SRID Committee Meeting

SUB-COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

SOUS-COMITÉ DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE ET DU DÉVELOPPEMENT INTERNATIONAL DU COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES ÉTRANGÈRES ET DU COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Wednesday, March 14, 2001

• 1530

[English]

The Chair (Ms. Beth Phinney (Hamilton Mountain, Lib.)): I call the meeting to order. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the first meeting of the Sub-Committee on Human Rights and International Development for this session.

For the benefit of committee members, I want you to know that at the next meeting we will have briefings from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, and then from CIDA, on their activities related to our mandate. That should help those of us who are new members on the committee, and there will be updates for the returning members.

Today we will get an overview of the current situation and future prospects in Columbia. We will begin with the Hon. David Kilgour, who is Canada's Secretary of State for Latin America and Africa, and who has recently visited Columbia several times. Maybe he'll tell us how many times. We will then hear from a number of Columbian visitors representing labour, women's groups, indigenous groups, and others who are in Canada to raise the awareness of the situation in Columbia.

Mr. Svend Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): On a point of order, Madam.

The Chair: Yes.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Could we have interpretation into Spanish while our guests from Columbia are here?

The Chair: We will when it's time for them to speak.

Mr. Svend Robinson: They wanted to hear the evidence.

The Chair: We don't have it, I'm sorry.

Mr. Svend Robinson: We don't?

The Chair: No. We have a translator, but not—-

The Clerk of the Committee: We had a problem trying to get a translator. The person is going to come at 4:15 p.m.

Mr. Svend Robinson: So they won't be able to hear anything that's being said.

The Chair: I'm sorry, for the guests, that we don't have translation into Spanish, but we will have a translator when it is their turn to speak. Make sure they know that.

With those comments, I will call on Minister Kilgour.

[Translation]

Hon. David Kilgour (Secretary of State (Latin America and Africa)): Madam Chair, dear colleagues,

[English]

I must make an apology too, Madam Chair. My statement has not been translated into French and English, and I apologize for that. I wish it were in Spanish as well. It will be available afterwards, and if anybody would like it I'll send it to them.

I would like to congratulate the committee for deciding to look at the subject of human rights in Columbia. I've visited Bogotá six times as Secretary of State. Last month I was there for a week-long symposium on peacekeeping in the Americas, which was presented by the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre. It was attended by approximately a hundred Columbians from a wide range of institutions, including the human rights community. Each time, Madam Chair, I go to Columbia the complexity of the situation becomes more apparent. I know my colleague, in fact my fellow member of the class of 1979—there are only three of us left, Madam Chair—has been as well.

I get more confused each time I go to Columbia. There are plainly no quick or easy answers to the complex issues of social exclusion, narco-trafficking, violent insurgency, and human rights problems facing the country. I think it's fair to say, though, that drugs are the oxygen that fuels much of the horror across Columbia, which today is costing 71 lives violently a day on average.

[Translation]

The challenges in Colombia are enormous. An adequate presentation of them would require several hours. However, to assist in understanding some of the forces at play, I'll begin today by commenting on four of the groups whose activities are impacting negatively on human rights in that country. These groups are known commonly as the FARC, ELN, paramilitaries and the military.

• 1535

[English]

During the fifties, sixties, and seventies, various guerrilla groups espoused a Maoist, agrarian agenda. The largest and most durable of these was the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC, which is now estimated to number between 15,000 and 20,000 members. In addition to being active throughout Colombia, the FARC occupies a “demilitarized” zone about the size of Switzerland, which was granted by the government of Andres Pastrana in late 1998 as a catalyst and safe haven for the conduct of peace negotiations.

The violence perpetrated by the FARC across the country is widespread and includes summary executions of civilians they accuse of challenging FARC goals, armed attacks on police and army facilities, and the use of explosive gas canisters that result in indiscriminate death and wounding.

The FARC supports its army and guerrilla operations mainly through revenues derived from kidnapping in the cocaine sector. FARC kidnap-for-ransom targets include Colombian citizens who are specifically selected beforehand, ordinary citizens who are chosen through random roadblocks, and citizens who are “purchased” from criminal gangs.

The FARC “prisons” also include large numbers of captured army troops and police officers. The FARC has denied the International Red Cross access to prisoners it holds.

Despite repeated overtures by President Pastrana during the past two years, the FARC has to date resisted making any significant concessions in the ongoing discussions with the government. This attitude appears to reflect a conviction that an eventual military victory over the Colombian army is possible and fear of reprisals from paramilitary groups should FARC members disarm unilaterally.

The lack of real concessions from the FARC to date has resulted in widespread public disillusionment with the peace process and a reduction in public support for the peace initiatives of President Pastrana.

Optimists say that a recent decision by the FARC to permit international monitoring of the peace negotiations signals more positive prospects for the future.

ELN—Ejército de Liberación Nacional—is the second-largest guerrilla group, with an estimated 4,000 to 5,000 members. Created with an ideological mix of Che Guevara and liberation theology, the ELN has financed itself through extortion, kidnapping, and of course the drug sector. The ELN has been particularly active in the destruction of public infrastructure such as hydro towers and bridges.

It is believed that the ELN has been weakened significantly in recent months and it now appears prepared to consider seriously the prospects of ceasefire and peace agreements, the surrender of arms, and entry into Colombian society. In the belief that peace with the ELN can be achieved, the Colombian government has offered to grant the ELN its own safe zone where peace talks can be held in a secure environment.

Paramilitary activity has existed in one form or another in Colombia for decades. In the 1980s these groups began to expand rapidly as hired “protectors” for drug barons, landowners, and business owners. In addition, given the apparent inability of the Colombian military to control the national territory, many paramilitary units were created by or with the acquiescence of the Colombian military to help fight expanding guerrilla movements.

Although the paramilitaries were made illegal by the Colombian government in the mid-nineties, they continued to benefit from the support of a significant segment of the Colombian population. In addition to the receipt of donations from landowners and other business persons, the paramilitaries also receive funds from the flourishing drug sector. Unlike the guerrilla movements, the paramilitaries do not use kidnapping as a primary means to fund their activities.

As indicated by numbers mentioned before, the rapidly expanding paramilitary groups are believed now to conduct most of Colombia's summary executions and are increasingly engaging guerrilla groups in direct military confrontations. Tragically, as part of their campaign against the guerrillas, the paramilitaries regularly murder civilians accused of “collaborating” with the guerrillas.

• 1540

Madam Chair, the military of the country has approximately 146,000 members. Despite its significantly larger size, the army has not succeeded, during 37 years of internal conflict, in mounting a sustained, decisive action against the guerrillas, who have constituted the primary armed force in a significant portion of the national territory. I wonder how many members know that there are approximately 200 communities across Colombia, in the peripheral regions, that have no regular police, military, or any other form of state presence.

