The Dominion - Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement

Colombians Refuse Canadian Mine

Tim McSorley — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 20:14:16 +0000

Farmers' stance against extractive project ignored in Ottawa

BERRUECOS, COLOMBIA—In southwest Colombia people are organizing within and throughout their villages, creating a strong network of resistance to Canadian gold mining. But they’re not fighting for concessions or reforms: they’re fighting to win.

Canadian mining company Gran Colombia Gold set up exploration platforms in small farming communities near Berruecos, Colombia in early 2011. Soon after, local coffee farmers began to question the benefits of a large-scale gold mine. “All I see that can come from this project is conflict and displacement,” said Hector Gomez*, a local farmer who is opposed to exploration. We spoke at a former drilling platform near the Mazamorras stream, where he had brought his kids for a swim.

His neighbour, Carlos Perez, adds that he moved to the area in part because of its reputation for being safe. “The first thing we lost [when the company came] was peace,” he said.

The budget for exploration is $3.8 million, which includes geophysical surveys and drilling, to test the size of gold, copper and silver reserves.

Gomez and others have already paid a heavy price for speaking out against the project. The Committee for the Integration of the Colombian Massif (CIMA), a rural social movement that counts many local farmers as members, has officially reported ten separate cases of harassment, death threats and violent assaults against critics of the company and their children since April 2011.

In two of these cases, CIMA representatives say, the head of private security for the mining project directly threatened the lives of local organizers. The human rights committee for the CIMA notes that many more cases go unreported due to fear and a lack of faith in officials to investigate.

“It's just like what happened with the coca-producing zones,” said Gomez in a comparison that may seem unexpected, until explained. “First comes the money, then comes the violence—the armed groups, drinking [and] crime.”

Farmers have had difficulty getting the Colombian government to provide information about the environmental impacts of large-scale mining, let alone hear their concerns about the project.

Gloria Muñoz, another local coffee farmer and young mother, went door to door collecting signatures for a petition calling on the municipal government to hold a forum against mining. She says she collected over one thousand signatures and sent it to officials, including Ingeominas, the Colombian government department responsible for granting mining exploration permits. She received no response. Meetings with the local mayor led to promises of a forum, but no results. "They put it off three times," she said in the courtyard of her modest but quaint home overlooking green hills and neighbouring farms.

"They act like if the company leaves, we'll die of hunger," said Muñoz. Sylvia, a relative of Muñoz, was hired as a spokesperson for the company. Also a young mother, Sylvia stresses the importance of job-creation, and argues that, when it comes to the environment, farmers have nothing to worry about. “This is a responsible company,” she said.

The debate between locally-hired contract workers and project opponents over jobs and the economic future of the region has sometimes boiled over, creating what the CIMA has called an atmosphere of chaos, anxiety and confrontation.

Local spokespeople for Gran Colombia Gold have their work cut out for them. People living close to exploration platforms say that when drilling began, it was loud and took place around the clock. When a shuttered drilling platform began to leak water, project opponents say they noticed that the water level in a near by aquifer began to drop.

As tension mounted between rural communities and the company, local contract labourers and spokespeople carried out community projects on Gran Colombia Gold's behalf—some of which did not go over well.

On October 9, 2011, some of the company's workers and private security personnel arrived to repair a paved soccer court in Bolivar, a tiny hamlet only accessible by a winding footpath up a steep hillside. Farmers living nearby say that they did not want company employees to carry out community work, so they approached the workers and asked them to stop.

They allege that the head of private security for the project ordered the workers to continue, and that a physical confrontation resulted in which a mine worker struck a protestor along with his sister and niece.

Later that day, hundreds of angry residents from Bolivar and nearby communities occupied two of Gran Colombia Gold's mining exploration camps. They remained on the grounds until the following day when they burned the camps to the ground.

Shortly thereafter a mediation team arrived, including the Department (the Colombian equivalent of a province) of Nariño's Human Rights Ombudsman, representatives of two municipal governments and of the Governor's office, as well as a Gran Colombia Gold employee.

Farmers say they negotiated a tentative agreement in which Gran Colombia Gold would suspend work for one month while the Governor of Nariño prepared and held a department-wide forum on the impacts of large-scale mining.

Gran Colombia Gold never signed the agreement. In a press release it said that the burning was carried out by "unknown invaders." The release did not mention a previous confrontation or mediation process.
Municipal elections led to some small gains for project opponents in 2012. In March, organizers finally got their mining forum in Berruecos, at which a number of officials and mayors declared their opposition to mining by multinational companies.

They were also able to pressure the newly-elected Governor of Nariño, Raul Delgado, to hold a department-wide forum on mining in March. At the forum the governor committed to setting up a co-operative roundtable that would bring together an array of social actors and decision-makers in order to better negotiate land-use policies handed down by the Colombian government.

At the end of the forum, CIMA representative Robert Daza said he was hopeful about the roundtable, but that the movement was prepared to organize a general strike across the department if it doesn't work out in favour of the local population.

Organizers believe that a large mobilization like this is possible because they are not alone. Their story is being played out in different ways across the country. While agriculture accounts for 22 per cent of jobs in Colombia, the national government has made large-scale mining a major priority in development planning.

In 2008 the Colombian Ministry of Mines and Energy reported that 52 per cent of companies investing in mining exploration in Colombia were Canadian. That same year the two countries signed a free trade agreement, which includes strong protections for investors. The agreement went into effect in August 2011.

The Canadian Council for International Co-operation (CCIC) has followed the trade deal closely, producing a report on the agreement in 2009 entitled Making a Bad Situation Worse. Brittany Lambert, program officer for the CCIC's Americas Policy Group, said from Ottawa, “Our concern all along with the Canada-Colombia FTA has been that it has the potential to exacerbate the ongoing human rights crisis in Colombia.”

Colombia is home to the highest internally-displaced population in the world, estimated at between 3.8 and 5.4 million people. Peace Brigades International reports that 80 per cent of human rights violations that have occurred in Colombia over the last ten years took place in mining and energy-producing regions, with 87 per cent of internally-displaced people originating from these zones.

Many see this as a result of the tendency for rich earth to attract armed actors, from guerrilla groups to paramilitaries to the Colombian armed forces. The Colombian military has a strong presence in regions hosting large mining projects. President Juan Manual Santos announced in February 2012 that 30 per cent of Colombia's public forces—more than 80,000 members—are currently dedicated to protecting mining and energy infrastructure.

Aside from the militarization of mining zones, social and human rights organizations have reported the targeted killings of leaders opposed to large-scale mining. In September 2011 José Reinel Restrepo, a Catholic priest and outspoken critic of another Gran Colombia Gold mining project, was assassinated a week after travelling to Bogota to criticize the company's plan to displace the entire town of Marmato, Caldas.

Almost one year after the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Colombia came into effect, the Canadian government was slated to release a report on how the deal has impacted human rights. Rather than comply with the requirement to produce an annual report, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade released a document on May 15 that merely outlined the methodology it will use to produce a report for next year.

