Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Issue 12 - Evidence, November 24, 2010
OTTAWA, Wednesday, November 24, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade met this day at 4:18 p.m. to study the political and economic developments in Brazil and the implications for Canadian policy and interests in the region, and other related matters.
Senator A. Raynell Andreychuk (Chair) in the chair.
[Français]
The Chair: Honourable senators, I see a quorum. Before I turn to the topic for today, I should advise you that our report, with the changes, was sent for translation. The changes were made over the weekend by our researcher, but it has not cleared translation and is not likely to be completed until later this week. I think it will be next Wednesday that we will receive the final version of the report. That is just for information. We want to be sure that we have an appropriate edited version in French as well as in English. That is on our study of China, Russia and India.
Today we will commence our study on the political and economic developments in Brazil and the implications for Canadian policy and interests in the region and other related matters.
To commence our study, I am very pleased to have before us, from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, DFAIT, Mr. Jon Allen, Assistant Deputy Minister, Americas; Mr. Neil Reeder, Director General, Latin America and the Caribbean; and Mr. David Plunkett, Chief Trade Negotiator Bilateral and Regional.
As I have just indicated, gentlemen, we are starting our study on Brazil. We will concentrate on economic issues and political issues. You are here to engage us in the study, and no doubt we may call on you after to continue.
We want to see Brazil within the context of South America and Latin America and its implications for Canada. We are not sure where that will take us totally, but you are here to start us off on our study.
Welcome. I understand Mr. Allen will be making the introductory remarks. As is our usual practice, we will then turn to questions from senators.
Jon Allen, Assistant Deputy Minister, Americas, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada: You can be assured we will be with you throughout the course. We are happy to come back if we cannot answer all your questions or if other issues come up later on in your study.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to address the committee. I thought I would take a few minutes to briefly outline Brazil-Canada relations and Brazil's regional and global role. Then we can move on to questions, as you suggested.
Brazil is a major emerging economy, a member of the BRIC countries — Brazil, Russia, Indian and China — a country that has been increasingly carving out a greater role for itself in the international arena. It is the fifth most populous country in the world, with 190 million people. It has the world's eighth-largest economy and is expected to become the fifth-largest economy over the next 15 years.
It has a growing middle class — some estimate almost half of that population of 192 million — an expanding export sector and a robust democracy. As you know, Dilma Rousseff has just been elected the country's first woman president. Brazil also has a growing sense of its regional and international role.
Demographically, it is a very young country.
As part of its global foreign policy aspirations, it is seeking a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and is currently serving its tenth term as a non-permanent member.
Brazil is already a significant partner with the United Nations and has been taking on increasing levels of responsibility in UN affairs. For example, since 2004, Brazil has led the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti, MINUSTAH, where we are working with Brazil and a number of other countries; and it has committed over $250 million to support Haiti's reconstruction following the earthquake there last year.
Brazil plays a major role at the World Trade Organization, WTO, as my colleague David Plunkett is more than aware, and it is increasingly engaged in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, though it has not yet decided whether to accede to that organization. It has joined, or is in the process of joining, various regional development banks, including the Asian and African development banks, and is a member of the Inter-American Development Bank, IDB, and has become a contributor to the International Monetary Fund, IMF. It recently joined the ranks of creditor and emerged out of debtor status with the IMF.
Brazil strongly supports the G20 as the premier forum for international economic cooperation and advocates the elimination of the G8 in favour the G20 to address a wide range of global issues and to broaden geographic participation. We can come back to that, but it is one area where we are not completely ad idem.
Both Canada and Brazil have subscribed to the G20 commitment to combat protectionist tendencies. Brazil calls for reforms to international financial institutions, arguing that stronger representation is needed for emerging economies such as Brazil, China and India, its BRIC partners. Like Canada, it has weathered the economic crisis better than most, thanks to a solid financial system and the quick and extensive measures it took in response.
Although Brazilians often prefer to see themselves as global rather than Latin America players, regionally, Brazil is consolidating its influence in Latin America and the Caribbean through leadership in organizations such as the Southern Common Market, MERCOSUR; the Union of South American Nations, UNASUR; the South American Defence Council; and the recently established Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, which was created in February 2010 in Cancun. It remains an influential member also in the long-standing Organization of American States, OAS, where we are also members.
Brazil has also begun to play a role in Africa — I note that it has just opened a significant number of new embassies in Africa — and on global issues such as Iran and climate change. It is a major investor in Africa, motivated in part by its large Afro-Brazilian community, and is expanding its diplomatic footprint there and in other regions.
There are more people of Lebanese origin in Brazil than in Lebanon itself. I learned that while I was in Israel during the conflict in Lebanon, when there were great calls to break off diplomatic relations with Israel.
Brazil will host the 2014 FIFA World Cup and 2016 Summer Olympics — quite a coup, having stolen the Olympics from President Obama in Chicago.
Given all of the above, it is highly likely that Brazil will play an increasingly important role in shaping the new global architecture.
If I may, I would like to spend a few minutes on the Canada-Brazil bilateral relationship, which is also moving forward impressively. Canada-Brazil relations have been on an increasingly positive trajectory in recent years. As a key regional and global actor, and as a priority country within Canada's Americas and global commerce strategies, Brazil shares many of Canada's interests and values: advancing democracy, security and prosperity in the hemisphere and globally; strengthening the multilateral system; and supporting Haiti in its efforts to rebuild that country.
We both have vibrant multicultural societies. Bilateral commerce continues to expand, and people-to-people ties among non-government actors are strong, diversified and growing. As noted, we also collaborate with Brazil on various issues in many multilateral fora, including the UN, the G20, the OAS and the OECD.
The Canadian government is currently implementing a multi-year market plan for Brazil, an integrated approach to intensifying the bilateral commercial relationship, which will position our two countries to reap economic benefits. In 2009, two-way trade was $4.2 billion, an increase of 26 per cent from 2004. Exports grew by 68 per cent between 2004 and 2009.
Foreign direct investment dominates the commercial figures. In 2009, Canadian foreign direct investment in Brazil totalled over $11 billion in the mining sector, in the commercial and residential sector and in a number of other areas, while Brazilian foreign direct investment in Canada was close to $15 billion. Canada is Brazil's number one destination for outward investment; and Brazil is the sixth-largest source of foreign direct investment in Canada, as well as the eleventh largest recipient of Canadian direct investment abroad.