Recently the government and military have undertaken a greater effort to confront the paramilitaries, thank goodness. Although the Government of Colombia has identified paramilitaries as perhaps the most serious problem in their country, army and paramilitary collusion is still believed to be significant, particularly in the middle and lower ranks of the military.

[Translation]

As indicated by the heavy dependence of the guerilla and paramilitaries on revenues from the drug sector, Colombia is now the focus of an illegal drug trade that grows, processes and distributes nearly 70% of the world's cocaine and more than two- thirds of the opium produced in this hemisphere.

Although an anti-drug area spraying campaign was initiated in December in the major drug producing regions, it is still unclear to what extent Colombia's production and export of illicit drugs will be affected.

[English]

As in other Andean countries, such as Peru and Bolivia, a primary concern of small producers affected by drug eradication efforts is the opportunity for the viable production and export of substitute crops. The Colombian government and guerrillas have both requested the assistance of countries, including Canada, in this regard.

I will say a word about Plan Colombia, Madam Chair. In its efforts to resolve the problems facing the country, the Government of Colombia has developed a comprehensive strategy called Plan Colombia. It's a $7.5 billion plan, which includes proposals to address progress in such areas as the peace process, strengthening the economy, social development, combating narco-trafficking, reforming the judicial system and the protection of human rights, and democracy development.

During the March 8 meeting between the Government of Colombia and the FARC negotiators, the latter confirmed that the guerrilla organization approves the current government policy against drug trafficking, but believes that the funds being spent on the “military component” of Plan Colombia should be redirected to the social and other components. By the way, the military component refers to funding intended to assist the Colombia military in regaining control of the drug-producing regions.

Now I address challenges to human rights, the subject that brings us here today. The civilian population in Colombia, which is about 40 million people, is caught in the crossfire of the opposing armed groups. Civilians, often human rights defenders, social activists, journalists and political commentators, trade unionists, the displaced communities of Paez, and indigenous peoples are the most frequent targets for both guerrillas and paramilitaries.

If you can imagine, every three hours, on average, a new high-profile kidnapping. As I mentioned earlier, 71 men, women, or children die daily, on average, as a direct result of la violencia, and most of those deaths, I'm told, are not the result of the conflict. There were approximately 25,000 deaths and 3,500 reported kidnappings related to the conflict in calendar 2000. In addition, the internal conflict has forced approximately two million people from their homes since 1985.

At present the FARC and the ELN and the other smaller guerrilla groups are considered responsible by at least one human rights organization, the Colombian Jurists Association, for 22% of the human rights abuses, including 51% of the kidnappings for ransom. Approximately 2% of the abuses are now attributed by the Colombian Jurists to direct actions by the Colombian military. The paramilitaries or the illegal self-defence groups are currently thought to be responsible by the jurists for 72% of serious human rights abuses, including 5% of kidnappings. Unfortunately, regardless of the perpetrator, there is virtually total impunity associated with human rights abuses in Colombia, virtually 100%. Considered collectively, these factors make the human rights situation in Colombia the most serious in our hemisphere.

• 1545

[Translation]

Canada is doing what it can to improve the human right situation in Colombia. Our initiatives include active support for human security projects and social and economic development; the needs of the internally displaced; human rights training for the military; the Bogotá office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; the United Nations Secretary General's special advisor on international assistance to Colombia; and, an active program of human rights intervention by our Embassy.

Canadian Official Development Assistance also provides funding for human rights monitoring, the fight against illegal crops, impunity and promoting human rights awareness.

In addition, Canada has been asked to participate in both the ELN and FARC peace processes.

[English]

In regard to the peace process, I realize I'm taking quite a lot of time, so perhaps I could leave that. If somebody wants to raise the topic, I can deal with that. Of course, it's related to human rights, but it's not directly

[Translation]

related to

[English]

human rights.

In conclusion, the Canadian government and many individual Canadians—there are about 1,800 Canadians living in Colombia—share a profound concern for the human security, social, and economic challenges confronting the beleaguered people of Colombia. Although the eventual signing and enforcement of agreements to address these problems must depend primarily on Colombians themselves, I believe your committee and Canadians generally are fully prepared to accompany Colombians on their path to a better future.

Hopefully the charts are reasonably self-explanatory and consistent with what I've been saying.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

I'm sorry I didn't acknowledge her on my way in, because I didn't recognize her, but I'd like to introduce the Ambassador for the Republic of Colombia to Canada, Ambassador Fanny Kertzman. Welcome to our meeting.

Now I would like the cooperation of the members. If we have what we had before, ten minutes from each party, there will be only one question from each party, and maybe not even that—four questions being asked. Could we have approximately five minutes, and then if somebody wants to come back...?

Okay, then we'll start with Mr. Goldring.

Mr. Peter Goldring (Edmonton Centre-East, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you very much for your presentation, Minister Kilgour.

From your description, I would certainly think if there ever was a definition for chaos, this might very well be it.

My understanding of guerrilla movements and areas like that involving countries is that generally they are located in primary regions of the country. You did indicate Switzerland as comparable in size to one organization's territory. But to clarify this for me, could you tell me what percentage of the country's total land mass that organization, FARC, occupies, and also what percentage for ELN? Is that relative to it? I would assume that the government and military would be in control of the balance. Could you give us some idea of the percentages?

Mr. David Kilgour: If you can see my chart, the FARC zone is about the size of the part I've indicated with my finger.

Mr. Peter Goldring: Oh yes.

• 1550

Mr. David Kilgour: But keep in mind that the FARC moves all over the country, or at least parts of the country.

Mr. Peter Goldring: But they occupy that area?

Mr. David Kilgour: Yes, that is their zone, and they basically have complete control of that.

Mr. Peter Goldring: So that's some 10% or 20%?

Mr. David Kilgour: I would say it's probably closer to 5% or 10%.

Mr. Peter Goldring: Yes, okay.

Mr. David Kilgour: And as you heard, they're negotiating an area for the ELN to have an equivalent zone.

Mr. Peter Goldring: So is the majority of the country well under the control of the government and the military?

Mr. David Kilgour: You'll get different figures, and the ambassador would probably have a better figure than I would, but I think it's supposed to be about 50% of the country that is in the hands of the FARC.

Does she wish to put her view on the record?

Mr. Peter Goldring: Given that situation, that there's a fair or substantial amount under the government territory—and in one note I have here Canada is contributing some aid to the Government of Colombia. Could you tell me some of the background and where that aid goes, what it's mainly directed for, and a bit of a breakdown?

Mr. David Kilgour: Human rights monitoring is the first category. We're providing aid to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights through a $600,000 grant, which supplements a previous $500,000 initiative.

Mr. Peter Goldring: It shows here some $33 million, though.

Mr. David Kilgour: Yes, I'll come to that.