Voices from communities like Berruecos have, at least for the moment, been ignored in Ottawa.

Despite being up against a powerful company, farmers in Narino are optimistic. "We're not rich, but we do good work here, and we're not going to lose what we've got because we're willing and ready to defend it," said Gomez.

*Some names in this article have been changed for security reasons.

Leah Gardner is a member of the Project Accompaniment and Solidarity with Colombia (PASC), a Montreal-based collective.

Colombian Farmers Demand Mining Dialogue

Burned out Mining Camp

Ottawa's Colombia Problem

dawn — Mon, 28 May 2012 10:41:01 +0000

Canada fails to release human rights report on Colombia following FTA

MEDELLIN, COLOMBIA—The Canadian government's failure to report on Colombian human rights, as promised as part of its Free Trade Agreement (FTA), drew criticism from the country's opposition last Thursday.

The FTA, which went into effect in August 2011, received the backing of Canadian opposition parties when Prime Minister Stephen Harper committed to releasing annual reports on how trade was affecting human rights in Colombia. A report analyzing the treaty was released last Wednesday with no mention of human rights issues.

"As the agreement has only been in force for the last four and a half months in 2011, there's not enough available data to do a comprehensive analysis," said Trade Minister Ed Fast in Canada's House of Commons. "That analysis will be released in 2013."

The report's delay drew the ire of many government critics, who felt the current administration was only seeking profit from Colombia while ignoring its human rights violations.

"Canadians want more trade...but we also want...the partners we trade with to respect democratic values," said the opposition's international trade critic Don Davies. "It leaves us to wonder whether the government was afraid to table an honest human rights assessment because it shows the situation in Colombia has not improved."

Opposition party member Scott Brison, who used his close ties to Colombian officials to propose the joint report, assured Canadians that the South American nation was committed to improving its shoddy human rights record, which has seen 17 trade unionists disappear since the agreement was signed.

"I know the Colombian government, with which I continue dialogue, takes this reportage very seriously and actually views it as an opportunity to deepen corporate social responsibility and to increase transparency around human rights and the effect of legitimate trade on actually strengthening human rights," said Brison.

"I hope that the Harper government takes this reportage process as seriously as the Colombians do," he added.

Numerous criticisms against Canadian mining operations have been lodged by Colombian civil rights groups, according to Jennifer Moore, the Latin American coordinator for Canada-based industry monitor MiningWatch.

"What really worries us is that you put into place a new free trade agreement, you provide new and substantial rights to foreign investors to defend their investments...and there are no correspondingly strong rights for communities to assert their rights when they're being infringed upon by these corporate interests," Moore told Colombia Reports, where this story originally ran.

Complaints have ranged from company representatives entering Indigenous land without permission to overlapping mining operations forcing residents from their homes. Canadian gold mining company Gran Colombia has been the target of heated protest in recent years after its alleged failure to allow "robust public participation" in communities where operations have taken place, according to Moore.

In 2011, a Catholic priest from the historic gold-mining department of Caldas protested his town's demolition to make way for the company's mining operations. He was murdered by unknown assailants shortly afterward. Gran Colombia denied responsibility for the murder, saying it was simply a robbery gone wrong.

"The inclusion of this human rights report in order to justify the passage of the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement was a whitewash from the beginning and now we're just seeing what a sham it really is," added Moore.

The FTA made news May 7 when Canadian officials claimed Colombia failed to issue duty-free licenses to its exporters in 2011.

The United States FTA with Colombia went into effect on May 15. The agreement has also been fiercely criticized by human rights organizations in both countries due to the ongoing violence against labour activists and union workers.

Brandon Barrett is a journalist and regular contributor to Colombia Reports based in Medellin, Colombia. An earlier version of this story appeared in Colombia Reports and the Media Co-op.

Harper and Santos Handshake

Canadian Companies Out For Colombian Oil

dawn — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:48:54 +0000

CCFTA among a host of initiatives that create "huge opportunities for easy profits"

VANCOUVER—Canada has been involved in oil and gas in Colombia since the 1920s, when the Canadian-based International Petroleum Corporation (IPC)—then a subsidiary of Standard Oil of New Jersey—owned Tropical Oil and the Andian Pipeline Company. When ownership of these companies was due to revert to the Colombian state in 1951 (concessions at the time were for 30 years), IPC feared it was going to lose both companies. So the foreign company tricked the Colombian government into believing that Andian was a separate company from Tropical, even though they shared a parent company. These shenanigans earned Andian National a new concession, and the company established its new head office in Canada until the 1970s.

A new free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia, and the strong presence of Canadian companies in Colombia’s oil and gas sector, indicates the Colombian government no longer has to be tricked into handing over its natural resources to Canadian corporations. Instead, it will do so willingly, in the name of increasing foreign direct investment. On June 29, the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA) went through the final stages of legislation in Canada, effectively becoming law. The final legislative legwork is with the Colombian Congress, which has to implement a series of laws in order to finalize the agreement.

In Canada, unions and human rights organizations led opposition to the CCFTA, but they failed to rally popular outrage against the agreement. The passage of this controversial agreement, however, cannot be attributed only to ineffective opposition, especially not when those actively organizing in its favor constitute a powerful swath of Canada’s corporate elite.

The day after the CCFTA became law in Canada, Perrin Beatty, CEO of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, stated, “Our members are pleased with the government’s commitment to move this trade agreement forward.” When Beatty wrote a letter to encourage the government to pass the CCFTA in May 2008, nine Chamber members signed on in support. Three were representatives of oil companies—all of them based in Calgary where Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party has an important base of support: Enbridge, Nexen and Talisman.

While Colombia doesn’t have the oil reserves to compete with Venezuela, it is estimated to have the fifth largest reserves in South America. According to a 2010 report by Oil and Gas Journal, Colombia has 1.36 billion barrels of proven crude reserves. This year, Colombia’s National Hydrocarbons Agency estimates that the country will produce 800,000 barrels of crude per day.

Over the past years, Colombia’s oil and gas sector has grown rapidly. The country is becoming an increasingly attractive destination for foreign investment in the oil and gas sectors for various reasons, including better security conditions for operators, and legislation introduced in 1999 that encourages investment.

In 2003, the United States announced additional funding of $98 million to have US Green Berets and private contractors train the XVIII Brigade, an elite unit of 2,000 Colombian soldiers deployed specifically to protect the Cano Limon-Covenas pipeline. Pipeline attacks and acts of sabotage were down to 32 in 2009, compared to 106 in 2006.

In 1997, the Canadian International Development Agency and the Canadian Energy Research Institute, based in Calgary, teamed up with a Colombian law firm and a number of oil companies to draft a new set of laws governing private investment in the oil and mining sectors in Colombia. New Colombian legislation favoring foreign direct investment in both sectors was approved in 2001.