As Brazil has emerged as a global player and sought to broaden its relationship with Canada, we have focused on a whole-of-government strategy of increased engagement via high-level exchanges and visits, strengthened dialogue, enhanced commercial ties, as I have just said, and cooperation between domestic government departments. Over 15 Canadian government departments are now significantly engaged in the Brazil relationship. In the past two years, there have been a number of visits to Brazil by ministers and deputy ministers, the most recent being a trip by Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Morris Rosenberg in October for senior bilateral political consultations. In March of 2009, an unprecedented 10 Canadian deputy ministers visited Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Brasilia and the regions around the Amazon. These visits have been reciprocated by numerous visits from Brazil, including by the Minister of Defence and a delegation in March 2010 of over 25 Brazilian deputy ministers and senior officials. As well, the DFAIT hosted a Brazil policy conference in May 2010, at which Brazil's Secretary-General of External Relations gave the keynote speech, with over 100 participants from academia, civil society and the private and public sectors of Brazil and Canada.
That secretary-general is rumoured to become the next Brazilian foreign minister, although we are waiting to see if that actually takes place. He is a former Brazilian ambassador to the U.S. who has been here a number of times and is very well regarded here.
In September, in Toronto, the Deputy Minister of International Trade, Louis Lévesque, welcomed one of his trade counterparts who lead a multidisciplinary trade mission to Canada.
As noted, Brazil is demonstrating strong interest in deepening its relationship with Canada in the collaboration and sharing of information, a sign of a maturing bilateral relationship. In this context, Brazil and Canada have entered into many new MOUs — memorandums of understanding — and other mechanisms for cooperation. For example, Brazil is keen to learn from our experience in Africa and in Afghanistan. Brazil is also looking to Canada for advice as it develops its capacity as a responsible and effective development assistance partner, a new role for the country.
Other recent milestones in the bilateral relationship include the Canada-Brazil Framework Agreement for Cooperation in Science, Technology and Innovation, which has increased collaboration in areas such as biotechnology, renewable energy, clean technology and information communications technology. At Brazil's suggestion, senior officials are also exploring the creation of a high-level Canada-Brazil business forum to be chaired by prominent business leaders from both countries.
Canada recently hosted the second iteration of the deputy minister level Joint Economic and Trade Council, JETC, a mechanism for exchanging information, trade and investment relations. The JETC had been dormant for a number of years and was relaunched aggressively in 2009. At the most recent talks in September, issues discussed included international business development, energy and services, aerospace, corporate social responsibility and agriculture, just to name a few. This has proven to be a successful mechanism for making progress on a number of fronts, including deepening existing commercial links.
In addition to MOUs in health, agriculture, sustainable development of minerals and metals, and education, we have entered into an MOU on Olympics cooperation, drawing upon Canada's Vancouver experience, and we are entering into MOUs on youth mobility. It is interesting to note that 14,000 Brazilian students and tourists come to Canada, an we are Brazil's largest venue for English-language teaching for Brazilian students.
Inaugural political-military talks were held in Brazil in September, co-led by DFAIT and the Department of National Defence. A strategic partnership dialogue, a high-level forum for discussing regional and global issues, was proposed by the Brazilian Secretary-General of External Relations and will be launched in the next few months.
I will close by saying that the bilateral relationship was once governed by irritants, by the Bombardier-Embraer conflict, by our decision at one time to close our market to Brazilian beef, by the Lamont and Spencer case, which some of you might remember, and it has now moved beyond that kind of relationship. I can safely say it is now moving into the realm of a strategic relationship where irritants like that can be dealt with as they are with good partners but do not dominate the relationship and do not colour it to the extent that great progress cannot be made.
I think we are now in the mode of making great progress, so I think I should probably stop there and let you ask some questions. I hope that was helpful.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Allen. I know your colleagues are here to help answer questions on specific areas.
I want to start with two areas you have not touched upon, and you may wish to comment on them now or provide an answer later.
With respect to the role of the states in Brazil, there is a lot of ingenuity and differences from state to state as one travels there. Is there contact between the provinces and the states in Brazil? Is that factored into your thinking?
Second, I was always struck that while there is a close relationship between Portugal and Brazil, it does not colour in the same way France does with its ex-colonies, and England and even Belgium to that extent. Can you comment on the strength of that relationship? Does that colour any of our initiatives?
Mr. Allen: Picking up on the last question, the UN Security Council vote was coloured by the fact that Brazil was supporting Portugal, undoubtedly. On that, I would say that unlike France and perhaps unlike Spain and Latin America, Portugal is a smaller country with a smaller reach and a smaller global influence; perhaps that is why we do not see that relationship as significant as France's relationship with its former colonies in francophone Africa or with Spain's relationship with certain countries in Latin America.
Regarding the states, I would agree with you 100 per cent that the states are extremely important in Brazil. I cannot attest to many provincial-state relations, but I know that the Canadian private sector is very much engaged with the states and in the states. I met with the Brazil-Canada Chamber of Commerce just last week and was educated about certain states being far more developed and easier to operate in; others are less so but are very open to investment, et cetera. There are different land regulations in different states, depending on how mature and developed they are.
I could also say that in addition to our embassy in Brasilia and our consuls general in Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo, we have opened smaller offices in other states such as Recife and Belo Horizonte. We are trying to spread our coverage more broadly and beyond where it has traditionally been so that we can take advantage of the opportunities in those states.
[Traduction]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: It is always a pleasure to have you here, and to have the opinions of representatives from the Department of Foreign Affairs; it is always exciting to begin a new study about a new country.
Personally, I followed the election of Ms. Dilma Rousseff, who was elected in the second ballot, with great interest. There is something that worries me deeply, because today, the newspaper Le Devoir reported about the Minister of Industry, Mr. Tony Clement, who was questioned about and took very seriously the fact that Brazilian aircraft manufacturer Embraer filed a complaint against Bombardier concerning a government subsidy granted for the development of the C-Series.
Incidentally, this article from Le Devoir is dated today, Wednesday, November 24, 2010. It mentions an article from the Brazilian newspaper Valor Econômico, which stated that the aircraft company wished to submit a case to the Court of Justice of the European Communities in order to force the British government to cancel its support to Bombardier.
With something like that hanging over our heads, I would first of all like to hear your opinion on this matter; and I would like to know how you would assess the advantage of Canada investing in Brazil and strengthening relations. Also, what are the concrete perspectives of bilateral cooperation?
Mr. Allen: I am going to give the floor over to David Plunkett, our expert in political commerce.