The Canada Fund for Local Initiatives project is helping the office of the national ombudsman, where we have programs combating impunity—I don't have a sum for that, but I think it's about a $500,000. We have a five-year $1.5 million bilateral project supporting the work of Colombian human rights NGOs. Through a partnership project with the Canadian NGO, Development and Peace, we have a database on—

Mr. Peter Goldring: Would these be primarily peace-related and human rights-related?

Mr. David Kilgour: They're human rights and peace-related.

Mr. Peter Goldring: Given that that's a sizeable amount of funding, could you tell me whether Colombia was a signator to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child? If so, article 1 refers to a child as being 18 years and under, but article 38 specifically allows children to go to war at the age of 15. As a matter of fact, they can even voluntarily join an army at any age. With this considerable amount of, I would say, clout of funding, would this not be a first place to start, to have at least some cooperation so that children are not taken into the armed forces for fighting?

Mr. David Kilgour: I understand that Colombia has signed the convention, and Canada is very concerned about this issue too.

I'm told that the children are not in the army; they're in the guerrilla movement, and they're recruited in places like south Bogotá.

The government is doing its best—

Mr. Peter Goldring: I understand that, but seeing as we're looking at a complex approach, a very intricate and involved approach overall, and understanding that all things cannot be done in one day, so to speak, would we not consider that this should be one of the highest priorities, to have at least the basic, most minimal level of cooperation from all parties involved so that at least our children aren't given AK-47s and put out in a war zone?

Mr. David Kilgour: I couldn't agree with you more. To its credit, the Government of Colombia has not, to the best of my knowledge, involved children in its armed forces. But the problem, as I'm sure you're aware, is that children are recruited and have been recruited by the guerrillas.

The Chair: Thank you. You may have time a little later, Mr. Goldring.

Mr. Bellemare.

[Translation]

Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, would you describe Colombia as a country under anarchy?

Mr. David Kilgour: That is a good question. I said earlier that, according to my sources, 200 communities in peripheral regions of the country have no regular police or military presence. These communities totally lack in the most elementary protection a society can have. It is not clearly indicated on the map, but there are mountains that cut the country in two. On the left, there are mountains and, on the right, prairies. In the small and isolated communities, the situation is as you have described.

• 1555

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Since the country is dominated by anarchy, are we not placing our citizens in danger? If I understood you well, several personalities, even members of the Parliament, have been kidnapped and probably killed in some cases. I think we have mining engineers working in Colombia as well as teachers, NGO representatives and missionaries. Since we are involved in the development of Colombia, are we not taking certain risks in sending Canadian citizens to work there?

Mr. David Kilgour: You are absolutely right, Mr. Bellemare. Three weeks ago, I was in the south of Bogotá where I met people working for NGOs who are taking enormous risks. As I said, 3,400 people are kidnapped each year. For example, I am told that, if you are sitting in a car and you are stopped, the kidnappers take your wallet and, with the help of a computer, can learn how much money you have in your bank account. They are so sophisticated and, as you mentioned, if you are Canadian, you are naturally seen as an ideal candidate.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: So, with whom do we do business? If we can come to an agreement with the Colombian government to maintain good relations and to help it develop, especially in the area of human rights, there seems to be nucleii everywhere, in other words sub-countries. You have rebels here, guerillas there who control... In practical terms, do we have to negotiate with these different so-called governments?

Mr. David Kilgour: Up to now, the government has been negotiating with the FARC which uses as a base an area of the country where it keeps prisoners, for example, and we are now negotiating with the ELN for the establishment of another territorial base. Apart from these two bases that I have mentioned, held by rebels, I do not think there are others.

In my opinion, frankly, the government is looking for a way to establish a durable peace in the country. Ten million Colombians took to the streets a year and a half ago to protest with signs saying “no más”, which means “ça suffit”, or “no more”. Given the data I have mentioned, you can imagine the life of a Colombian. The economy is not doing very well. Unemployment is at 30% apparently. This used to be one of the strongest economy in Latin America up until two years ago and people are now looking for ways to leave the country.

The Chair: Mr. Dubé.

Mr. Antoine Dubé (Lévis-et-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, BQ): Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is the first time I take part in a meeting of the Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Development. I have read as much as I could, including the third report of the External Affairs and International Commerce Committee on Colombia, dated February 11, 2000, which includes a detailed analysis. The committee made seven recommendations, including four which concerned specifically the Government of Canada. I will quote one because I do not know if you have the report. What I would like to know, in terms of follow-up—it has been a year—, is what has been done concretely by the Government of Canada, following the recommendations made by the External Affairs Committee. I ask that you to look more closely at the fifth recommendation, at the bottom of the page, where it says:

• 1600

Calls upon the Government of Canada to exercise increased monitoring of the impact of Canadian corporate trade and investment in Colombia in order to ensure that the presence and activities of Canadian corporations are not worsening the conflict or the human rights situation and to report back to this committee on this issue;

There have been elections, true, but I am asking you what has been done.

Mr. David Kilgour: Are you quoting number 4 which concerns the investments and all that?

Mr. Antoine Dubé: I'm referring to the fifth recommendation at the bottom of the page. There are seven recommendations in the report, is that not so?

Mr. David Kilgour: Yes. You are referring to the fourth or the fifth?

Mr. Antoine Dubé: I am referring to the fifth more particularly. You can give me a general answer, but I would like you to spend more time on that one.

Mr. David Kilgour: This is a good subject and a very important one.

As I said earlier, up to now, if I understand correctly, no complaints have been made against Canadian corporations. They have done no wrong. I had discussions with businessmen and women over there, and it's so difficult down there. For example, in some places, there are explosions every three months. These kidnappings make everything so difficult.

If you can give me facts that show that the corporations have done something wrong, for example on the environmental side, the Colombian government insists on good practices. Up to now, it seems there have been no complaints made against Canadian companies concerning the environment. Close to six or seven million dollars are invested in that country. That economy is very important, the country is very important for Canadian trade and investment.

Mr. Antoine Dubé: I have one last question concerning the report submitted to government by the External Affairs Committee. I imagine a committee cannot give orders to the government, that it can only make recommendations. Was there a written response to this report?

Mr. David Kilgour: Yes, there was one. Unfortunately, it is in English. Is there a French version? I could give you a copy of that report.

Mr. Antoine Dubé: Does the committee already have the report?

Mr. Svend Robinson: Yes, there was a response. A response was sent to us by former minister Axworthy.

[English]

The Chair: No. The main committee received a copy, but not the subcommittee. We can get you a copy.

[Translation]

Mr. Antoine Dubé: Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Are you finished, Monsieur Dubé.

[Translation]

Mr. Antoine Dubé: Yes. I have no more questions.

[English]

The Chair: Mr. Robinson, and then Mr. Cotler.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to welcome the minister before the committee, and I thank him for his personal commitment to Colombia. I know he has travelled there on a number of occasions.