By 2003, $300 million in foreign direct investment in Colombia went to the oil and gas sector. Compare this to 2008, when 32 per cent ($3.4 billion) of the $10.6 billion in foreign direct investment in Colombia was in the energy sector. Following oil and gas, mining attracts 18 per cent of foreign direct investment; manufacturing, 17 per cent; and the financial sector, 10 per cent.

Recent developments have made the oil and gas sector even more appealing for foreign investors. Ecopetrol is the largest corporation in Colombia; since 2007 it has acquired much of the country’s pipeline infrastructure. The company controls 100 per cent of Colombian refining, 55 per cent of oil production, 60 per cent of gas production and 79 per cent of existing pipelines—equivalent to 8,815 kilometres of pipeline. Though Ecopetrol was founded in 1951 as a state company, it is now a mixed corporation with 89.9 per cent owned by the Colombian state and 10.1 per cent ownership by shareholders. The company is listed on the Colombia Stock Exchange (BVC) and the New York Stock Exchange.

Ecopetrol has promised to invest $60 billion in exploration, infrastructure, transportation, refining, production, marketing and acquisitions between now and 2015. This year alone, the company will spend $6.9 billion. One of the first projects will be the construction of a new, $3.5 billion pipeline from the city of Ariguaney in the department of Meta to the port of Covenas in the department of Sucre.

These developments make Colombia “one of the world's fastest growing and most important energy development stories,” according to Luke Burgess, writing on an energy sector website in May. The billions of dollars that Ecopetrol and the Colombian state plan to invest in oil and gas infrastructure and exploration mean investors have “huge opportunities for easy profits.”

Earlier this year, Colombia’s National Hydrocarbons Agency carried out a massive public relations push to encourage investment in the country’s oil and gas sector that included presentations and trade fairs in New York, Houston, Calgary, Toronto, Singapore, Sydney, Madrid and London, among other cities.

In addition to favorable conditions for investment, the government promised that the military would train a battalion of soldiers to assist companies in obtaining and transporting seismic testing results in parts of the country with potential operational risks. This is the first time the Colombian army will provide troops to companies in the exploration phase; previously it was limited to protecting oil and gas production and transportation in the exploitation phase.

In June, the National Hydrocarbons Agency put 168 oil and gas concession blocks covering over 50 million hectares of land on auction to foreign and national exploration and production companies.

As companies bid for concessions on June 22 at the Cartagena Convention Center in Colombia, Energy and Mining Minister Hernan Martinez made a special announcement:

"I have some good news for our Canadian friends. The Senate has just approved a free trade agreement... so that opens the way for a lot of opportunities and our government is very happy about that,” said Martinez.

In total, 78 concessions were awarded to Ecopetrol along with companies from the United States, Brazil, Norway, and elsewhere. Four Canadian companies—Pacific Rubiales, Alange, Gran Tierra Energy and Petrominerales—won exploration blocks as a result of the auction. The Canada-Colombia FTA is an added incentive for these corporations to maintain their headquarters in Calgary, as it provides investment protection clauses that guarantee the security of their investments in Colombia.

These companies will join other Canadian firms in making haste to expand their interests in Colombia. Talisman Energy just announced it will partner with Ecopetrol to purchase all of British Petroleum’s operations in Colombia for a total of CAD$1.9 billion.

But it is also clear that oil and gas projects in Colombia operate with the direct support of the scandal-ridden Colombian Army, and often in close cooperation with paramilitary, guerrilla and private security forces whose hands are covered in blood. Any attempt to hide these atrocities behind a Canadian flag will be a failure, as these companies and both governments are already well aware of the high social and environmental costs that will accompany increased oil and gas development in Colombia.

This article was originally published by the North American Congress on Latin America. Dawn Paley is a journalist based in Vancouver. Follow her on Twitter @dawn_.

Oil Death Jeans Improved

Opposition to Canada-Colombia Free Trade Continues

Tim McSorley — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:30:00 +0000

Protest targets Liberal trade critic over his support for accord

WOLFVILLE, NS—As the controversial Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement proceeds into second reading in the House of Commons, pressure is mounting on the Liberal party, and its international trade critic, to drop its support for the proposed accord.

On Friday, December 4, over 80 people rallied in front of the Wolfville, NS, office of Scott Brison, MP for Kings-Hants. Brison, the Liberal International Trade Critic, was targeted because of his support of Bill C-23—an Act to implement the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA). The rally also came only days after the Conservative government cut funding to a well-known NGO critical of Canadian foreign policy.

Free trade critics say the CCFTA, like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), serve the interests of capital. They describe free trade agreements (FTAs) as a mechanism that allows soaring profits and reduced labour costs through the super-exploitation of workers in economically and politically oppressed areas. Labour unions, human rights organizations and church groups across Canada have decried the 38 assassinations of trade unionists in Colombia this year as reason enough to oppose the deal.

Brison sits on the House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade. Earlier this year, Brison and the committee “called for a full independent human rights impact assessment of the proposed FTA with Colombia,” said Kathryn Anderson of the Church in Action Committee of the Maritime Conference of the United Church of Canada.

“Brison no longer supports this and his uncritical support for the CCFTA today is beyond the pale,” she says.

Brison made a brief appearance before the rally began, and attempted to physically grab the microphone from Council of Canadians Atlantic Organizer Angela Giles. Brison told the crowd that he would not be staying for the rally and that they could meet him to have a discussion a half an hour later at Acadia University.

Large puppets of Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe Velez and paramilitaries mingled with protesters. Demonstrators held white masks with flowing red streamers to represent the victims of Colombia's state-supported armed violence.

Following songs by the Raging Grannies and speeches from representatives of labour unions and church and social justice groups, the crowd marched to Acadia University. Protesters chanted, “Hey Scott, just say No!” as they entered the building and room where Brison was waiting.

Brison asked the crowd if they supported market-based economies, free trade agreements and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

“I was deeply disturbed by Mr. Brison's comments. Instead of taking the opportunity to listen to those with in-depth historical knowledge, Mr. Brison insisted on sharing with us a shallow and distorted understanding of the history and present reality in Colombia. It was particularly frustrating to have Mr. Brison read selectively from a UN document without stating the concerns and recommendations of the UN Rapporteur,” said Anderson.

One man in the room told Brison that his support for the CCFTA meant he “support[s] murderers.” Another, Tom Walsh, a Wolfville resident, asked Brison how, as a gay man, he could support the Uribe government that tolerates the organized murder of homosexual and vulnerable people in Colombia.

Colombian mining critic denied visa

The day before the rally, over 90 people attended a panel discussion about Colombia and the CCFTA. While the panel featured a broad range of speakers, one person was notably absent: Jairo Epiayu Fuentes, an Indigenous Wayuu man from Tamaquito, Colombia. Epiayu was scheduled to speak about the imminent eviction of his community for the expansion of the Cerrejon coal mine—the mine that supplies New Brunswick's Belledune coal plant and is on the list of approved suppliers for Nova Scotia Power. His two attempts at receiving a Canadian visa were denied.