[Français]
David Plunkett, Chief Trade Negotiator Bilateral and Regional, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada: I am always a bit leery about commenting on a newspaper report I have not actually read — especially quoting ministers — that may not necessarily be accurate. I am a bit nervous about wandering into this question at this stage.
Obviously Bombardier, being a world leader in the aerospace sector, is putting a lot of emphasis on the CSeries. The Government of Canada has invested, through a repayable risk-sharing investment, toward research and development for the CSeries. We believe that our repayable research and development contributions have been designed and implemented to be consistent with our international trade obligations.
On two occasions now, Brazil has asked us some questions about the development of Bombardier's CSeries. We have provided information to address the questions that have come in. My understanding is we have had this exchange of questions and answers.
One thing I would note — and Mr. Allen touched on it in his comments about the irritant-based past of the relationship — is that the aerospace industry increasingly operates on a global, integrated basis. Embraer and Canadian companies in the aerospace sector are collaborating successfully on Embraer projects. There is a better relationship now out there.
I think that is as far as I am comfortable going, without knowing exactly what Minister Clement may or may not have said.
[Traduction]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I will ask our young page to make a photocopy of the article. I simply wanted to know if you thought that it could threaten our relations with Brazil. My question related to that aspect.
I do not have any other questions for the moment; maybe later on in the second round.
[Français]
Mr. Allen: I would echo what Mr. Plunkett said at the end. As with the Americans, for example, we have irritants — softwood lumber, Buy American — but our relationship is bigger and more mature and can more than survive that. That is what I was trying to get at: We have moved beyond that.
Indeed, Embraer is buying input from Canada. It is selling planes in Canada, and Bombardier is selling planes and equipment into Brazil now. Even in the aerospace sector, we have a mature relationship. We are setting up a bilateral working group in the aerospace sector that will advance those issues. I am confident that we will be moving forward.
Senator Downe: Can you explain why this community of Latin American and Caribbean states was formed in February?
Mr. Allen: It is difficult for me to interpret.
Senator Downe: Let me focus the question. Why did they think there was a need for an additional organization, when we already have the Organization of American States and all the others you listed?
Mr. Allen: UNASUR is an organization for South America, and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, CELC, is for Latin America and the Caribbean. If I were to try to interpret it, I would say that they are making a statement about the desire to have their own organization, one that does not necessarily include North America.
Theirs is regional. As far as we can tell, it is not competing. It has the same basic values — the promotion of democracy and the peaceful resolution of disputes. I can only assume that while the OAS serves some purposes, they decided they wanted to have their own unique club. Hopefully, one does not take away from the other.
Our position is not to be critical of that, any more than we expected them to be critical when we formed the NAFTA and decided that despite the OAS, we wanted our own little trading club. I think it is probably an indication of the region maturing and wanting to demonstrate to the world that they are more than capable of getting involved in their own affairs.
I should say that neither UNASUR nor CELC has secretariats or a lot of money. So far, I think they are organizations at an early stage of development. We shall see to what extent they progress and how involved they get.
Senator Downe: Do you feel comfortable answering questions about CIDA, or would you prefer we leave that for CIDA officials?
Mr. Allen: I think you should ask CIDA. I might be comfortable, but they would not be comfortable.
Senator Segal: I wanted to get Mr. Allen's reflection on two specific parts of the relationship: the security relationship, potential and real, between us; and the possibility of greater cooperation and some measure of integration.
Before I do that, I would be remiss if I did not express my own thanks as a citizen for the outstanding work you did as Her Majesty's Canadian ambassador in Tel Aviv. I am sure that was a task not without its challenges and sensitivities, and we are appreciative. I will also make reference to the deepening of the relationship between Canada and Israel during your time as our ambassador. I think that is of some historic significance and very much to the credit of DFAIT, as a representative of the Crown here.
The Brazilians took an independent position, trying to be helpful on the Iran issue. President Lula flew to Iran and, with our Turkish friends, endeavoured to find an almost Canadian third way out of a difficult position, which you would have a remarkable perspective on, based on your service in the Middle East. Clearly when a country grows and expands, both in influence and in economic capacity, when its own middle class is expanding, as you say, it is only natural that it would want to see its sphere of influence expand accordingly. To the extent to which it is taken more seriously perhaps in the councils of the world, it is a normative thing for a country to want to do more and be listened to more directly.
Can you give us your own sense of how we as Canadians can have a constructive relationship with the Brazilians, understanding that that independence on their part may not always be conducive with our obligations with respect to NATO and may not always be conducive with our views necessarily on the broader issues of the Middle East? We have taken a very tough stand on Iran, on Iranian violation of human rights. In fact, your colleagues at the UN mission have worked hard to make it clear that we are not prepared to live with Iranian violations of human rights.
Can you give us a sense of how we might approach that going down the road and what our committee might reflect upon when we are considering the relationship and thinking about the security and kind of global balance issues that dealing with our allies in Brazil might suggest?
Mr. Allen: It is a pretty complex region and a pretty complex question, but I will take a stab at it.
First, I should say that on the specific issue of Brazil and Turkey's involvement on the Iran file, there was a bit of an unfortunate disconnect there because at one point in time, the Americans did want Turkey and Brazil to be involved and tried to play that honest broker role that you were talking about. It took quite a bit longer than possible, and when it finally started to gel, it happened to coincide with a very delicate time when the Americans had finally gotten their United Nations Security Council partners on board to move on sanctions.
I think the Brazilians would tell you that they had a letter from the president and they were following through. The Americans would tell you, ``Yes, that is true and we do not blame the Brazilians, but the timing was wrong and we needed to move forward with sanctions when we did.'' In that instance, they were playing a constructive role; they just did not get the timing right.
In general, though, having been a global player for a long time, I think we are more than aware that countries like India, China, Brazil and Russia, the BRIC, will take different positions than we do on any number of issues because they are emerging, because they are not ``of the developed world,'' because they no longer want the G8 to determine the global agenda and they no longer want the developed countries in the IMF and the World Bank, so they are now stretching their wings and beginning to assert themselves.
I think as responsible global partners, we must accept that with our partners within the G20. We will continue to move forward with them on certain issues. On certain other issues, we will inevitably divert, but that does not mean we cannot be partners. We will simply not be ad idem on everything going forward. For that matter, we are not ad idem with the United States or with countries in Europe going forward either.