I had the privilege of visiting Colombia myself just a couple of months ago. I travelled with the ambassador, Ambassador Rishchynski, and his very dedicated and hardworking staff, up to Barrancabermeja at a very critical time. The situation in Barranca is absolutely appalling, as I'm sure the minister is aware. Nine people had been murdered by paramilitaries in the 24 hours previous to my visit there. And impunity, as the minister says, is virtually total throughout the country.

Because there are only a few minutes, I want to just maybe put two or three questions on the record, and then I'll ask the minister if he would respond to them.

The first is with respect to the issue of Plan Colombia. As the minister knows, the military component of Plan Colombia has been denounced strongly by many commentators, including the European Parliament and many of the groups representing civil society in Colombia itself. I met with elected representatives, senators, and members of congress who said they had been largely shut out of the process of the development of Plan Columbia.

• 1605

Frankly, many of us are disappointed that the Canadian government hasn't taken a clear position in speaking out strongly against the military component of Plan Colombia.

The minister said the government hasn't supported Plan Colombia. I'm inviting him here today to take a much stronger position and to actually make it clear that Canada does not support the military component of Plan Colombia; that we instead believe that there should be far greater emphasis on social and economic support; and that we recognize that some of the implications of Plan Colombia have nothing to do with drugs and everything to do with an American military agenda directed at the guerrilla forces in the south. There's no Plan Colombia military component in the north, for example, as the minister knows.

Will the minister not make a clear statement, speaking out against Plan Colombia's military component?

I have two other questions. First, I wonder if the minister could tell us whether there is any direct or indirect Canadian military involvement in the military component of Plan Colombia. I'm thinking here specifically of any involvement by Canadian companies in servicing helicopters that are involved in Plan Colombia, or indeed of any former Canadian helicopters that may now be used in the military component of Plan Colombia.

Finally, Madam Chair, what role is Canada going to be playing with respect to Colombia and the upcoming meeting of the UN Human Rights Commission? The situation has gotten worse, as the minister knows. The human rights situation is devastating.

I met with Anders Kompass, the UN representative, who was very critical of the Colombian government. He said the situation had gotten worse and that the links between the paramilitaries and military personnel are blatant in places like Putumayo, for example.

Are we going to be calling for a strong resolution, Madam Chair, at the UN Human Rights Commission and not just another chairperson's statement? Will we take a strong stand in light of the deteriorating situation in Colombia?

The Chair: Mr. Minister.

Mr. David Kilgour: Mr. Robinson, I was on the justice committee for four years, so leave the minister one minute to reply.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Take all the time you need, Mr. Minister.

Mr. David Kilgour: First, as to the military or anti-drug component of Plan Colombia, we have been very skeptical about that. We have not supported that, as I'm sure you were told in Colombia, and I hope you've heard that many times.

We do think the government was democratically elected. We know it's having an extremely difficult time, which my friend, Mr. Robinson, knows as well. As you know, it's the only active conflict in the hemisphere. It's one that's probably costing lives as we speak. It's been a terrible situation, and we want to see the peace process work.

I'm sure you have it in your briefing notes. Canada has done a great deal to try to bring about peace. We've pushed the government on all kinds of issues, human rights issues, and have severed all ties with the paramilitaries.

For example, the member asked about Canadian involvement in helicopters, and I'm sure my colleague is thinking of Vector. We have not approved an export permit for aircraft parts, although we are aware of Vector Aerospace's announcement of a contract. We're in touch with the company and its affiliates, and we hope we'll get the information we need.

If the contract does involve the export of parts or technology, we'll—

Mr. Svend Robinson: What about the servicing of those helicopters?

Mr. David Kilgour: My understanding is that...in Colombia or here?

Mr. Svend Robinson: Yes. By Vector.

Mr. David Kilgour: No. We do not service military helicopters. If my colleague has knowledge of this being done, I would be extremely grateful if he would let me know.

The final question, about human rights—

Mr. Svend Robinson: I'm sorry. I had asked about any Canadian helicopters that have ended up in Colombia, transited perhaps through the United States.

Mr. David Kilgour: That's a well-phrased question.

To my knowledge, there are no military helicopters that have gone to Colombia. But Mr. Robinson is very much aware of the workings of the defence agreements between Canada and the United States, and I'm sure that's what he's getting at in his question.

• 1610

I will not undertake a long dissertation on how that agreement works. We will support a strong statement from the chair of the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

Mr. Svend Robinson: What about a resolution?

Mr. David Kilgour: At the moment we're committed to supporting a very strong statement by the chair.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Not a resolution?

The Chair: Mr. Cotler.

Mr. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.): I too want to express my appreciation to the minister for his involvement, dedication, and commitment, which has been exemplary in this and other respects.

I have a set of interrelated questions, partly in response to some of your remarks.

You mentioned that human rights violations are not directly related to the peace process, but of course the peace process may impact on human rights violations. I'm inviting you to do something that maybe time did not permit you, and that is to discuss somewhat the interrelationship between peace and human rights—the worst human rights violations tend to occur in the context of the conflict between the government and armed groups. As to the solicitation group for the peace process that now exists with the FARC and the ELN, I wonder whether there can be some involvement with the paramilitary in that regard.

Mr. David Kilgour: Thank you for raising that, Mr. Cotler.

The peace process has dragged on with glacier-like progress. There seems to have been a breakthrough lately. In fairness, some people will tell you or anybody who goes there that some parties to the process don't want peace. If you're bringing in hundreds of million dollars a year, do you really want to see the status quo changed so that you bring in perhaps nothing or infinitely less? I think that's one of the questions that has haunted everybody involved with these processes, whether there's a real desire.

I don't think anybody questions the sincerity of President Pastrana. He has made enormously courageous efforts, including going in to sign the Los Pozos agreement with the guerrilla leader about ten days ago. I think he has put everything he can on the line to achieve peace, and there has been exceedingly little progress until perhaps a week or ten days ago.

Does the member have a copy of the agreement that he and the leader of the FARC signed?

Mr. Irwin Cotler: No. I know some comments and references that have been made to it, but I do not have a copy of the agreement itself.

Mr. David Kilgour: We'll provide a copy of that.

One of the things it allows, for the first time, is the involvement of the international community, and that has been happening. Canada is involved, as well as a number of other countries. For example, Canada and nine other countries—Sweden, France, Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Norway, Spain, Italy, and Switzerland—were asked by both sides to participate as facilitators for the peace process with the FARC. The role of the facilitators will be to encourage and assist in negotiations between FARC and the government.

Discussions to date between the government and the ELN have been facilitated by Cuba, Norway, Switzerland, France, and Spain. Five other countries—Canada, Japan, Sweden, Portugal, and Germany—have been asked to provide monitors or verifiers for the proposed ELN zone. One of the things Canada has to be sure of is that it would be safe if we took a role in that as verifiers.