Initially he was told that his form was not legible. The second rejection letter claimed the government was unconvinced that he would leave Canada at the end of his visit. "Family ties in Canada and country of residence," "purpose of visit," "limited employment in his country of residence" and “personal assets and current financial status" were listed as factors in the decision to deny his visa.

Although he was denied entry to Canada, the community leader was granted a multiple-entry visa into the United States. The two applications were filed within weeks of each other.

Last September, after a three-day visit to Colombia, Brison stated that “paramilitary groups have been disbanded in Colombia,” and that “to say that paramilitary forces are murdering union leaders today is false.” This stance has been highly disputed. Common Frontiers, a coalition critical of free trade, and which is working to propose alternative economic models, called on Brison for a public apology “to the long suffering Colombian people, and...the families and work colleagues of the murdered trade union leaders.”

James Brittain, author of the upcoming book Revolutionary Social Change in Colombia: The Origin and Direction of the FARC-EP, also disagrees with Brison's proclamations that the Colombian state under President Uribe has curbed corruption and violence and enhanced opportunity and security.

"Like Harper, Brison heralds the free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia as the way to improve living conditions in Colombia. Brison says the CCFTA will help reduce poverty, prevent the resurgence of illegal armed groups and help prevent more Colombians from entering the narco-economy.

"Such ideological pronouncements are interesting because they demonstrate a shocking lack of information... concerning Colombia's economic, political and social conditions. Colombia has participated in formal FTAs for over two decades. Each FTA claims to bring prosperity, development, sustainability and an end to the country's half-century of civil war. However, after a thorough investigation one becomes aware that very different outcomes have arisen as a partial result of liberalized economic policies."

According to Brittain, “War and the extraction of natural resources have led to the internal displacement of 4.6 million Colombians. Coca cultivation and the narcotics trade have increased since the 1980s. Thousands of workers and community leaders have been violently assassinated, arbitrarily disappeared, and/or harassed by state forces and state-supported paramilitaries.

“Brison neglects to address the fact that the Uribe administration is mired in scandal and murder. There are documented allegations and confessions that far-right paramilitary groups and over 100 government and military leaders—including dozens of Uribe's closest political partners, confidantes and family members—have worked closely together to eliminate state antagonists and threats to economic growth. The 'False Positive' program implemented by the current administration saw Colombian soldiers rewarded for murdering innocent civilians and subsequently dressing them as guerrillas. Under Uribe's tenure as president over 700 unionists have been murdered,” says Brittain.

Brittain is a supporter of the campaign to free Colombian activist Liliany Obando. Obando, a human rights leader in Colombia's agricultural sector, traveled throughout Canada in 2005 and then again in 2006, highlighting how millions of women and children have been displaced by land seizures and state-based violence in Colombia. In August 2008, she was charged with "rebellion," separated from her two children and jailed. After repeated delays, and evidence of state forces tampering with files related to her case, Obando's trial finally began November 27 and is scheduled to continue on December 14 and 21. Her children and people involved in her support campaign have received threats.

Canada stops funding group critical of free trade

KAIROS, an ecumenical and social justice-based organization, was told November 30 by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) that the agency would no longer fund the organization. Mary Corkery, KAIROS' executive director, was told KAIROS no longer fits CIDA's funding priorities.

“We are disheartened that this longstanding relationship and decades of support by the Canadian government has been ended,” she said in a press release. “KAIROS and the millions of Canadians we represent through our member churches and organizations do not understand why these cuts have been made.”

CIDA funded KAIROS for the past 35 years. As the November 30 deadline for CIDA to approve KAIROS' funding loomed, KAIROS member churches, its partners and other organizations wrote letters of support to Minister of CIDA Bev Oda requesting she approve the organization's contract which had been sitting on her desk since July. One of those letters of support came from Colombia's Popular Women’s Group (OFP).

Yolanda Becerra Vega, OFP's Director General, immediately wrote to Oda when she learned the news about KAIROS' international programs.

She wrote, "As you know, we work in regions in Colombia where armed conflict has resulted in the denial of women’s basic rights. The economic support from KAIROS and CIDA permits us to implement programs which include legal and health services, community kitchens, and other humanitarian assistance that have saved many lives and given possibilities and opportunities to hundreds of women, mothers, wives, daughters, sisters and entire families.”

KAIROS, a vocal critic of FTAs, pointed out in one of their campaign trading cards that 60 per cent of cut flowers in Canada come from Colombia. The roses and carnations are cut by women and children whose bodies are exposed to pesticides long banned in Canada.

CIDA has been criticized in recent years for the kind of financial support it provides to Colombia.

In 2001 and 2002, CIDA’s Colombia branch worked with the University of Calgary-based think tank Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI) to streamline Colombia's mining and petroleum regulations. CERI is funded by various government departments and the mining industry. Critics of the new mining laws say Colombia's environmental regulations have been relaxed and the lands of Indigenous people have opened to more exploitation.

The length of company concessions was extended and royalty rates paid to the Colombian government were slashed. Prior to August, 2001, foreign companies paid 10 per cent for coal exports above three million tons per year and a minimum of five per cent for exports below three million tons. After August, 2001, private interests with rights to Colombia's sub-soil paid 0.4 per cent in royalties, no matter the amount of material they extracted.

Earlier this fall, Brison asked Mining Watch Canada at a hearing of the House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade whether they could name mining companies guilty of human rights violations in Colombia. Jamie Kneen, Mining Watch's communications coordinator, told Brison that none of the companies could prove they were not complicit.

“We fear that by granting 'most-favoured nation' status to Canadian mining investments, the CCFTA will restrict the ability of the Colombian government to implement the recommendations of the Ombudsman in Colombia with respect to people who have suffered violence, threats, and forced relocation in the areas the mining companies are operating. As well, without—at minimum—undertaking a human rights impact assessment prior to implementing the Agreement, there is no way of excluding the possibility that these investments could be rewarding people who have undertaken systematic violations, and benefiting from those violations,” stated Kneen.

Tracy Glynn is an organizer with the Atlantic Regional Solidarity Network and a director on the board of the Dominion Newspaper Cooperative.

CCFTA masks

Scott Brison at CCFTA rally

Canada-Colombia FTA on life support, but still breathing

dawn — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 03:07:35 +0000

Picture 3.png

Proponents of the the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (Bill C-23) faced a few hurdles over the past few weeks, but the deal is far from dead.

Bill C-23 is on the order paper for October 19th, when Parliament resumes after fall recess.

The deal has undergone eight days of debate in Parliament, most recently as subject to an NDP sub-amendment to a Bloc amendement to the bill.

The NDP's sub-amendment was meant to "stop the FTA from going to second reading, essentially killing the agreement," according to Stuart Trew, trade campaigner for the Council of Canadians.

The sub-amendment was jettisoned by the Liberals and the Conservatives (74 in favor, 194 against).

Next stop is for the Tories and the Grits to tackle the Bloc's amendment to the Bill, which according to activists tracking progress of the deal "will 'flush' out the positions of Liberals on C-23."

