Canada-China Relations Committee on June 19th, 2023

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

All right.

Canada does not have a restricted entities list. We don't presently use executive orders to restrict the kinds of investments Canadians can make in China in the way the United States has done. We know the United States has been much more aggressive in interdicting products that have come from China and have originated in areas where there is forced labour.

Is there anything you can suggest to this committee that we should be including in our report as a recommendation that would improve the rigour and the probity of our human rights regime, especially when it comes to countries like China and their violation—their atrocious violation—of human rights?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

As I said, yes, I think the government would benefit from mandatory human rights due diligence. With that implemented, with consequences, that would allow the Canadian government to influence or punish corporate behaviour, so influence good behaviour, punish bad behaviour.

You will see in the official assessment we're going to do that we will be looking at particular entities in Xinjiang, which should, when we publish our report, give actors, such as investors and other companies looking at this, and the government, an idea of companies that Canadian companies ought not to engage with.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

How many Canadian companies are active in China, specifically in the Xinjiang region of China?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

It depends on what you mean by “active”. With regard to supply chains in China—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

That's correct.

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

—as I said, when we did our report and we interviewed 10 Canadian garment companies, all of them had supply chains in China.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Was that coming out of forced labour camps?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

That wasn't determined. That was just information we received from companies, so we don't know that. That's what our complaints are looking at. With the 13 complaints we have, we will be looking at the allegation that they are benefiting from forced labour. When we do our investigation, we'll be able to report on that.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Of the 13 cases you're reviewing right now, is there any indication that these Canadian companies knowingly engaged in trade that involved garments produced by slave labour?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

The allegation is that this has occurred, but I can't comment on that. I haven't completed our investigation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken Hardie]

Thank you, Mr. Fast. That's your time.

We will now go to Mr. Fragiskatos for our final five minutes.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.

Ms. Meyerhoffer, can you tell us more about equivalent offices that may exist in other countries? How unique is Canada in terms of having an ombudsperson in place to look at the sorts of things you look at, responsible enterprise? Could you elaborate on that at all?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

In terms of an ombud office created under the United Nations “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights”, article 27, where they recommend that states create non-judicial mechanisms to look at corporate behaviour across boundaries, we are the only one that I'm aware of.

Now, there are other bodies. There are national contact points. Some of them in other countries operate a little more rigorously, or like an ombud, but they're not an ombud office. Uniquely, I think it's us, although I think others are looking—from conversations I've had—at our type of office.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Okay. As the office is unique in this regard, in terms of best practices carrying out the work, how exactly do you approach this? What exactly is the approach taken to putting in place mechanisms that will allow you to carry out your work, if there isn't a point of reference?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

Our points of reference are the United Nations “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights” and the “OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises”. It's particularly that first document, the UN's guiding principles. In there, they talk very specifically about the need for human rights due diligence in order to identify, assess, mitigate, prevent, remedy and address harms.

We have built our office based on those well-developed and robust principles and standards.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

When there are concerns that arise as far as human rights violations existing, how exactly do you go about examining that in any detail, and how can those findings translate into concrete policy change?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

We have a five-step process.

The first one is this: Someone reaches out to our office. We do an intake session with them to find out whether it's admissible and a human right.... We ask them a lot of questions.

If I find that the allegation is admissible and something we should look into, we launch an initial assessment. That's where we are with these 15 right now. In that initial assessment, we let the respondent company know about the complaint. We talk to both the complainant and the company separately to see whether this can be resolved, redressed and remedied, if a remedy is needed at that stage. If we can, we'll do an “early resolution”, as we call it.

If not, we talk to the parties. If they are able to talk to one another, we mediate the issue and come to some kind of conclusion that, again, redresses the harm if a harm has arisen....

If not, we do an investigation. Again, investigation is fact-finding. It would be done in-country, if possible, or through desk research, if not—through various means. We do it to the best of our ability.

From that, we would first make recommendations to the company, in order to help them change their practices. We're trying to influence their behaviour. That's part of my job. The other part is making recommendations to the Minister of International Trade as to what the government might be able to do in order to provide better guidance, or to influence the behaviour of Canadian companies operating abroad.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

This point about admissibility is particularly interesting, because that's where everything begins.

What are the criteria for determining the admissibility of a case?

[Sheri Meyerhoffer]

Yes, there has to be some evidence of three things.

First of all, it's some evidence, because we're not looking at the merits. Actually, we don't look at the merits until after the initial assessment. There has to be some evidence that it is a Canadian company. We ask a lot of questions around that. We do research around that. If it is outside Canada, it's not within our mandate. If it's in Canada, it has to be in our sectors—the three sectors.

Then, based on the information we've received, it involves a human rights abuse.

The final one is that it occurred on or after the date I opened the office, which was May 1, 2019.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken Hardie]

Thank you very much.

That brings us to the end of our time with this panel. We want to thank them for their time this evening and also thank our colleagues here in the room for the work they've done.

I want to remind everybody that we will be accepting instructions to the analysts on the draft report that they will be producing. I'll call your attention to a document that was released on the May 25. It's a possible outline for a draft that might inform some of your thinking on what you'd like to see in the report as it comes up.

As we close, I first want to thank our clerk, our analysts, our interpreters and the technical and support staff.

I want to wish everybody here a very happy, productive and, hopefully, at times, relaxing summer—maybe.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

You haven't heard about next week's 106(4), then. We're going to D.C., aren't we?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken Hardie]

You're going to do a 106(4)? There will be no Christmas card for you.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken Hardie]

I think I'm going to drop the hammer right now.