But Mr. Cotler, with his vast experience, may be thinking about the fact that if you get peace, the problems of violence and terrible human rights abuses will stop, and I'm sure that's the hope of 40 million Venezuelans, but as I think Mr. Robinson, who has been there too, might say, there is some skepticism about that.

As I've said before, the feeling is that when you have this oxygen that fuels the drug trade, it's an enormous disincentive to achieve peace. If you're making huge amounts of money, how anxious are you going to be to end your ability to market cocaine or heroin? In fact, one of the people at the peace conference, a very respected figure in Colombia, said he didn't know how peace could ever be achieved until something was done about the narco-trafficking. It's the chicken and egg thing: as long as we have narcotics flowing out of Columbia into places like Montreal and Ottawa, are we ever going to be able to achieve peace? I would welcome comments of any of the members on that subject, if they want to speak to me afterwards, or make a comment now, if time is short.

• 1615

The Chair: Mr. Cotler, that's your five minutes. You could get a turn after, but I'm not sure.

Mr. Goldring.

Mr. Peter Goldring: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have one point first and then I do have a question.

Mr. Minister, I realize that time is rather limited here, but you did mention some of the items that are on the list of the aid projects. I wonder if we could have tabled that list of the aid projects, for financial aid as well as for personnel and material supplies and aid.

Mr. David Kilgour: I'll table it, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Mr. Goldring, do you have a question?

Mr. Peter Goldring: Yes. That was my point and now I have a question.

Mr. Minister, I want to return again to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. I'm looking for some help from you on this because I find here a bit of confusion, a bit of hypocrisy, in my mind. Whereas in article 1 it says that below the age of 18 is the definition of a child, yet in this convention, which Canada is a signatory to—and in the investigations there was no objection to this filed with the United Nations, even during and up to its full acceptance—article 38 only mentions to refrain from recruiting any person who has not reached the age of 15 years. In other words, if a person volunteers, they could be 10 years, they could be 12 years.

Given that this brief from Columbia indicates that 30% of the forces of the guerrillas are children, Mr. Minister, do you not feel that for it to be fair and consistent, in Canada and with foreign countries, really this article 38 concerning children to be used in the armed forces of nations should say under the age of 18, not under the age of 15; in other words, 17 years or under? Would that not be reasonable? Can you imagine why Canada would be a signatory to such a United Nations standard?

Mr. David Kilgour: The chair would probably say that was not relevant to what we're talking about today, but—

Mr. Peter Goldring: Human rights.

Mr. David Kilgour: On the question of Columbia, Columbia does not allow children under the age of 18 in the military. They passed a law last year to make sure that was the case.

Again, the point can't be made too often: it's the rebel group who are using children.

Mr. Peter Goldring: But they're in negotiations now.

Mr. David Kilgour: Yes, that's quite true, and one of the things I'm sure the Government of Columbia and the Government of Canada and every government wants to do is to stop seeing kids who are 13 or 14 dragged into fighting with any side of the dispute.

Mr. Peter Goldring: But what about this as a human rights issue for the rest of the world, for Canada to be signatory to this? Is this not being inconsistent with our own beliefs on human rights throughout the world?

Mr. David Kilgour: With respect, we have enough human rights problems in Columbia to then get into that.

Mr. Peter Goldring: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Robinson, and then Mr. Cotler.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you. I want to follow up on a couple of the questions I asked earlier.

On Plan Columbia, one of the many concerns about the military component is the fact that there are other far more appropriate responses to the current tragedy in Columbia than spraying and a military element to Plan Columbia. The European Parliament, for example, has talked about the importance of negotiated and agreed solutions in the fight against illegal crops—agrarian reform and alternative crops—such as addressing the desperate poverty, for example, that affects many of the peasants there and providing them with some meaningful alternatives; such as looking at manual eradication instead of spraying, for example.

• 1620

I want to ask the minister again. The minister said Canada hasn't supported the military component of Plan Colombia. Has Canada voiced its concern? Did the minister voice his concern, his opposition, to the military component of Plan Colombia in his dialogue with Colombian government officials?

Mr. David Kilgour: To answer the first part, the Colombian government is prepared to negotiate the crop substitution, but it is true too that some of these crops are being grown on large plantations by drug barons, if I can put it that way, controlled by the rebels. In fact, at one point, the paramilitaries were hired by the drug traffickers to protect their fields from interference.

Mr. Svend Robinson: In fact, Colombia's military component doesn't deal with the paramilitaries at all.

Mr. David Kilgour: The Government of Columbia has taken a stand. I asked President Pastrana about that when I met with him, and he's actively trying to stop the funding, because the fuel for the paramilitaries is the funding they get from people who pay them. As I'm sure you know, Mr. Robinson, they've grown from an estimated 4,000 to 8,000 people in the last couple of years.

Mr. Svend Robinson: And, of course, in Putamayo, for example, the paramilitaries are operating in locations the military is completely familiar with and yet nothing is done whatsoever to respond to that concern.

Has the minister actually condemned the military component of Plan Colombia in his dialogue with the Colombian government? Has he joined in condemning it? He says we haven't supported it, but has he voiced concern about this?

Mr. David Kilgour: We support human rights. We've supported human rights, as you know, from the people you met—

Mr. Svend Robinson: That wasn't my question. My question was about the military component of Plan Colombia. Has the minister condemned that?

Mr. David Kilgour: We have taken, as I said before, the view that we neither support nor condemn.

Mr. Svend Robinson: That's a complete cop-out, with respect, Madam Chair.

The minister has also answered my question with respect to military sales. I believe the minister stated that Vector is not servicing military helicopters. I spoke with the CEO of Vector and he was not able to give that assurance. How is the minister able to give that assurance?

Mr. David Kilgour: The Canadian part of Vector is not servicing military helicopters. Vector, I understand, has affiliates in different parts of the world, but the Canadian one, to our knowledge, is not servicing military helicopters. We're talking with them regularly on that.

Mr. Svend Robinson: And the minister's not aware of any helicopters that originated in Canada that are currently being used in the military component of Plan Colombia.

Mr. David Kilgour: If you find something, Mr. Robinson, I'd be grateful if you tell me immediately. There are no military helicopters.

Mr. Svend Robinson: And would the minister not agree that that would be quite unacceptable if it were indeed the case?

Mr. David Kilgour: Yes, I would agree.

Mr. Svend Robinson: My last question then, again, is given the deterioration of the human rights situation in Colombia, the fact that the UN representative, Anders Kompass—and I believe the minister would have met with Anders Kompass.

I'm not sure if the minister's assistants have been introduced. Has this gentleman been introduced yet?

Mr. David Kilgour: We can do that afterwards. Don't waste your questions.

The Chair: I'm sorry, we should have done that.

Mr. Svend Robinson: It's just that he's been regularly providing information here.