The following is the Bloc amendment on C-23:

Conservatives Delay Vote on Canada Colombia Free Trade Agreement

dawn — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 06:48:03 +0000

Picture 23.png

Reports from Ottawa are that the Conservatives have notched the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement down on the order paper.

The deal, enshrined in Bill C-23, was expected to go to a vote after a second reading. The second reading, or at least part of it, took place last week. The vote didn't.

Here, I reproduce part of a message sent out from NDP Foreign Affairs critic Peter Julian on Friday.

This is our second victory, I guess it means that we’ve won the second round of the debate but there is no doubt that this Bill will be coming back, potentially in a few weeks time, while the House sits awaiting a pending election.

I think that we should celebrate another victory at a time when the government thought, with Liberal support, it could push it rapidly through within a couple of days.

I reported last week that some Liberals are now in support of the deal, but others, obviously, are less sure.

MP Jay Hill indicated Friday that Bill C-23 is no longer at the top of the Conservatives' list, but has been bumped down a notch behind the National Capital Act, which he expects to table after MPs return from constituency break.

I guess the phone calls and petitions are having some effect.

Photo of MP Scott Brison, Canada-Colombia FTA booster par excellence. He spent 96 hours in Colombia in August.

Urgent! Tell the Libs that We Say No to the Canada-Colombia FTA!

dawn — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 02:19:26 +0000

Received some notes from a CPAC observer today who said that some Liberals are speaking out againt the Canada-Colombia FTA.

This afternoon, he sent a message reading "Ok, they're in adjournment proceedings. Somehow, we got through another day of debate in parliament without a vote. Let's get on those phones, folks."

The call is out again, urgently, for people to call Liberal MPs and ask them NOT to speak out against the Canada-Colombia FTA.

Below, I re-paste a previous post on this issue, including phone numbers of strategic Liberals. The time to call is now.

Below is contact info for the Liberal leader, some influential Liberal MPs, Liberal members of the trade committee, and some Liberal MPs who narrowly won their ridings in the last election. Please send them messages urging them to oppose the CCFTA.

Ask your friends and faimly to do likewise.

1- Michael Ignatieff, Etobicoke-Lakeshore, ON, Tel: 416. 251.5510, Fax: 416.251.2845; Tel: 613.995.9364, Fax: 613.992.5880 IgnatM@parl.gc.ca

2- Bob Rae, Toronto Centre, ON, Tel: 416.954.2222, Fax: 416.954.9649, Tel: 613.992.5234, Fax: 613.996.9607
RaeB@parl.gc.ca

3- Maria Minna, Beaches-East York, ON, Tel: 416.467.0860, Fax: 416.467.0905 Tel: 613.992.2115 Fax: 613.996.7942
MinnaM@parl.gc.ca

***Here is list of Liberal MPs that are Members of the CIIT

Vice-Chair: John Cannis, Scarborough Centre, ON Tel: (416) 752-2358, Fax: (416) 752-4624; Tel: (613) 992-6823, Fax: (613) 943-1045
CanniJ@parl.gc.ca

Members:
1- Scott Brison, Kings-Hants, NS
Tel: (902) 542-4010, Fax: (902) 542-4184, Tel: (613) 995-8231, Fax (613) 996-9349
BrisoS@parl.gc.ca

2- Mario Silva, Davenport, ON Tel: (416) 654-8048, Fax: (416) 654-5083; Tel: (613) 992-2576, Fax: (613) 995-8202
SilvaM@parl.gc.ca

Bob Rae: Liberals "will support" Canada Colombia Free Trade Agreement

dawn — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:48:54 +0000

According to an email from Bob Rae about the Canada Colombia FTA, the Grits "will be supportive of the bill proceeding to committee."

The legislative information about the CCFTA (Bill C-23) has yet to be updated online. So no word yet as to how that went.

From: RaeB7@parl.gc.ca
Subject: RE: Liberals stand up against the Colombia Canada FTA
Date: September 14, 2009 7:46:59 AM PDT (CA)

Thank you for your message about the House of Commons debate on the ratification of the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement, with its side agreements on labour and the environment, together with an understanding on investment and taxation.

If there is no election, as a result of a decision by either the Bloc or the NDP to support the Harper government, it is indeed likely that this bill will go to committee, where there will be substantial discussions on the impact of the treaty. The Liberal Party will be supportive of the bill proceeding to committee. Further support will depend on satisfactory answers to our questions and concerns.

I had the opportunity to travel to Colombia recently, and met with business and trade union leaders, as well as leaders of non-governmental organizations and of course the Colombian government itself. I feel better informed about the situation, but am determined to listen and learn during the debate.

Tories set to re-introduce Canada Colombia Free Trade Agreement

dawn — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 02:10:26 +0000

Bill C-23, the Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, is on the Order Paper for September 14th.

Below, a call to action from the folks managing the Stop the Canada Colombia FTA group on Facebook. I know I just wrote a blog post on how lame it feels to write letters, but in the interim, ¡vamónos!

Friends,

We have learned that the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement is to be the first order of business when the House of Commons reconvenes on Monday. There are strong indications that the Liberal Party are intending to support the bill.

We managed to back them off once before - we need to do so again.

Ask your friends and faimly to do likewise.

1- Michael Ignatieff, Etobicoke-Lakeshore, ON, Tel: 416. 251.5510, Fax: 416.251.2845; Tel: 613.995.9364, Fax: 613.992.5880 IgnatM@parl.gc.ca

2- Bob Rae, Toronto Centre, ON, Tel: 416.954.2222, Fax: 416.954.9649, Tel: 613.992.5234, Fax: 613.996.9607
RaeB@parl.gc.ca

3- Maria Minna, Beaches-East York, ON, Tel: 416.467.0860, Fax: 416.467.0905 Tel: 613.992.2115 Fax: 613.996.7942
MinnaM@parl.gc.ca

***Here is list of Liberal MPs that are Members of the CIIT

Vice-Chair: John Cannis, Scarborough Centre, ON Tel: (416) 752-2358, Fax: (416) 752-4624; Tel: (613) 992-6823, Fax: (613) 943-1045
CanniJ@parl.gc.ca

Canada's Deadly Trade Deals

dawn — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 05:30:15 +0000

An interview with Laura Carlsen, director of the Americas Program of the International Relations Center

MONTREAL–One of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s first major foreign visits after being elected in 2006 to his first minority government was to Latin America and the Caribbean. The trip aimed to promote a Canadian foreign policy focused on establishing "new partnerships in the Americas."

Canada has aggressively pushed to establish trade agreements in the Americas, and in pursuit of this signed bilateral trade deals with Peru and Colombia in 2009. Concurrent with the push towards more trade pacts in the Americas, Canada has cut the number of nations receiving bilateral aid through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).

Today's Canadian foreign aid policy sees a smaller number of countries being targeted for aid through the Conservatives' "countries of concentration" policy, which limits aid to 20 nations. The policy focus centres on trade with Latin America and the Caribbean, while aid to African nations, including Kenya, Cameroon and Rwanda, has been cut.