I do think there is increasing respect for their views, and I think they are being moderate in their approaches; they are not trying to be difficult. They are asserting their interests, and we will have to engage with them and recognize that. We do not want to see the end of the G8, even though we are members of the G20. If they had their druthers, the G8 could disappear and they would be very happy. They want to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Their wanting it may not be in our interests, but that is okay.
What impresses me is that they want to engage us. They really do see Canada as a model going forward on certain issues, such as peacekeeping and development assistance, as we mentioned. Having gotten beyond the irritants, they are for the first time seeking out our counsel, and that is very positive.
Senator Segal: On a more granular basis, are you and your colleagues comfortable that we do not have any structural impediments to greater, as our Québécois friends would say, concertation?
For example, at the October convocation at RMC, the Royal Military College of Canada, there were students and exchange students from many countries in the world, including our good friends in the Russian Federation, but there were no Brazilian students. At our staff college, there are officers from many of our Middle Eastern Gulf cooperation countries and others but no Brazilian students. I am sure there is no policy that says, ``Brazilian military officer candidates are not welcome,'' but are we doing the kind of outreach necessary to we begin to build some of the relationships that over time become mutually conducive to cooperation and to a common understanding of our collective strategic interests and capacities?
Mr. Allen: I think we are. To be honest, I cannot explain why there were no Brazilian students, but you are right, there certainly is no impediment. As I said, the Canadian Minister of Defence, Minister MacKay, was in Brazil, and the Brazilian Minister of Defence was here, and we had a very good, solid political military dialogue; there is keen interest on both sides. I think it may be just the case that it is new. I think it is worth following up on, and I will. I will note we have two defence attachés in Brasilia, so there is certainly a basis for it.
Let me turn the floor over to Neil Reeder, who wanted to add something.
Neil Reeder, Director General, Latin America and the Caribbean, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada: I might also mention that Minister MacKay attended over the past weekend the Conference of Defense Ministers of the Americas meeting in Bolivia. You might wish to bring witnesses in from the Department of National Defence, DND, but what we are seeing in DND is a definite turn towards the Americas in the department's international policy, part of that link to recognition that security is a key plank to promote cooperation in the region under Canada's Americas strategy. We are pleased with what DND is doing. The department is increasing its attaché network as well in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Another comment of interest on Brazil is its regional security role. We salute the Brazilians' presence in Haiti, where we are working closely with them. Brazil is the largest single contributor of troops to MINUSTAH, the stabilization force in Haiti. It leads that group. Canada is there with a number of Latin American countries, but we feel Brazil has stepped up and said, ``This is a crisis; we will help and take a leadership role.'' We have been working closely with the Brazilians, and we expect them to continue to take that leadership role in the region and internationally.
Senator Segal: On a technical matter, I think you made reference to some either agreements or MOUs between ourselves and the Brazilians on a host of fronts. If those are public domain, would you be able to share them with the clerk of this committee so that we could have the benefit of their content?
Mr. Allen: Absolutely. We will share those. As I suggested, a number have been done and others are being negotiated, but I do not think there is anything classified in that list. We will share it with the committee.
Senator Mahovlich: I would like to mention that in the city of Toronto, one of the largest charities we have is known as the Brazilian Ball, and it is run every year. It has been put on by the Canadian Brazilian community for over the past 20 years, and it has raised more money than any other charity in Toronto. All the costumes and the people in the parade come from Rio de Janeiro, I believe. They bring everyone out for one big party; it is like a Mardi Gras. I have to compliment them for their great job.
Twenty-five years ago or so, when someone mentioned Brazil to me, Brascan would come to mind quickly. Whatever happened to Brascan?
Mr. Allen: It is now called Brookfield, and it is one of Canada's largest investors and players in Brazil. Brookfield is heavily invested in the real estate side, but much broader than that. Its vice-president is the head of the Canada-Brazil Chamber of Commerce, and the company continues to play a leading private sector role.
The Brookfield people are among the cognoscenti of Brazil still in Canada. They are extremely happy with their investments and their involvement in that country. They continue to be, and continue to expand.
Senator Mahovlich: Are they still in mining?
Mr. Allen: Absolutely.
Senator Wallin: It is nice to see you in a different world and in a different time and place. I have a couple of basic questions as we set the stage. I apologize for being late, but I am sure the chair laid it all out.
We did the RIC of BRIC, and now we are doing the B of BRIC. Is it still relevant?
Mr. Allen: The BRIC?
Senator Wallin: Yes.
Mr. Allen: I think so. I think it is especially relevant for the BRIC because they like having a grouping. It is especially relevant for Brazil because Brazil does not like to see itself at all as of Latin America; it likes to see itself as South America. However, it does not like to see itself even only as South America; it likes to see itself as a global player. By being in the same grouping as, especially, India and China, which are the darlings of the world going forward, Brazil sees itself very much in that light. I think its UN Security Council aspirations, like India's, are enhanced by its partnership there. For them, it is important.
Senator Wallin: We have almost completed the final version of our report on India, but the same kinds of things are said by outside observers about this relationship — that the Canada-Brazil relationship is not on the radar screen. It is a very narrow relationship — concerns about our supply management approach to some sectors, et cetera — and the dollar amount is small.
Again, and we kept asking this question in the Indian context, why is that?
Mr. Allen: I think that is old information — not to be critical, because the new information is pretty new. Over the last five to seven years that description has changed considerably: The irritants no longer dominate, and the intense bilateral and global relationship has developed.
I am relatively new to the game, and I was amazed. We do not often see 10 deputy ministers heading off to a country at one time. Not only did they go there, but they were impressed by what they saw and got their departments to engage; many of the MOUs we are talking about came out of that. We are now starting to get the ministerial level contacts, and I think we are beginning to get more private sector interest.
Senator Wallin: I think that is the issue, that governments may have engaged, but —
Mr. Allen: Mr. Plunkett may have views on this. However, Canadian business has the United States, and Americans speak English, and it is right across the border; you know that better than anyone, senator.
Brazil is a big country, but it is quite far away. The people speak Portuguese. There are complex states and many rules and regulations, so you actually have to do some work.
The fellow from Brookfield was telling us that Americans and Canadians like to go down to Brazil and have a breakfast meeting, do a deal and then leave. Well, in Brazil and in Mexico, there is a three-day introduction of hellos and breakfasts and lunches and let us talk business and family, and then you make a deal.