In terms of the deterioration of the situation there, the UN representative with whom I met said that the situation has gotten significantly worse, and he was very concerned about the Colombian government's failure particularly to break the links between paramilitary and military; there is the issue of impunity. Why is it that the minister and the government are not prepared to support stronger action at the upcoming meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights than another chairman's statement? The situation has gotten worse and yet we're saying another chairperson's statement is good enough. Why is the minister not prepared to listen to the voices of NGOs and civil society in Colombia as well and say we have to send a much stronger signal to Colombia that this impunity, this violence, has to stop?

Mr. David Kilgour: I take that as a representation. Madam Chair, if the members of this committee want to recommend what has just been recommended, I assure you that the government will take it very seriously.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Thank you.

The Chair: Mr. Cotler.

Mr. Irwin Cotler: I want to go back and continue this line of questioning, because you mentioned, Minister, the report of the Colombian Jurists Association, which said the paramilitaries are blamed for 72% of the extrajudicial killings and much of the gross human rights abuses. But as we know, the numbers and the strength of the paramilitaries are growing and impunity continues to be absolute. My question is, because I know the Canadian ambassador has called upon the government to bring paramilitaries to justice, and I know that in the recent agreement, the Los Pozos agreement, the government agreed to create a commission to study ways of curbing the paramilitaries.... I am wondering if there is anything specific that we may be able to recommend, even through the UN Human Rights Commission, on that matter.

• 1625

Mr. David Kilgour: I don't think there's any doubt that the only way to deactivate the paramilitaries is to cut off their funding. They're paid well, and as I said, they've doubled in size in the last year or so. If they could stop people from sending them cheques every month or having money deposited to pay them, they would probably begin to shrink very quickly. It's the money that's keeping them going.

Mr. Irwin Cotler: Is there any evidence of Canadian corporate complicity in human rights violations?

Mr. David Kilgour: There is none that I am aware of, and if you or anybody here becomes aware of anything, I would ask you to let me know immediately. The Canadians you talk to there are as concerned about the situation as anybody. They can't go out of Bogotá, the capital, without extreme danger. Companies like Enbridge have had great difficulty. No, the Canadians are concerned about this and want peace as much as anybody. As I said, I would very much like to know if you ever discover any indication that a Canadian or a Canadian company is involved in helping the paramilitaries to continue to survive.

Their brutality is.... One of the stories I heard when I was there was that the FARC will go into a village and demand to be fed. People, with guns to their heads, will feed them, and then two days later the paramilitaries will come along and say “You fed these people”, and they will shoot them. It is an unspeakable horror. All of us in the hemisphere have to find a way of helping them to bring it to a stop. President Pastrana has asked for the help of Canada and all the countries that will be at the summit to get all of the parties involved in this situation in Colombia to come up with a viable peace.

The Chair: Mr. Cotler, do you have another question?

Mr. Irwin Cotler: No, that's fine.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

We have Ron Davidson. Could you introduce him first?

Mr. David Kilgour: I would like to introduce Jean-Paul Ruszkowski. He has lived in Peru for 14 years and is a Canadian. He is an adviser to me.

The Chair: We have Ron Davidson—or did you already introduce him? That's fine.

Mr. Minister, if you'd like to stay, you are quite welcome. I know you probably have other things to do. You may like to hear what these people have to say—or any of your staff who want to stay.

Again, we thank you very much. Could you make sure we have copies of your words at the beginning of the meeting? We will translate them for everybody into English, French, and Spanish.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Madam Chair, I have a point of order. I haven't had a chance to speak with Mr. Bellemare yet or to get around the table to Mr. Cotler, but I think, following up on the minister's suggestion that the committee may want to provide some direction in the shape of a motion about the position we might take at the upcoming meeting of the UN Commission on Human Rights, I'd be glad to work with other members of the committee to come up with a—

The Chair: Maybe we could discuss it after this meeting, when your friends here have all had a chance to speak. We don't want to use up their time.

We'll just take a two-minute break now, please.

• 1629

• 1635

The Chair: We're now going to hear from our Colombian visitors. There's something I haven't got straight. Are these people from Colombia, just visiting, or do they live in Canada, being originally from Columbia?

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal (Canada-Colombia Solidarity Campaign): They're from Colombia; they're visiting here.

The Chair: They're just visiting, not living here?

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: That's right.

The Chair: Okay. Thank you.

Maybe, Mr. Leal, you could introduce them.

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: Okay.

Thank you to everybody for being here and giving us a chance to present these positions, which you might not otherwise hear with respect to Colombia. This is part of an effort that we call the Invisible Struggles Tour. This represents social movements and popular sectors whose voices tend to go unheard in the midst of a conflict. We privilege these movements because of the belief that their proposals, their alternatives to the war, are very viable and are not given a significant platform from which to be heard or negotiated. They have positions with respect to the conflict in Colombia that are different from, for example, Plan Colombia and from the notion that drugs are what fuels the war and are the main cause of the conflict. Rather there are other issues to do with social justice, building legitimate democracy, etc.

Each of these people is going to state who they are, very briefly, the movement they represent, what the principles are, some of the elements of their movement, and some of the points of concern they have for the Canadian government with respect to Colombia, which perhaps the Canadian government would consider when developing further its policies towards Colombia, allowing these people to have more visibility and more voice.

The Chair: Thank you. And who is going to go first?

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga.

The Chair: We have a translator who is going to translate after each person speaks, so this is going to take up quite a bit more time. We ask that they keep their statements short, and we will keep our questions and answers short.

Is he going to speak for five minutes, and then she's going to translate?

Mr. Svend Robinson: I think each one was two minutes.

The Chair: Two minutes.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Yes.

The Chair: Go ahead, then.

Mr. Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga (Cauca Province, Southern Colombia) (Interpretation): I am Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga. I am an indigenous leader from the region of Cauca, and I represent the autonomous governments. Our governments are included in the 1991 constitution, and we work for what we call a life plan.

• 1640

Our organization is recognized at the three levels of government: at the level of municipalities, at the provincial level, and at the national level. Therefore, we can enter into agreement with international organizations.

Our life plan views development in a different way, in a non-violent way, and we are against any type of war. We would like the Canadian government to recognize the social sectors and to recognize that the alternative for Colombia is a social investment. We talk about drugs, we talk about guerrillas in Colombia, but the problem is older, and it has to do with the lack of social investment. If we do not solve the social problem, what we are doing is just putting some makeup onto our problems and not solving anything.

The Chair: Who's going next, Mr. Leal?

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: Mr. Carlos Rosero, from the Autonomous Afrocolombian Movement, will speak now.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Carlos Rosero (National Leader, Autonomous Afrocolombian Movement) (Interpretation): We consider that we, the Afro-descended communities, have suffered the displacement of 317,000 people, and there has been no protection of life. In some cases, there has even been collaboration between the military and paramilitary forces behind this displacement. There's not only the army, there are paramilitary forces. There is a 4% displacement caused by the army, but 55% is caused by the paramilitary forces. There is also 20% caused by guerrillas, with the remaining percentage caused by other actors.

