence over Colombia in terms of the human rights situation we are currently debating.

Since the election of President Uribe in 2002, Colombia has made progress in reducing violence and human rights violations despite an armed conflict fuelled by the drug trade.

This progress is largely due to close collaboration with international organizations such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Progress has already been made because international organizations have become involved and people are participating in commercial enterprises.

I will stop there because I want to answer my colleagues' questions. We have to decide if we want to build walls or windows; if we want to criticize and deny the problems or become engaged.

In order to truly improve the human rights situation in Colombia, I choose engagement. I will be voting in favour of Bill C-2.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Bloc

Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the Liberal member's heartfelt comments, but I do not agree with her walls versus windows analogy. Another possibility would be to build different windows. Colombia has an embassy in Canada and Canada has an embassy in Colombia. There are many ways this debate could move forward.

I have to wonder about the progress made in that country since President Uribe came to power in 2002, as the member mentioned. Are fewer people being killed and imprisoned? Is that progress?

It is strange to hear such arguments. I would like the member to talk about the argument that alternative solutions already exist. However, we must not go from putting up a wall that is a trade barrier to putting up a wall of misunderstanding that would only encourage a government that completely denies civil liberties.

Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Martha Hall Findlay Liberal Willowdale, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. Some progress has been made, but the situation is not perfect. That is why we are taking part in this debate. We want to improve the human rights situation in Colombia. Is it better to go on criticizing or to offer our support, to show them that we have seen some progress and we want to help them continue in that direction?

I am not the only one saying this. The American President, Mr. Obama, congratulated President Uribe for the progress made in terms of human rights in Colombia and the in fight against the murders of trade unionists in that country. He noted that there had been appreciably fewer deaths related to the labour movement and increased prosecution of individuals who commit egregious human rights violations.

Some progress has been made. Are we going to encourage Colombia or continue criticizing?