I think our private sector is beginning to learn that and beginning to engage, but it is not the easy market that we are used to. However, it is 190 million people, 95 million middle class. BlackBerry — Research in Motion — has opened up a manufacturing facility there; RIM understands that this is a real potential market. We keep our fingers crossed.
Mr. Plunkett: Certainly the business community is very supportive of the ambitious bilateral and regional trade agenda we are pursuing. You mentioned India. You will perhaps have seen that just a few days ago we announced the launch of free trade negotiations with India, a market of more than one billion people. We put out a joint economic study with India in the summer, which shows some of the benefits that are to be gained in that particular market.
We are interested in advancing our dialogue with Brazil in MERCOSUR, because Brazil cannot negotiate normally as Brazil on trade policy matters, and we are exploring options to deepen our relationship at this stage.
Senator Wallin: On MERCOSUR, this remains a problem, does it not, or has that mindset changed? I think it is fair to say that UNASUR was President Lula's baby and may not be the new president's baby, but you will have better information on that than we have.
Mr. Plunkett: Until someone tells me otherwise, I think we are negotiating with MERCOSUR.
Mr. Reeder: I would add a couple points on the commercial exchanges and flag a couple of events. Minister Van Loan has now been to Brazil twice in the past two years. Brazil had a multi-sectoral trade mission to Canada in September past, a very successful mission, and Parliamentary Secretary Keddy led a trade mission in the oil and gas sector with Canadian companies to Brazil in April of this year, along with ACOA, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency. In June of next year, we are looking at an infrastructure mission, again led by Mr. Keddy.
There is a government movement behind this, of course, but we are also responding to a high degree of interest from the Canadian private sector — oil and gas, infrastructure and science and technology, as well.
Senator De Bané: Would you agree that this economic development, which has been very impressive in the last 20 years, is, to some extent, also conditional on Brazil overcoming some of its challenges that have not been met?
According to the United Nations, it is still number 75 on the Human Development Index. Despite all his popularity, President Lula was unable to bring the congress to adopt tax reform; 50 million people in Brazil are still under the poverty line; 30 per cent of the people in the important cities of Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo live in favelas. I think there are over 150 million acres of land that are uncultivated and where millions of families would like to have some land distribution.
To what extent do all those social problems endanger the extraordinary economic development of that giant?
Mr. Allen: That is a good point. Some people, including a number of people our deputy minister met with when he was in Brazil recently, are suggesting that the new president will focus her attention much more domestically on infrastructure, on poverty reduction, on education, on a number of the areas that you have touched on. We will see.
When President Lula, a person who spoke no English or French, took over as a union leader, probably people would not have predicted that he would become the leader he did on the world stage, but there is a sense going forward that there has to be consolidation within Brazil, and she recognizes that and wants to lead it.
With that said, I guess one would argue that the figures in India and China would not be completely different, and yet there is a vibrant commercial, vibrant economic and vibrant financial sector with which to engage. I think the hope is that by engaging, by trading, by exporting with the world and by becoming a global partner, those populations will continue to rise through to the middle class and further. I think President Lula himself is an example of that.
The hope is that by engaging, we will help them solve some of those problems. However, as you mentioned, tax reforms, structural reforms and judicial reforms that might be required are items the Brazilians themselves will have to address, if they so wish. It will be easier to attract investment and commercial relationships if they do. I think we agree with your assessment.
Senator De Bané: What is DFAIT's view on this new organization, CELC, from which North America will be excluded? To pursue what Senator Downe was asking you about, what do you think is behind that? Is it that they see themselves as the leaders of Latin America? I am sure Argentina would have some reservations about that, of course. Do you see any implicit raison d'être for the fact that all of South America will be invited to join but not Canada and the U.S.? What is the department's analysis about that?
Mr. Allen: Mr. Plunkett says they do not need interpretation when they have their meetings. Mr. Reeder says Brazilian leadership.
Brazilian leadership is definitely a factor. It was interesting that Brazil got UNASUR and CELC up and running, but then Nestor Kirchner, the late President of Argentina, was made president, a very astute political move on the part of the Brazilians.
The South Americans, the Latin Americans and the Caribbean people are demonstrating that they are independent, that they are becoming successful and that they are more than capable of having conversations amongst themselves, not necessarily with the Americans, Canadians or Mexicans. However, to date, that has not excluded their participation in the OAS, which I would suggest is a mature, well-functioning, reasonably well-financed organization and which still plays a major role in dispute settlement, democracy promotion and those elements.
Senator De Bané: Mr. Deputy Minister, what are the major irritants or issues between our two countries?
Mr. Allen: There will always be trade-related irritants in any relationship that is that big. Senator Fortin-Duplessis raised one possibility: There is still a hangover with respect to Embraer. That is there.
We talked about differences over how we approach global issues, such as the G20 versus the G8 and the UN Security Council and Brazil's approach to some of the conflicts, such as Iran. I do not know what Brazil's position on Afghanistan is. Oh, it is opening an embassy in Kabul. We probably have differences of views but nothing that would go to the heart of the relationship in any way, shape or form. Those are some issues, but I would not call them irritants.
[Traduction]
Senator Robichaud: I think you partially answered. Brazil is becoming a leader in the South American continent. How do other countries in that continent view the fact that Brazil is taking over the role of leader?
[Français]
Mr. Allen: First, I would say there is recognition that Brazil is the largest, the most powerful and the most economically successful country in the region, so that is recognition.
Second, I am not an expert of 20 years on this, but my sense is that Brazil is a very astute and tactical country, and it avoids throwing its weight around. It actually goes out of its way not to throw its weight around in the continent. It is extremely helpful to smaller countries like Uruguay and Paraguay. It arbitrates in disputes between, for example, Colombia and Venezuela. It avoids competing with Argentina. I think perhaps it has watched the past in the region and has decided that it will take a path of low resistance, inclusion and assistance rather than lording over countries, given that it could do so.
As Mr. Reeder pointed out, its role in Haiti is a helpful role for a country that needs assistance. I think we will begin to see Brazil using its economic wealth as a donor. I do not think it likes to be called a donor; it uses another phrase. I think it will begin to play an increasingly positive role where it can. It will assert its own interests where it has to, undoubtedly. To date, one does not hear a lot of criticism of the big brother, but rather more praise, I think.
[Traduction]
Mr. Reeder: I would like to mention that Jon Allen and I lived in Mexico in the past. The only element of rivalry for leadership in Latin America is between Mexico and Brazil. It is minor tension that has existed for a long time. I think Mexico has gained some stature in North America thanks to NAFTA.