In the displacement areas, what we are concerned about is the megaprojects, especially those in the region of Cauca's Buenaventura, because they affect the communities directly. We propose that there be moratoriums for these megaprojects, considering how they affect the communities who live around them.

• 1645

For us, Plan Colombia is only want. There is not a military component or a social component. We don't want this project to validate the terror that people in the area suffer.

The Chair: Thank you.

I wonder if any members of the committee want to know which areas they're talking about. Would you like Mr. Leal to point them out, or are we okay? It's okay? All right.

Who's next, Mr. Leal?

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: Patricia Buritica, of the National Labour Congress of Colombia, which is called the CUT.

The Chair: Okay, Patricia.

Ms. Patricia Buritica (Leader, National Labour Congress, CUT, (Union Federation)) (Interpretation): Good afternoon. Thank you very much for listening to us. I am representing the union movement in Colombia.

Our movement has so far had 3,000 people murdered by the military and the paramilitary forces. I'd like to say that in my country there is an alliance formed by the paramilitary, the armed forces, and private entrepreneurs, because they want to clean the area so that there is no problem for investments. The Colombian government has no clear plans against the paramilitary forces, only intentions—and we have heard that here.

When we talk about foreign governments acting on a country, they have to know they're acting on a country at war. The Government of Colombia and the Government of Canada have investment agreements, and we have to recognize that any agreement in that respect has to respect life, because with 3,000 people murdered and our union leaders...without union leaders there is no possibility for democracy in our country.

We are aware that the problem of drugs is a real problem, but we don't think fumigation is the answer. This has been recognized by local governments and even by the guerrillas. Yes, we need a plan against drugs. Fumigation is not the answer, but the substitution of crops is. The problem of drugs has to be addressed, but in a way respecting our environment, especially our ecological reserve called Amazonia.

• 1650

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: The next speaker is Dora Guzman from the Women's Popular Organization of Barrancabermeja.

Ms. Dora Guzman (Organización Femenina Popular (OFP), Barrancabermeja) (Interpretation): I represent the women's organization. For 29 years, we have been active in the community, building a capacity for training people to become autonomous and to build a civil society.

As women, we built these processes with care through the years, but when we wanted to validate them, we found ourselves harassed by paramilitary forces in the region because they don't want our way of life. It has taken us all this time to build our ways of life, because we want to be different, we want to take different positions, but when we assert ourselves in this respect, we are cut, and even our ways of living are cut.

These are very important concerns for us. On average, we can say there are 1,200 women who are really in danger of death, because there is no possibility of living the way we want, living the way we have built our lives, to live with dignity.

We have to be here to share with you people the stories we have lived. What we need immediately is a protectorate, especially in the region of Barrancabermeja and in Colombia, in order to protect our ways of life.

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: The next speaker is Agustin Reyes, from the Peasant Movement for Communities and Territories for Peace.

Mr. Agustin Reyes (Founder, ASOPRICOR) (Interpretation): Good afternoon, and thank you for listening to us.

• 1655

I come from Tocaima, and three years ago the paramilitaries killed 13 campesinos, or peasants, in our region. This is not an isolated practice, but has spread to other regions, to campesinos and to communities with a different way of life.

There are no answers to our problems. It is enough to look at the government statistics, which tell us that in 97% of cases the massacres are committed with impunity. We have opted to respond to these problems in our own way.

We have declared ourselves territories and communities of peace, and we ask these armed groups to respect our autonomy and our territorial boundaries.

But we have to make one thing very clear: peace for us doesn't mean only to silence the arms. For us, peace also means building social justice, which has not been built in our country.

Peace is not going to be built simply by removing the arms. It will happen through a process where the commission not only recognizes the role of the social organizations but also gives them support for this project of a new society.

In this respect, you have a great responsibility to provide to the poor what they need for either the projects of death or the projects of life. This is your choice.

The Acting Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.)): Thank you.

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: The next and final speaker is from the Women's Path to Peace, Ruta Pacifica, Maria del Pilar Cordoba.

Ms. Maria del Pilar Cordoba (Ruta Pacifica de Mujeres, Women's Path to Peace) (Interpretation): We are a pacifist, feminist movement, and we are against war as a solution to solve the Colombian problem.

• 1700

Our option is to strengthen the social fibre and the social organizations and to find different answers to the Colombian conflicts. The work exists not only in the internal areas but also within our minds, so we have to demilitarize not only the internal aspect of war but also what is in our minds.

The burden this armed conflict put on women is extremely heavy, and we want the impact this conflict has on women and on our civil society to be more visible.

As a civil movement for peace in Colombia, we ask not only our Colombian government but also Canadian society for a commitment to support the negotiations for peace and to support the breaking of the alliance between the armed forces and the paramilitary forces.

We ask for protection for all social organizations. The armed forces are, again, the government. We believe the armed forces are not part of another army but are against civil society. So we ask for a commitment from all international agencies to protect human rights, to provide clear strategies in defence of human rights, and to opt for life, not death. We don't want a military kind of life. We don't want to have to go around being protected against these armed forces in our daily life; we want to live a normal life. We believe that more money is being spent on war than on peace.

The Chair: Before we go on to the questions, I wonder if you could explain to them—I'll say this again at the end—how much we appreciate their coming and that someone from each.... There are four members here now who will be asking them questions, and they're not meant in any way to be difficult questions for them to answer. We're doing this as friends, to learn more from you.

Could you also explain that we have five minutes and that includes the question and the answer.

• 1705

Mr. Moore.

Mr. James Moore (Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, Canadian Alliance): I'd like to thank the panel for coming here today and explaining this. I'm afraid I missed the first part, but I got all the presentations that were just made. I very much appreciate it. I can get the sense of passion that you all feel for this issue.

The Canadian government has committed some $40 million towards helping the cause down there and trying to find some sort of peaceful solution for what's going on. Most parliamentarians, and indeed most Canadians, would like to know that the $40 million is going to something useful and that there is some kind of cause and effect happening—some peaceful cause and effect—and whether we should be contributing more money to the cause if there is a peaceful effect.

I want to ask, not anybody in particular but if there's one person who could answer, have you seen positive effects from Canada's contribution, and is there something more we could be doing beyond what we're doing at the present time?

Mr. Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga (Interpretation): You have to take into account that there has been investment in social programs, but there is also corruption in our representatives. Most of the money really doesn't reach the social organization it was intended to reach at the beginning. So we always emphasize that any money should be channelled through social organizations that have representatives in the country, and that's the only way they can reach the people they intended to reach.

Mr. James Moore: Is Mr. Talanga suggesting then that the appropriate step for the government is to channel the money through NGOs, non-governmental organizations—because it's clearly lines of sovereignty, and Canadian taxpayers and ministries can't be deciding how the Government of Colombia should be spending its money, as irrational as their spending priorities may be? Is that what he suggests, that it be through non-governmental organizations, and if so, which ones?