These shifts in policy are seemingly influenced by Canadian corporations that hold significant sway over government economic policy, such as mining, oil and gas corporations.

Bilateral agreements in the Americas signal this important shift. Canada’s trade agreement with Colombia has been the subject of intense criticism from labour unions in both Colombia and Canada.

The current Colombian government is embroiled in political scandals over ties to right-wing paramilitary groups that target and assassinate labour activists, Indigenous people, and members of popular and community movements. Human rights activists argue that a bilateral agreement with Canada lends international legitimacy to Alvaro Uribe's government in the face of such gross breaches of human rights.

"As for labour rights and the freedom of association, the FTA [with Canada] is a shameful reward for government and managers when it comes to violating these rights, forgetting more than 2,700 murdered unionists and letting their killers go unpunished,” outlined a February 2009 declaration to the Canadian government from Colombia’s major trade union federations.

Canada’s bilateral negotiations with Colombia come at a time when a similar US-Colombia trade accord has been halted in the United States by Congress due to concerns expressed by US law makers about human rights violations in Colombia and its government's connection with such activity.

US trade policy in the Americas was a major topic in the recent US elections. During the final campaign debate, Barack Obama slammed attempts by the Bush administration to sign a bilateral trade agreement with Colombia:

“Labour leaders have been targeted for assassination on a fairly consistent basis [in Colombia] and there have not been prosecutions,” he said.

Despite the open concerns south of the border, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has pushed forward the Canada-Colombia deal.

Canada’s accord with Colombia is rooted in the same free market economic policies enshrined in NAFTA, which have been the subject of opposition from labour unions and peasant associations across Mexico, the US and Canada for over a decade.

Resistance by social movements successfully halted the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) agreement, which would have seen a single trade zone throughout the hemisphere.

The governments of Canada and the US have since shifted their focus to creating bilateral and regional trade deals in the Americas, spelling out a new policy battleground for the upcoming years that will undoubtedly be fought out both on the streets and within the halls of power.

In the interview that follows, Laura Carlsen, Director of the Americas Program of the International Relations Center based in Mexico City, outlines some specific economic and social impacts of existing free trade agreements on Mexico and throughout the Americas.

Stefan Christoff: First, can you outline the social and economic impacts of NAFTA as related to migration from Mexico to the US, and also within the contemporary context of the push by the US towards bilateral agreements?

Laura Carlsen: NAFTA marked the first time that there was a major trade agreement between two developed countries, including the largest economic power in the world and Mexico, a developing country, which presents major challenges in negotiating a free trade agreement.

Despite the inequality between the economies of Mexico and the US in regards to size and productive capabilities, the agreement basically delivered tremendous privileges to transnational corporations in the US to the detriment of Mexico.

Since NAFTA has been in effect we have seen serious damage done by the accord on Mexican society. There have been serious impacts on people in the countryside and also to small-to-medium size industries throughout the country, leading to growing rates of unemployment and a doubling of the rate of migration from Mexico to the US. The economic impacts of NAFTA have created serious internal displacement and forced migration.

Christoff: Similar trade policies to NAFTA in Latin America have played a major role in forced migration. Could you address, for example, how the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) has impacted migration?

Carlsen: The CAFTA agreement is also going to lead towards increased outward migration. All the Central American countries have been going through an economic restructuring along the lines of these free trade agreements, leading to free trade zones where assembly workers are dealing with [working] conditions that are very bad and wages that are very low.

People are displaced from the rural areas in large numbers due to foreign imports upsetting local market values, creating the conditions for forced migration.

Essentially these [trade] agreements lock in an export-oriented model of development, a model which according to other experiences in Latin America, particularly in Mexico, benefits a very small group of people while causing serious dislocation for many social sectors.

Along the Guatemala-Mexico border a couple of years ago, most of the people waiting to cross into Mexico were then going to move on to the US: farmers who had been displaced by imports, or by growing corporate control over prices of commodities such as coffee; farmers who could not make a basic living from harvesting their crops.

CAFTA will only increase this process of displacement, as the foreign businesses that move in work on an export-oriented farming production model, not employing a huge amount of local people, while the economic benefits are directed towards a very small social sector.

Often it is claimed that such agreements bring in foreign investment, however the lived experience is that foreign investment doesn’t come pouring in the minute you sign an agreement. On the contrary, the economic impact is generally negative. In the majority of Latin American countries subject to such trade agreements, we are seeing a net outflow of capital.

Christoff: In your time within regions impacted by NAFTA, can you outline how this agreement has impacted people, specifically small farmers and peasants?

Carlsen: It is best to examine a specific town; for example, a village within the Mixteca Indigenous region in Oaxaca, in the mountains where many families live [through] a combination between subsistence farming and selling corn on the regional market.

As NAFTA came into effect, we began to see large amounts of subsidized, cheap agricultural imports, specifically corn, coming in from the US, causing domestic prices in Mexico to dive.

For local farmers who rely on selling small amounts of corn to survive this was a devastating shift in the local and regional markets in Mexico, which undermined their ability as family farmers to survive.

Given the US corn imports, the Mixteca region in Oaxaca has become one of the major out-migration regions in Mexico, with townships that are showing negative population growth, specifically due to out-migration to the US.

Many local farmers in Mexico who used traditional farming methods, working often without mechanized equipment, without fertilizing chemicals, were displaced by NAFTA, given cheap US imports.

It was clear that such farmers would face displacement even before the agreement was signed. A US trade representative outlined at the time of NAFTA’s signing that US trade analysts were expecting around three million local farmers in Mexico to be displaced by the agreement. It was argued that these farmers would move into more modern and competitive industries, particularly the industrial corridors that were being constructed in the countryside, often by foreign corporations.

However, in reality, the massive displacement happened, in the millions, but the new jobs never arrived to Mexico, so people were left with nothing. Today, many local farmers are simply growing corn to survive. Often women are left on the farms with the family to survive while the men travel to the US to work. Major rural displacement caused by NAFTA has been very clear.

In villages within Oaxaca and throughout the country, many, many people are migrating to work in the US due to trade policies that have made survival at home impossible. Traditionally, there were always regions in Mexico where workers would travel to work in New York City or LA—this was a labour circuit—however, traditionally, this was a much smaller migration and most often the migration wasn’t permanent.

Mexican workers would travel to the US to work during the harvests and then travel back to Mexico to work, however given that the border has been so hardened and militarized today, the migration to the US tends to be much more permanent. [This was] exactly the opposite result to the expressed intentions from US officials on why the border with Mexico was hardened.

Displacement has spread throughout Mexico, as the inability to make a decent living is now impacting multiple regions as a result of such trade policies.

Christoff: In examining the impacts of free trade on peasant communities in Latin America, do you have reflections on the reactions from social movements in Peru and Colombia to the US push for bilateral accords with these two nations? Do you think that bilateral deals with the US will have similar results to regional trade accords in Latin America?