Mexico is still interested in being a leader in the region. You can see it every now and then. I just came back from a stay of three years in Central America. On a number of occasions, I noted that there was always a bit of a game between Brazilians and Mexicans to see who was dominant in the region. Most countries accept that Brazil is now truly at the forefront in that respect. That remains something that must be acknowledged in the area. This is not so much the case, as Jon Allen had said, with Argentina and Brazil; that is kind of in the past. But Mexico still considers itself a leading country in the region.
[Français]
Senator Johnson: I am curious to know more about President Rousseff. She was the hand-picked choice of President Lula, right? Can you give us some further background on the new president, and perhaps her priorities domestically and in foreign policy? Do you have any insights on how this might affect Canada? Has she been to Canada, for example, or have the people around her? Is Canada a factor in this respect? Will any changes take place?
Mr. Allen: She is a former revolutionary. She is clearly from the political left, but like many politicians around the world and in Brazil, she moved to the centre. As you said, she was hand-picked and was a trusted aide of President Lula. She was not nearly as charismatic; she had to go to a second round in order to win, but she did win in the second round handily.
As we mentioned, the sense that we have is that her principal preoccupations, initially at least, will be domestic — labour, tax reform, education, infrastructure, including the need to get ready for the Olympics and the World Cup, but more importantly, ports, roads, airports and railways. In other words, to keep Brazil moving at the pace of growth it has attained, President Rousseff's government will need to be able to get up its game, and infrastructure will be key to that.
Brazil does not have to export; it has a huge population and can sell within that country and do quite well. However, the sense is that will be her focus.
We are actually waiting to see whether Brazil will issue invitations to world leaders to come to the inauguration. So far, she has not. There is a bit of a tradition in Latin America, certainly among the Latins, and that may well happen. Maybe that will be the first signal, whether she sends out invitations to the United States, Canada and Mexico or whether she keeps it within the family. I am not sure.
Other than that, from my perspective, it is a bit of tea leaves because she has not been on the world stage. People say she speaks English and French, and she has traveled internationally more than President Lula had when he took over, so who knows.
Frankly, looking at world leaders, including our own prime ministers from time to time, people have thought, well, they will focus on the domestic agenda. Then they start traveling, they begin to engage with world leaders and they begin to play a role globally and regionally. I would say it might be hard for President Rousseff to resist, in a way, but maybe not at the get-go.
Senator Johnson: Is there a perception that the former president will be very involved with her work in the future, at least for the short term?
Mr. Allen: There are some rumours that he will take over UNASUR; but will he be the wisdom behind the throne? I am not sure.
Senator Johnson: Is she bringing many of her revolutionary colleagues to the table as well?
Mr. Allen: I do not think so, to the extent that they were not already there. Mr. Reeder just reminded me that she was a Bulgarian immigrant, like so many Brazilians and so many Canadians, when we talk about that multicultural experience. She is interested in our experiences in dealing with immigration and multiculturalism, as well. That is another element that might get her out.
Senator Johnson: That is interesting. What would be the Bulgarian factor in Brazil? I cannot remember.
Mr. Reeder: It is a very multicultural society based on immigrants, mostly from Western and Central Europe, apart from the Afro-Caribbean community.
Senator Johnson: It will be very interesting.
Mr. Allen: It will be interesting to watch.
Senator Raine: Could you comment on the different standards for environmental protection and things like that between Brazil and Canada?
Mr. Allen: Again, I do not have all the details. I think different states are at different levels of development with respect to regulations and laws that have been passed.
When it comes to our efforts in Brazil, we take the corporate social responsibility role that we are trying to inject with our private sector and ourselves very seriously.
I met with a couple of mining companies that did indicate that at the local level there are rules and regulations they are required to meet, which they do. It is not the Wild West by any stretch of the imagination in many parts of Brazil. Perhaps in other parts it is a little less developed and a little less regulated.
Mr. Reeder: One of the MOUs we have signed, with Natural Resources Canada as the lead, has to do with sustainable development of minerals and metals. We are now looking at cooperation with Brazil in this sector, based on our corporate social responsibility principles, and we are going to proceed with this. This MOU was signed last year in Toronto, and it is an area we will work on.
On the positive side, I should say — because as Canadians we have this perception of the depletion of the Amazon and such — to give credit to Brazil, we are seeing a much more prudent management of the Amazonian resource. There are many challenges still, but we are seeing a much more prudent management of that resource than in the past. Brazil also understands and gets the message from the international community that it has a responsibility for stewardship of that very precious resource. It is doing a better job, but there are still many challenges ahead.
Another issue we are seeing taking place in Brazil and in the region generally in the mining sector is illegal mining by small informal miners, which is a major problem for us because that is unregulated and very dangerous mining. A number of Canadian mining companies have come to us on this theme recently because they are finding problems with the unregulated mining. It is quite dangerous for the miners — the informal, illegal miners.
Senator Raine: I know Brazil's national language is Portuguese. Is English the second language, since the country has so many immigrants? Are the Brazilians having issues with Portuguese versus English? How are they dealing with that in their schools?
Mr. Reeder: As a Spanish speaker, I am struck by the fact that you cannot speak Spanish to the Brazilians. You can, in the sense that they understand, but they do not particularly see that as the appropriate language of discourse.
If this committee travels to Brazil, you will find that English will be your language of communication with the Brazilians. They will understand Spanish, but they are not a Spanish-speaking country, and their default second language officially — and I think conversationally — is English. I was quite struck by that.
I will not say there is resentment if you speak Spanish to them, but they clearly prefer to converse with North Americans in English. There is great emphasis on the promotion of the English language. It is a large population that reminds me of Japan, where you have to force people to move beyond. It is too easy to work in the national language; you have to force young people to learn the second language in order to move into the international economy.
In Brazil's case, as Mr. Allen mentioned, there is a huge emphasis on English as a second language. Canada is now a recipient of that flow of 10,000 to 12,000 students per year who come for six-month study courses in Canada. It is a huge industry in Ontario and Quebec right now, feeding students from Mexico, Brazil, Korea, et cetera, who come in for these short-term courses and go back with a Canadian language diploma, which opens up wonderful opportunities for them to work in their national economies. All of a sudden, they are considered to be bilingual with English as a second language. It is a very profitable industry for Canada, and it promotes job opportunities for them back in Brazil.