• 1710

Mr. Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga (Interpretation): When I talk about channelling through organizations, I'm thinking about organizations we represent here, because our work has been very useful.

For instance, my organization represents 70,000 people, 15 autonomous governments, and we have different projects, for women or other projects that are necessary. When we channel the money through these projects, we have good results to show. As I told you before, we are a legally recognized organization, so we can enter into agreements with international organizations.

Another way of doing this is through Canadian NGOs, because you have to take into account that in Colombia there are corruption problems. Even now there is a problem, and unfortunately none of the people involved is going to jail or to prison.

Mr. James Moore: Thank you.

[Translation]

The Acting Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare): Thank you very much, Ms. Buritica.

It is now Mr. Dubé's turn.

Mr. Antoine Dubé: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have listened to what you had to say and I've read all that. In the document that was prepared for us, I see that one of the purposes of your visit to Canada was to make us aware of your situation. I think you have done your work well and have reached your goal.

A visit can entail other activities here, in Canada. Moreover, if your visit takes you to other countries, for instance to the United States, could you give me some details? Could you also elaborate on what you expect exactly from the Canadian government? You have introduced yourself and I offer you the chance to say more concerning your specific concerns. For example, I would like to know if there's grouping between you and other NGOs? Is there any hope in that regard? Can we hope to function even better with you?

In addition, you say that the Quebec Summit on Free Trade in the three Americas will be a very important event. We, that is the opposition parties and government members, will insist that this issue be at the core of discussions on bilateral trade.

Thank you. I may have said too much.

[English]

Ms. Patricia Buritica (Interpretation): Specifically, there are four things we want from you. The first is that you take a radical position against the Plan Colombia, which for us is a plan of war, and support the other alternative, which is the social plan.

• 1715

The second point is that your position in the free trade area of the Americas agreements be clear, and that whatever you demand from your own society, you demand from the government, respect for human rights and other civil respect. We ask that you demand from the Colombian government that they show respect and put an end to these paramilitary interventions.

The third is that the money invested in Colombia be for strengthening civil society and the permanent assemblies for peace. We ask that you participate in all the processes for peace in civil society, because you've been invited, as a country, to be part of the peace process.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Mr. Cotler.

Mr. Irwin Cotler: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to begin by expressing my appreciation of your courage, your determination, and your leadership in the invisible popular struggle. I would say that as a result of your testimony here today, the popular struggle is less invisible and the strategies of exclusion, of discrimination, of displacement, and of killing directed against the civilian population are now better known. No one here can now say we do not understand the full significance of the strategies used against the invisible popular struggle.

It now becomes our responsibility to promote and to protect the human rights of Colombia's indigenous peoples, of the Afro-Colombian people, the women's groups, and indeed of women who have been the victims of rape and other forms of sexual violence, peasants and the labour movement—indeed I would say of Colombia's social movements as a whole and civil society, the specific targets of the killing.

• 1720

I have one question. Given the attempts at extraction and expropriation of land and resources and the displacement and killing of people for that purpose by national and transnational economic interests and forces, I wonder if any of the witnesses have any evidence of involvement by Canadian interests in that regard.

Mr. Carlos Rosero (Interpretation): There is a process in our country to change the legislation on mining, and we know there have been Canadian resources invested in that area. At the beginning there was violation of rights of indigenous peoples and black people in the country, and when we protested they said “Go to your senators and they will give you answers”.

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: To clarify, what happens is that with the mining code reform, Canadian official development assistance went into supporting this, which limits participation and consultation from the outset.

The Chair: It still does now? Is it better or worse?

Mr. Carlos Rosero (Interpretation): Yes, it continues, because it went to the congress, and the first part was already approved. So there's no return point where there is consultation through the grassroots organizations or with the people involved. I know there are at least eight or nine Canadian companies in the mining sector, in oil and gold.

• 1725

The question that we ask ourselves is, these amendments to the law, are they to facilitate the access of the Canadian companies to these resources and to restrict the rights to consultation of our communities?

The Chair: Mr. Bellemare.

[Translation]

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Talanga has made a statement... Which should you prefer, that I speak in French or in English?

[English]

A voice: I prefer English.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Okay.

Mr. Talanga made an assertion a while ago, which I may have misunderstood. Is he promoting a division of the country into different states, separating some areas and then creating Colombia 1, Colombia 2, Colombia 3, and so on?

Mr. Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga (Interpretation): In Colombia we have a decentralized administration. What I was saying is that the investments should be through the organizations that have proven to provide good management of the resources. For instance, there are municipalities that have gained recognition for having good development plans, but because they are not part of a specific political party, money is not channelled through them; it's channelled through the other organizations that are political in nature and do not regard the welfare of the communities.

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: If I can clarify, he specifically said that he had been the mayor of the Municipality of Toribio, which won an award for the best development plan of all the municipalities in the country. Because it was a civic indigenous government and did not pertain to either one of the two principal political parties, the resources didn't reach his municipality, as theoretically they should have.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: The word “corruption” came up a while ago. I understood that moneys coming from Canada did not reach their goal on certain occasions because of corruption on the part of someone in Colombia. My understanding is that the Canadian International Development Agency contributes approximately $12 million a year. We have a five-year commitment, which totals about $60 million. Our moneys go to human rights monitoring, and these organizations are United Nation organizations. We have projects through the Canada Fund, which is administered by our embassy in Colombia. Of course, a third group would be the NGOs working on location.

Are you suggesting that there might be someone involved in corruption in Colombia and that the money is not getting to the proper destination?

• 1730

Mr. Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga: [Witness speaks in Spanish]

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: He says he personally doesn't know of any cases with Canadian money, but he was speaking in general about international cooperation. He cites the example of the forest action plan supported by the World Bank, whereby the moneys that were given were conditioned on belonging to either one political party or another one, and they tended to be released at electoral periods. So I think it was just a general term.

Mr. Ezequiel Vitonas Talanga: [Witness speaks in Spanish]

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: He gave an example whereby peasants were supposed to be paid 100 pesos for every tree they planted and ended up being paid only 70-some pesos for those trees four years after.

The Chair: Are they giving them the interest?

Mr. Pablo Alejandro Leal: I don't know.

The Chair: It's past 5:30 p.m. I'd like to thank all of you for coming. You said you were coming to help us to understand more clearly what your lives are like back in Columbia and you've done that. You've spoken to six members of Parliament. I'm very glad you've shared your information with us.

I'd also like to thank the translator for her work. She did a great job. Thank you very much.

For the benefit of the committee members, we will be having a meeting next week. It's briefings from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and from CIDA on their activities relating to our mandate. This is especially good for those of us who are new, which means almost everybody, I think. The meeting will be at the same time on Wednesday.

I adjourn the meeting to the call of the chair.