Carlsen: Many of the general tendencies that we see in NAFTA basically hold to bilateral agreements; there have been few substantial modifications.

Democrats in the US claim that the Peru agreement is a new model for trade agreements, given there are a couple of clauses concerning labour rights and public health. However, the agreement is still based on the same trade model.

Essentially this agreement—like NAFTA—is based on a forum of development in which a developing country opens up markets completely, while granting a whole series of privileges to foreign investors and [hoping] that economic development trickles down to weaker social sectors.

However, this economic model ensures that there is no trickle down, while a country loses the ability to maintain national development policies that also support the weakest in society.

Peru’s bilateral agreement with the US includes clauses for the privatization of social services, despite the fact that throughout Latin America, in other countries, privatization policies often lead to cutting off access to basic social services for the poorest.

So the key point is that these ‘free trade’ policies, in Central America, in Peru, in Mexico, equal increased inequality. Essentially, such trade agreements drive the gap between the rich and poor to grow.

Stefan Christoff is a journalist and community organizer. This interview was originally produced in audio format for the Fighting FTAs project, an international project that provides a global picture of free trade agreements (FTAs), and insight into struggles being waged by social movements fighting back.

Oaxacans stand up and fight back

Harper pushes the Canada-Colombia FTA, the people fight back

dawn — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:44:46 +0000

Since the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement was tabled on March 26th, people across Canada have been getting the word out and showing their opposition to the deal.

Popular rejection of the deal has spread far and wide, and has even reached Prime Minister Harper.

"There is a view in some groups that they don't like modern economic policy. They think you can make progress without it. They're entitled to their view," said Harper while in Trinidad and Tobago for the the Summit of the Americas.

Protest against the FTA is not limited to Canada. In Colombia, though the deal was essentially negotiated in secret, people are speaking out.

"To sign this deal would not only make Canada complicit in the innumerable crimes committed by the Colombian government, which crimes have been denounced by the United Nations and the Interamerican Court of Human Rights," reads a letter sent by dozens of Colombian organizations and individuals to MPs yesterday.

Canada Colombia FTA: Making a Bad situation Worse

dawn — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:39:31 +0000

The Canada Colombia Free Trade Agreement was introduced to parliament on March 26th by the Conservative Government. It will sit until it is tabled, likely after the Easter recess, after which time it will sit for 21 days before ratification (or defeat).

The Canadian Council for International Cooperation released an exhaustive investigation into the trade deal on the day it was tabled.

For their part, the Conservatives have gotten so desperate to sell the deal that they're not even talking about human rights for Colombians anymore. Now it's about jobs for Canadians.

**CORRECTION: I mistakenly wrote that the deal has been tabled already. The bill has been introduced, not tabled. Sorry for any confusion.**

Crude Business in Colombia

dawn — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 06:01:35 +0000

Alberta's oil and gas sector gets behind the Free Trade push

BOGOTÁ, COLOMBIA–When Minister of International Trade Stockwell Day signed the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in Peru on November 21, it was a happy day for Canada’s oil and gas sector, but the deal was celebrated by its signatories as a landmark for human rights and democracy in Colombia.

“Deepening both economic and political engagement between our countries is the best way Canadians can support the citizens of Colombia in their efforts to create a safer and more prosperous democracy,” said Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the signing ceremony.

As Day’s pen slid across paper in Peru, a massive mobilization of popular movements had taken over the central plaza in Colombia’s capital. The protests in Bogotá – known as a Minga, and spearheaded by Indigenous peoples – were the culmination of over six weeks of demonstrations across the country.

Crystal clear among the demands of the tens of thousands mobilizing in Bogotá was the immediate end to all FTAs and an end to the economic system these deals represent.

“Free Trade Agreements are never for the benefit of the people,” says Rafael Coicué, a Nasa Indigenous leader from Cauca, in southwest Colombia, who participated in the Minga. “These agreements are shaped by economic interests at the cost of life and sovereignty.”

The Canada-Colombia FTA was negotiated in secret, and the texts of the talks were only made public at the time of the signing ceremony. And, having signed the FTA with Colombia, the Harper government evened the score with the Bush Administration in the US: both governments have now signed the agreement, but neither one has yet ratified the deal.

According to Foreign Affairs Canada, bilateral trade with Colombia in 2007 totaled $1.14 billion, making it the fourth most important destination for Canadian trade in Latin America.

Along with select exporters, Canada’s extractive industries are among the sectors that will cash in on the FTA with Colombia. In fact, a briefing put together by Alberta’s Department of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations calculates that exports from Alberta to Colombia averaged $48 million per year from 2002–2006. Almost half of Alberta’s exports to Colombia in 2006 consisted of wheat and other crops, oil and gas equipment, and transportation equipment.

More than 20 oil and gas companies from Alberta are currently active in Colombia, including Nexen, Enbridge and Petrominerales.

****

Enbridge owns 24.7 per cent of Oleoducto Central SA (OCENSA), the company that controls the largest pipeline system in Colombia. The outstanding portion of OCENSA is owned by Ecopetrol (Colombia’s national oil company), TOTAL, BP and Triton Pipeline Colombia. Enbridge has been involved in the project since 1994, and today is responsible for operations along Colombia’s largest pipeline.

The company runs a Corporate Social Responsibility campaign, but according to its own power-point presentation, they are “prepared for some NGO questioning” relating to their operations in Colombia.

Seventeen military bases and more than 1,400 soldiers, airmen and marines are stationed near the 820-kilometre-long pipeline. Enbridge claims that the constitution of Colombia requires them to have military personnel guarding their operations. Colombia’s military has recently come under international scrutiny because of the “false positives” scandal, in which civilians killed by the army were dressed up to resemble guerrillas.

In 1998, the OCENSA pipeline was bombed by the National Liberation Army (ELN), a guerrilla group active in Colombia’s northeast. Seventy-one people were killed and many hundreds were wounded in the blast.

Amnesty International condemned the blasts as a “flagrant violation of international humanitarian law,” and later revealed OCENSA was transferring arms to the XIV Brigade of the Colombian army, as well as employing a private security company whose operations aggravated the human-rights situation for civilians living in the area near the pipeline.

“The relation with Israeli private security companies is potentially of concern given that in the past such companies have provided mercenaries, of Israeli and British and German nationality, to train paramilitary organizations operating under the control of the XIV Brigade,” said Amnesty International.

Paramilitary activity along the OCENSA pipeline led to an eventual payout of victims by BP, which was then operating the pipeline. BP now carries out oil production and exploration in Colombia, and maintains a smaller stake in the OCENSA pipeline.

Nexen, for its part, has a non-operational stake in oil production in Colombia. “It is not a focus area for us and we have about eight to 10 people in the country,” wrote Carla Yuill, Nexen’s Manager of Corporate Communications, in an email to Edmonton's Vue Weekly. Nexen currently produces about 5,000 net barrels a day in Colombia.