Senator Raine: Of course, it makes it that much easier for North Americans to trade with Brazil because of that international language.
Mr. Reeder: The same is true with China.
[Traduction]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: As members of the public service of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, you mentioned that South American countries were progressing toward a large free trade zone, despite all the irritants. You mentioned agreements between our two countries in many sectors. For the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, could a free trade agreement between Canada and Brazil be beneficial to Canada? Would you recommend that?
[Français]
Mr. Plunkett: As I mentioned earlier, and I think Mr. Allen reinforced this in his comments, we certainly consider Brazil to be an important commercial partner as part of the MERCOSUR block with Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. We are interested in advancing our dialogue with Brazil and MERCOSUR more generally on trade policy matters. At this time, we are exploring options to deepen our commercial relations, but we are not sure yet what form this will take.
Before we would be in a position to enter into formal trade negotiations, we normally undertake an exploratory process. If you look at what we have done with countries like those in the European Union and India, which we have launched in the last couple of years, this is perfectly normal for both sides. It allows us both to explore whether a mutually beneficial agreement is possible. During this process, we consult with Canadians by way of the Canada Gazette process, the provinces and territories and business leaders. We do a lot of homework to get to this stage. Obviously, as bureaucrats, it is not for us to make this call, but we would make recommendations to our minister, and it unfolds from there on.
[Traduction]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: It sounds like you would one day like to see a free trade agreement made between the two countries.
My last question relates to agriculture.
[Français]
The Chair: You have made your point that it is a ministerial decision.
I should ask the clerk to provide members with the report this committee presented some years ago. The sections on MERCOSUR were rather interesting, looking at the impediments that may exist for encouraging free trade or not. We will have witnesses on that. In essence, it started as a customs union.
When we were looking at the most advantageous way to proceed, whether with world trade, regional or bilateral trade, we did have a study. While the statistics are dated in our report, some of the elements of working with MERCOSUR would be helpful, so I would ask that that report be circulated as good value. That may continue our dialogue on how to approach trade issues.
[Traduction]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: As you can see, our Chair knows her case files well. My last question concerns agriculture.
What effects does the evolution of agriculture in Brazil have on world food security and food security in this emerging economy?
[Français]
Mr. Plunkett: I am not sure I am best placed to answer that, but I will take a stab at it. You may have to talk to someone from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada or even the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
Obviously, Brazil is a major agricultural producer, and this is reflected in the context of the ongoing Doha negotiations, where it has played a significant role over a number of years, whether in sugar, poultry or other issues that they are largely involved in. Like Canada and other partners, Brazil would be party to international discussions at a technical level on standards and in a broader context of questions related to market access.
As Mr. Allen and Mr. Reeder have commented, Brazil is a significant player, both on a regional basis and globally. Therefore, it can influence the shaping of some of the rules that are being designed in these international negotiations. If we sit down with the Brazilians in any shape or form in the future, I can well imagine that agriculture would certainly be a significant element in any discussion.
Senator Downe: I want to follow up on the question asked by Senator Fortin-Duplessis. You outlined what Canada would do if we were to enter into a trade agreement, but what is Brazil doing? For example, I know Peru is trying to get as many deals as it can with as many countries as it can. Is Brazil currently promoting trade deals with a host of countries?
Mr. Plunkett: My colleagues have given me a list because there is no way I could memorize this.
In the past year, MERCOSUR has concluded free trade agreements with Egypt and Israel. At this point in time, Brazil is at different stages of negotiating preferential trade agreements of a diverse scope with the European Union, Jordan, Turkey, India, the Southern African Customs Union, the Gulf Cooperation Council in Morocco, Japan, Singapore, Pakistan, South Korea and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. It has bilateral preferential agreements with a few Latin American Integration Association members, specifically Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru and Venezuela. It has just launched negotiations with Mexico for a Strategic Economic Integration Agreement.
My colleague behind me can provide websites where you can look into these in more detail and get a sense of the scope and nature of the various agreements the Brazilians are undertaking. Clearly, they are busy.
Senator Downe: I did not hear the United States in that list. Do you know if they already have an agreement?
Mr. Plunkett: For the moment, discussions with the U.S. would be taking place in the context of Doha.
Senator Downe: Mr. Allen, in your presentation you talked about Brazil looking to Canada in a number of areas for leadership and so on. Do you know whether we doing any training for public sector employees or judges or anything like that, which we do in a host of other developing economies?
Mr. Allen: I do not, but I did see something about an MOU in the justice area that is not yet done but is being negotiated. I have not heard of training going on, which we are doing in Mexico and Central America.
Mr. Reeder: Two months ago a delegation of about 90 jurists from Brazil came at the invitation of the Brazilian embassy here. They were lawyers and judges from various states who were brought here to study the Canadian judicial system — in particular, how we manage, as a federal state, judicial issues affecting the states versus the federal government. There is a lot of interest in Quebec, as well, in the civil code and such.
They travelled to Ottawa, Toronto and Quebec City. The trip was organized by the Brazilian embassy as an opportunity to facilitate exchanges with jurists in Canada. That is an important initiative. The Brazilians were very impressed with that visit, so it was an important first step.
Senator Segal: As Mr. Plunkett was taking us through the increasing web of trading relationships that are developing through and with MERCOSUR, and as we note that Mexico and the EU have a free trade agreement — or are in the process of trying to negotiate one — it strikes me that the elephant in the room is a hemispheric free trade agreement.
There is a hemispheric community of the Americas, which constitutes, in a sense — and I know there are tactical issues — a market coherence effort on our part that addresses some of the competitive productivity challenges from Asia and, of course, the European integration model, which has been a great strength for European economic growth.
Without asking you to give a view on the matter, let me ask you this: If the Prime Minister of the day were to take the position that beyond focusing on the neighbourhood more — and he has already said that we need to go forward with a more integrated hemispheric relationship — on a host of issues, such as security, terrorism and the environment, the borders do not delineate any demarcation of protection from risk, nor do they delineate the limits of our market risk, quite the contrary. Could the folks at DFAIT respond to that kind of decision with the intensity and focus that would give any government that made that decision the ability to move ahead directly, or would you argue that you would have to take some time to prepare, simply because you can only do so much contingency planning, since you have day jobs, which are compelling and for which I expect you do not believe you are over-resourced?
