Thank you for that.
I keep deferring to Professor Dufour because her point was about the duty of vigilance, so I'll leave that piece to her.
I'll say that there have to be layered approaches to this. I think you're right that there is a spectrum, of course, but there are also multiple different angles from which you can address this. On the one hand, you might directly, as we were talking about, have a ban on investments in particular companies, but there also must be mandatory human rights due diligence for all companies operating in Canada to investigate their supply chain—to know it all the way down to their raw materials.
At this time, that is not mandatory; that is a voluntary protocol that a company can choose to follow, and the vast majority of companies do not choose to do that. In fact, they intentionally don't want to know what's happening at the roots—at the most upstream parts of their supply chains—because we know that's where the most abuse and exploitation happen.
I think we need a full mandatory human rights due diligence policy that includes transparency, traceability and accountability for companies that do not do this. This is another problem with a lot of international anti-slavery or forced-labour laws—there's no accountability if a company does not do what they're supposed to do. There's no enforcement and there's no penalty for doing it. Those penalties also need to be sufficient to deter companies from just ignoring the law and paying the fine as a cost of business.
I think those pieces are the critical ones, but I'll leave it to Professor Dufour to talk more about the duty of vigilance law internationally, which I don't know as much about.