****

John Wright is the president and CEO of Petrobank, which has operations spanning BC, Alberta and Saskatchewan, and Petrominerales, which produces oil in the Llanos area of Colombia, a region encompassing the departments of Arauca, Casanare, Vichada and Meta. The company is also exploring in Putumayo and Neiva, where operations net about 20,000 barrels daily and employ upwards of 130 people, plus a large number of contractors.

Wright has been working in Colombia since 1992, and he has yet to encounter the problems others have experienced in Colombia. “You find you’ll have exactly the same security issues you’d have in parts of Miami, or certainly in places like Caracas, or probably in a place like Lagos,” he says.

The day before Wright talked to Vue, 10 people were kidnapped by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in Meta, one of the departments where Petrominerales is active.

Nonetheless, according to Wright, “It’s very calm where we are... Colombia is one of the most transparent places on earth to do business; it’s as clean as Alberta when it comes to the oil industry,” he says.

He has strongly advocated for the passage of the FTA, and he testified before the Standing Committee on International Trade’s hearings about the deal.

“We’re huge supporters of [the Canada-Colombia FTA]. I think Canada has an enormous role to play; we can show the world how you can do things with rational regulations, rational oversight and transparent business practices, and Colombia fits into that mould,” Wright told Vue.

Not everyone agrees with Wright’s perspective. Gustavo Triana, the second vice-president of the Colombian United Workers Federation (CUT) and a former Secretary of the Energy & Mining Sector, says that, with relation to the oil and gas sector in Colombia, “What the Free Trade Agreements do is ... stipulate that the services and engineering that is today done by [Colombian] nationals will be instead done by foreigners, by bringing in firms and technicians that displace ours, and removing national control mechanisms.”

Resistance to the passage of an FTA between Canada and Colombia goes beyond popular movements and trade unionists in Colombia. After months of hearings on the agreement, the Standing Committee on International Trade issued its report to the government, in which it recommended an FTA with Colombia not be signed.

“The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada maintain close ties with Colombia without signing a free trade agreement until there is confirmation that the improvements noted are maintained, including continued improvement as regards displacement, labour law and accountability for crime, and until the Colombian government shows a more constructive attitude to human rights groups in the country,” reads the report.

****

Among the strongest voices of opposition to FTAs in North America are those of labour, especially the AFL-CIO in the US and the Canadian Labour Congress.

Colombia is the world’s most dangerous place to be a trade unionist. Since 1996, Colombia’s National Trade Union School (ENS) has recorded the assassinations of 2,690 trade unionists. According to Triana, these numbers include 135 workers in the oil and gas sector.

ENS numbers show that in 2008, 46 trade union members were assassinated, 157 were threatened, 15 were arbitrarily detained, 13 taken hostage and four were disappeared.

“The union movement is pretty strong in Colombia and I don’t see [unionists] being persecuted in any way. The US side of it, of course, it’s all just a big political sham, it’s the AFL-CIO who are against the Colombia Free Trade Agreement,” counters Wright.

“None of the Canadian companies linked to the oil sector ... have unions, and the reason is simple — they rely on third parties for labour, subcontracting; they don’t hire [employees] directly and in that way get around union organizing,” says Triana.

In addition to being a dangerous place for trade unionists, Colombia is home to a growing population of over four million internally displaced people, and plays host to irregular armed groups ranging from the FARC and ELN to paramilitary groups. Colombia is the hemisphere’s largest recipient of “aid” money from United States though Plan Colombia, most of which goes towards military spending.

The Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal, modelled on the Russell Tribunals that took place after the Vietnam war, spent three years studying the role of multinational corporations in Colombia over the last three years. A Nobel Laureate and a number of European supreme court justices issued the verdict of the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal last summer. Though no Canadian oil companies were named in the verdict, other extractive companies were denounced for their participation in human-rights violations.

“Colombia seems to be, in one sense, like a true institutional political laboratory where the interests of national and international economic actors are fully defended through the state’s abandonment of its functions and its constitutional duty to protect the dignity and life of the population, to which instead the state applies the Colombian version of the doctrine of national security,” reads the verdict.

“It is not true that terror is an enemy of development of capital in Colombia, in fact, the opposite is true: there is terror so that transnational corporate and Canadian capital can develop their interests, because terror creates cheap access to the means of exploitation and production,” says Manuel Rozental, a Colombian surgeon who has lived in Canada.

It is expected that the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement will be tabled in Parliament before the spring. Whether or not Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff will direct the Liberals to vote against the deal — previous leader Stephane Dion promised during the election campaign that he would not support the FTA – is not known.

A version of this article was previously published in Edmonton's Vue Weekly.

Dawn Paley is a contributing editor with The Dominion.

Oil Death Jeans Improved

Breaking the Propaganda Model: Colombia, Venezuela and Canada

dawn — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 22:29:47 +0000

203452312_e161849a4c.jpg

A couple of new pieces up recently by the North American Congress on Latin America shine a necessary light on political happenings in Colombia and Venezuela.

Colombia and Venezuela: Testing the Propaganda Model looks at the two countries vis-a-vis coverage in the NY Times and Washington Post, and effectively advances the hypothesis put forth by Chomsky and Herman in their classic Manufacturing Consent.

In Free Trade, the Good Cop, and Other Myths, Pablo Vivanco examines the Canada - Colombia Free Trade Agreement through a critical lens.

Finally, NACLA has published the full text of an excellent open letter to Human Rights Watch criticizing HRW's recent report on Venezuela. "By publishing such a grossly flawed report, and acknowledging a political motivation in doing so, [Jose Miguel Vivanco, the lead author of the report] has undermined the credibility of an important human rights organization," reads the letter.

Image: "Parodia de propaganda militar en la novela de ficción 1984" by Jaume d'Urgell.

Notes from Bogotá: Update on the Canada - Colombia FTA

dawn — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 22:56:50 +0000

It's a cool day in Bogotá, but the rains that have plagued the country over the last month have abated, at least momentarily.

I met with Mario Valencia from RECALCA (Colombian Network for Action on Free Trade) this morning. Top of mind for him was the possibility that Harper's Conservatives are dethroned on December 8, which would likely mean that the FTA is shelved, at least for the time being.

Though I'm personally skeptical about the possibility of a coalition actually succeeding in taking power from the Conservatives, in my experience it's rare that something happening in Canadian politics actually interests folks outside the country.

Mario passed along this statement from Senator Jorge Robledo, which reads, in part (unofficial translation):

The consequences [of a Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement] are evident: 80% of what Colombia sells to Canada consists of coffee, coal, flowers and sugar, which is to say goods that do not require an agreement to get to the market. On the other hand, 23% of what [Colombia] buys from Canada are agricultural products, principally cereals and meat products, which will worsen the situation of national producers.

The FTA [between Colombia and] Canada seems to have been written by a mining company. Canada is known as a paradise for these types of corporation, like Colombia Goldfields Ltd, Coalcorp Mining Inc, and Frontier Pacific Mining Corporation, whose environmental impact is already well known.