I would like to get a sense of that. Obviously, one of the issues we will consider as a committee is what our in-depth trading relations should be on a multinational basis with Brazil. If we had a chart that outlined what Mr. Plunkett shared with us, namely the relationships between MERCOSUR and Brazil and other countries — Jordan, Israel, Europe and the rest — we would begin to see some intensification here, which raises competitive issues for Canada.
I would be interested in your view as to whether the department would be able to engage as fully as some governments someday might wish on this sort of issue.
Mr. Plunkett: This is déjà vu all over again. You may recall that back in the late 1990s and the early 2000s there were negotiations on what was called the Free Trade Area of the Americas, FTAA, but this has been stalled since 2004.
Senator Segal: We had a Quebec summit, as I recall.
Mr. Plunkett: We have done multiple things in this area. Brazil and Canada were both parties to those talks.
I have been back from posting since 2006 and have multiple balls up in the air right now. In the four years I have been back, I have never been asked to do anything related to this FTAA process because it is significantly stalled.
That said, as you know, we have been active in the region itself. We have signed free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and Peru. Chile is being modernized, and we have been negotiating slowly with the Caribbean, the Central American countries and the Dominican Republic.
If I look from a Canadian perspective at who we have either negotiations or agreements with already and who we are talking to in one way or another, including air services, we probably have the whole hemisphere already covered ourselves.
However, I take the point, and it is an issue that has come up — whether it is called the spaghetti bowl of agreements or the noodle bowl in the Asian context; in some quarters, concerns are being raised about the proliferation of all these bilateral and regional agreements and the capacity of the business community to keep up with the various rules.
For our part, if you look at what we have in place with Colombia, Peru, Panama, et cetera, while each agreement has individual characteristics, there is a certain element of continuity from agreement to agreement. Also, we build in the possibility that you can start to stitch together some of these agreements. If all the parties have agreements with each other, we would not be opposed to pulling these individual agreements together into a more cohesive package, if you could technically put it together.
Formally, the FTAA process is stalled. There is the Doha process.
Senator Segal: That is also stalled.
Mr. Plunkett: I am not sure that is the technical term we are using now, but I take your point. We have people in Geneva right now who keep telling me it is a critical week and things are about to start to move ahead.
In any event, we would try to put together the biggest package that makes the most sense to support Canadian interests.
Mr. Allen: I would add that the country most opposed to the FTAA was Brazil, if I recall correctly.
Senator Segal: In part, that was why I asked the question. Thank you.
The Chair: For another date, we have been using template agreements — new wave agreements, we are saying, but the thread is for consistency with any WTO that may come along, am I not correct? There is the local appeal. It is the same structure, but we personalize it country to country as our needs and politics drive it.
Mr. Plunkett: Yes, there is a certain continuity of a model in our agreements. It is not one size fits all, by any means. If you go back, the NAFTA has shaped a lot of our thinking over the last number of years, but even just in the time that I have been doing this job, these agreements have had to change to take into account our interests and those of our trading partners. Just because we do it one way does not necessarily mean that is the only way to do it. If we want to get agreement, we may have to change.
Our agreements have to be consistent with our WTO obligations. For example, both our Peru deal and our deal with the European free trade agreement, the EFTA countries this committee has looked at, just went before a committee in Geneva in the WTO context, where other trading partners can have a look and comment on whether they think these agreements that we are undertaking are WTO-consistent, in the same way that we, as a country, can comment on preferential agreements that others are undertaking. It goes in both directions in that regard.
Senator Smith: Senator Fortin-Duplessis's question on vegetation reminded me of an issue that I mused about in recent months and do not know the answer to.
As you are aware, Brazil has been quite a world leader on an environmentally and politically correct and real global challenge — of non-oil operating cars. In fact, I seem to recall reading that the percentage of cars Brazil had that were non-oil operating was something like 47 per cent, and now it is maybe in the 50 per cent range.
My impression was that part of the reason they are able to do this is the intensity of the vegetation; I guess much of it in the Amazon basin is so lush and rich that it allowed them to produce vegetation from which they could get fuel that was at a price that made these non-oil operating cars viable to some extent.
In recent months, there have been a couple of huge oil discoveries off the northeast coast. I remember reading the deposits seemed huge in size, almost in the Saudi Arabian category. Maybe not quite that category, but they were huge.
I have been curious, and this may take some years, but when that oil comes in and their prices go down, do you think they will still be doing the environmentally correct thing and increasing the number of non-oil producing cars? Have you ever thought about this? When I was reading about it, I started wondering. They have been a role model.
Mr. Allen: I have just come from Israel, which is heavily into the electric car and is a country that, given its size, might actually be able to operate it.
I guess there are environmental issues and food-related issues with ethanol as well. As you say, Brazil is about to explore offshore and find a lot of their its oil.
Senator Smith: It has already explored and found huge areas.
Mr. Allen: Exactly. However, I really cannot comment on where the country might be going with that. Where to go is always a question of price at the time.
Senator Smith: I am sure where Brazil will be going is drilling, but who knows how long that will take. I could not resist asking if any of you had thoughts on that.
Mr. Allen: No, but we will look into it and get back to you.
The Chair: We will be sure to take your advice on witnesses from the Brazilian side, both the government and perhaps some corporate.
Senator Smith: It is an intriguing issue. You would hardly think Brazil would be a world leader on this, but when you look at why, it is obvious that the potential is there.
[Traduction]
Senator Robichaud: Can you talk to us about Amazonia, that is to say, its people and the land-clearing being done for the benefit of livestock farmers and to the detriment of people in the area? What concerns does the Brazilian government have about this?
Mr. Reeder: I do not have a lot to say about that topic. You could perhaps ask someone to come speak about that subject at a future hearing.
Brazil has made a lot of progress in the environmental sector in Amazonia. About 20 or 30 years ago, it really was a problem of mixed priorities. I think that now there is solid awareness on the governmental level as well as on the public level. Also of note is Brazil's current environmental leadership, which makes for a great improvement in resource management.
Nevertheless, I prefer to suggest that you take up this topic with other witnesses, who would be better able to address it, or that you take it up with other people in the Department, who may be able to speak about it.
[Français]
The Chair: Thank you. We have perhaps exhausted all of the information you can give us today, as well as your patience. It has been two full hours. We have covered many areas that I think are necessary for our study, so we thank you for giving us the Canadian perspectives and updating us on, as you say, the new Brazil that we should start exploring in relation to possibilities for Canada.
We thank you for appearing this afternoon. If we need to call on you again, it is reassuring you have said you will respond.
(The committee adjourned.)