The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“COLOMBIA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the Senate section on pages S6593-S6594 on Oct. 17, 2011.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
COLOMBIA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I have said on a number of occasions that trade is an incredibly important part of our economy, especially in my home State of Iowa. For this reason, I am a longtime supporter of policies designed to open foreign markets to our Nation's exports through new trade agreements. I have fought to break down the barriers that many other countries have erected to block our exports, and I have sought to reduce the practices by which many of them seek to compete unfairly in world markets.
However, trade is more than just the shipment of goods and services across borders. Trade policy and the impacts of trade also have wide ranging consequences for workers and the environment inside the trading countries. Properly designed, our trade policy can expand opportunities and promote the welfare of workers in both the United States and abroad. Ill-designed trade policy can have the opposite effect as well.
For this reason, I have to express my strong opposition to the free trade agreement with Colombia. Simply put, Colombia is one of the most dangerous countries in the world to be a trade unionist. According to Colombia's National Labor School, ENS, in the last 25 years, over 2,800 Colombian trade unionists have been killed. According to the AFL-CIO, 23 trade unionists have been assassinated this year alone in Colombia, including 16 since the conclusion of the labor action plan, which I will speak more about later. The ENS also reports that over the last 10 years, Colombian trade unionists have faced almost 4,000 death threats.
While some improvements have been made in recent years, the Colombian government has not sought to hold those responsible for these brutal crimes. According to the International Labor Organization's, ILO, High-
level Tripartite Mission to Colombia, ``the majority of trade unionist killings have not yet been investigated nor have the perpetrators, including the intellectual authors of these crimes, been brought to justice.'' ENS data indicates that since 1986, only 6 percent of the cases brought to trial have resulted in any convictions.
The current Colombian government led by President Santos has made some progress. I believe that the Colombian action plan related to labor rights that the Obama administration negotiated with the Santos administration is a step in the right direction. If the changes that the Santos administration have begun making are continued, and the labor action plan is fully implemented and enforced, Colombia will have made significant progress to addressing many of my concerns.
But given all that I have described earlier, it would be irresponsible of us to rush into a free trade agreement before we see the results of this endeavor. Unfortunately, while the labor action plan requires the Colombian government to issue new laws, regulations, and reports, there is no mechanism to ensure that these policies will be effective at improving the living and working conditions of Colombians. The only follow-up mechanism included in the labor action plan is a series of meetings to take place in 2012 and 2013. After 2013, those meetings may cease to occur.
Even more, should Colombia not meet its obligations under the labor action plan or take future action that is contrary to the labor action plan, only some portions may be subject to the binding dispute settlement procedures in the text of the agreement. The limited enforceability of the action plan further cautions against moving forward too hastily, as we will not have enough leverage to ensure that fundamental labor rights are respected once the agreement is implemented. As my colleagues may remember, the side agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement is ultimately meaningless and unenforceable.
One of the goals of our trade policy must be to further the internationally recognized right of workers to organize. Supporting the rights of workers to organize freely, bargain collectively, and live safely is not just good for workers abroad, but it helps workers in the United States as well.
The United States simply cannot compete in a global race to the bottom when it comes to labor standards. Our workers are some of the most highly skilled and productive workers in the world. But they simply cannot compete against countries that make things more cheaply because they don't respect the rights of their workers, have safe workplaces, or pay their workers a living wage. Unfortunately, this agreement will not help us further that goal.
I would like to raise a second significant concern I have about the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. As many of my colleagues know, I have been working on reducing abusive and exploitative child labor around the world for nearly two decades. I first introduced a bill on this issue in 1992. According to the best estimates by the International Labor Organization, ILO, there are 215 million child laborers between the ages of 5 and 17 who are engaged in today's global economy.
Of these 215 million child laborers, 115 million are engaged in hazardous work. These 115 million powerless children are working in mines, in fishing operations and on coffee plantations. It is appalling that this is still occurring in the 21st century. These children are robbed of their childhoods. Many are denied an education and any hope for a brighter future. They will grow up illiterate and exploited, creating a wellspring of future social conflict and strife.
We have made some progress over the years by funding programs for the remediation of child laborers through our contribution to the ILO's International Program for the Elimination of Child Labor, IPEC. In 2000, I successfully amended the Trade and Development Act with a provision directing that no trade benefits under the Generalized System of Preferences, GSP, be granted to any country that does not live up to its commitments to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. I required that the President submit a yearly report to Congress on the steps being taken by each GSP beneficiary country to carry out its commitments to end abusive and exploitative child labor.
I want to explain clearly to my colleagues what I mean when I refer to abusive and exploitative child labor. It is not children who work part-time after school or on weekends. There is nothing wrong with that. That is not the issue. What I am referring to is the definition set out by ILO Convention 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor. This is not just a Western, or a developed-world, standard. It is a global standard that has been ratified by 174 countries. It has been ratified by Colombia. The United States was the third country in the world to ratify this convention.
Unfortunately, the Department of Labor's Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor that was released this month, states up front that Colombia, ``has not provided adequate resources to the National Strategy to Eradicate the Worst Forms of Child Labor. Children continue to work in agriculture, including forced coca cultivation, and in mining.'' The report further finds that children are forced to work in domestic service, are sexually exploited, transport illegal drugs, and even are used by armed militants as child soldiers.
In addition to these shocking practices, eight Colombian products appear in the 2011 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor, also released by DOL this month. These products include coffee, sugarcane, and gold.
Unfortunately, the implementing legislation now before the Senate for free trade with Colombia actually would take us, and the world, a step backward when it comes to protecting children. That is right. This free trade agreement with Colombia, which replaces GSP provisions in governing trade between our two countries, will take us backward with respect to abusive and exploitative child labor.
Under GSP, the President now must report to Congress annually regarding Colombia's child labor practices, and if Colombia is not meeting the obligations that it undertook as a signatory to the ILO Convention, if Colombia is not acting to eliminate the worst forms of child labor, then trade sanctions are available to us to require enforcement of internationally recognized standards. That is so that our companies, and our workers, are not subjected to the unfair competition that abusive labor practices allow. Under this new implementing legislation for free trade with Colombia, on the other hand, if it is enacted, neither of those things I just mentioned will be true.
Our trade negotiators should not be weakening protections that we in Congress put in place to ensure that free trade can be consistent with respect for international child labor standards. Supporting abusive and exploitative child labor abroad does not help create jobs in America. Just the opposite, it hurts that effort. Our workers and our local businesses should not be competing with the worst forms of child labor abroad.
As a result, I strongly believe that we need to put the break on this flawed trade agreement. It is time for us to begin passing fair trade agreements that promote good quality jobs both here and abroad and work to end the worst forms of child labor. This agreement does not meet that test.
____________________
