Scott Brison

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, October 9th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, over the last five years, the Canadian government, through CIDA, has provided $64 million of aid to the people of Colombia, institution building, security and helping to rebuild the lives of the people of Colombia, socially and in terms of governance, after 40 years of civil war. Since 1972, the Canadian government has provided around $355 million of aid to the people of Colombia.

We are already engaged as a country in Colombia. Canada is already a partner in Colombia. If the NDP's aversion to this trade agreement is based on what is going on in Colombia, then the logical corollarary of that is those members ought to be opposed to Canadian aid to Colombia.

Is that the case? Are they opposed to sending aid to the people of Colombia? Or is it an ideological aversion to all free trade agreements that is crafting the NDP members' position on this? Is it their position that it is all right to give the Colombian people fish, but we should not give them fishing poles? It is alright to give them direct funding and aid, but for goodness sakes do not buy their products? Is that the NDP approach to foreign development?

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, October 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the words of the hon. member. She has said she does not believe we should have trade with a country wherein there is violence, as there is certainly in Colombia.

We also have to consider not just trade relations but also our aid relations. Canada does have quite a robust relationship with Colombia in terms of Canadian aid. We have agreements, for instance, where we provide funding for labour enforcement in Colombia. We provide money for human rights development in Colombia, for security in Colombia. That is our aid development.

Is the hon. member saying that we should continue our aid investment but not our trade investment because that would not make a lot of sense to me. Is it the official position of the NDP that we should continue to provide aid to developing countries, but we should not provide trade opportunities to developing countries? Is it the official position of the NDP that we should give the fish to the developing world, but we should not give them the fishing rods that would help them develop their own economy? Is it the position of the NDP that we should keep the developing world enfeebled and cowering to us and taking our aid, but not buy their products?

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, October 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raises an important point when he talks about violence toward trade unionists. I would call his attention to a Washington Post editorial from April 19, 2008. The editorial had some analyses of the attacks on trade union members and leaders in Colombia. In fact, it was determined that of the murders in Colombia in 2007, only 0.2% of those murders were trade unionists compared to the fact that 2% of the overall population of Colombia are members of trade unions. Trade unionists are in fact 10 times safer than the general public in Colombia. Based statistically, Colombia is a violent country.

Does the hon. member realize that 1,800 trade union leaders in Colombia are provided with full-time security by the Uribe government? That has resulted in the fact that trade union members are safer than the general public under the Uribe government's leadership. Does he understand that? Is that one of the reasons that President Obama is supportive of free trade with Colombia?

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, October 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member mentioned the geopolitical challenges faced in Latin America and Central America today, particularly the issue around the Venezuelan President Chavez. President Chavez' regime is threatening to cut off all trade with Colombia.

We have spoken with labour unions, businesspeople and workers in Colombia who are very concerned about the effect of Mr. Chavez' potentially cutting off all trade relations with Colombia, virtually shutting down industries in large parts of Colombia, particularly those contiguous with Venezuela.

Furthermore, the Chavez regime is supplying landmines to FARC in Colombia. We heard an intervention by one of my colleagues earlier today about the pernicious effect of landmines in Colombia, landmines being put in the ground by FARC, being supplied by Venezuela.

We also know of the relationship between Iran and its leadership and Venezuela now, and the fact that there are three direct flights between Caracas and Tehran every day.

Is it not important to the people of Colombia that we provide them with legitimate trade to help protect them against the thuggery being imposed on them by the Chavez regime in Venezuela?

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, October 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the notion of safety for retiring politicians. I support that wholeheartedly, although I have no intention of retiring for the time being. However, one never has a lot of choice in these matters.

That raises a point. President Uribe's father was murdered by FARC some time ago. The violence in Colombia, during the civil war between ideological factions, with the paramilitaries on the right and FARC on the left, wreaked tremendous damage on the people of Colombia. The government has made progress. We have a trade relationship with Colombia right now, but we do not have a robust, rules-based system to enforce better labour or environmental practices now.

Given that we already have a trade relationship with Colombia, how does having the most robust rules on labour and the environment of any trade agreement Canada has ever signed make things worse for the people of Colombia? The member mentioned Just Us! Coffee, a great company in my riding that the Martin government made an investment in supporting. I agree that it has made a difference, but it is one company.

We want to see rules that govern the activities of all Canadian companies there to strengthen the rights and environmental protection of the people of Colombia. The people we met with there believe that legitimate economic opportunity that weans them off of the drug trade that is destroying the environment, destroying lives and creating violence can actually help.

How does having more rules make the situation worse? I have an additional question. Can the member name one free trade agreement that the NDP has ever supported? He said that the NDP—

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, October 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments from my colleague from Charlottetown today who has provided some very thoughtful commentary on the situation in Colombia and the potential effect of a free trade agreement with Canada.

He spoke of the issues of civil war in Colombia. It is a country that for 40 years has wrestled with a civil war that began along ideological grounds but that has evolved more into just a drug war, in which there are former paramilitaries now, who are drug gangsters, effectively, and FARC, which is still active, not on the ideological side as much as on the drug side. It is a civil war that continues to be fueled by drug money.

When I was in Colombia a couple of months ago, some of the former paramilitary members with whom I met, who have been demobilized, told me that the reason they joined the paramilitaries in the first place was the lack of real economic opportunity in a legitimate economy or through legitimate trade. It is the same with FARC members. They joined FARC because the only job they could find was something to do with either the war or the drug trade.

Does the hon. member see the potential of the legitimate economy and legitimate economic trade with Colombia as providing opportunities for these people so that they do not have to go into either the drug trade or a civil war?

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 30th, 2009]

You are a big supporter of free trade.

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 30th, 2009]

No, that's not true.

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 30th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member claims that paramilitary groups have murdered trade unionists this year. She should be aware that paramilitary groups have been disbanded in Colombia, but there are drug gangsters who continue to exist. There continues to be a battle between FARC, the leftist guerrillas who philosophically are closer to her party, and the drug lords who continue to operate in what has become not an ideological war today but a drug war.

To say that paramilitary forces are murdering union leaders today is false, because everybody who has been studying the issue recognizes that the paramilitary forces have been disbanded, and in fact the trend line on these attacks has decreased tremendously. The fact is that there is a drug war in Colombia and the best way to provide an alternative to the narco-economy is through legitimate trade.

She also has said, and the trade critic for the party has claimed, that President Obama is against it. In fact President Obama has said that he supports the free trade agreement and has instructed Ambassador Kirk, his trade representative, to work closely with President Uribe's team to proceed with the free trade agreement, so the U.S. Democrat position is in support--

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from the New Democrats has expressed some real concerns today.

In terms of trade unionists, however, he must realize that the murders of unionists have declined 73% since the election of the Uribe government in 2002, that the Uribe government actually provides full-time, 24-hour paid security for 1,800 union leaders and that the attacks on these union leaders are almost exclusively from drug gangsters or FARC guerrillas. The narco-economy in Colombia is one of the biggest challenges.

How does the member not realize that providing legitimate, rules-based trading opportunities will actually help the Colombian people wean themselves off that narco-economy?

These attacks have occurred without any free trade agreement, without any rules-based approach. He says, and I believe him, that he wants to see a rules-based approach. How does signing the most robust labour and environment side agreements we have ever signed in any trade agreement have any potential but to make things better?