Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 21st, 2022

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I'll ask Matt Friedman the same question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm afraid you're out of time, Mr. Sheehan.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

We now go to Mr. Bergeron.

You have one minute and a half, Mr. Bergeron.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Isn't that three minutes?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

No, in this round every member is getting three, and you get a minute.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I'm not a member?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a quick question for you, Mr. Brown.

You yourself mentioned the difficulty customs officers have in determining whether something is coming from Xinjiang or not. I look forward to receiving your brief to get the details of your proposals. That said, aren't your proposals likely to come up against the same constraints, that is to say that we won't be able to distinguish, among products coming from China, what specifically comes from Xinjiang, just as it's impossible for us at the moment to determine whether a product coming from Israel was made in the occupied territories?

How can we get around this difficulty?

[Stephen Brown]

What we'd like to see is for all companies doing business in this area to be responsible for proving that the products in their supply chains aren't being made with forced labour.

When you read our detailed brief, you'll see that other countries, like the United States, have really good systems. There are lists that detail the evidence that must be demonstrated before goods that are produced can be approved and brought into the country.

Once a company does business in this geographic area, it has a responsibility to prove that all of its products are not the result of forced labour.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Brown.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We now go to the last question, with Ms. McPherson.

You have a minute and a half.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Thomas, you spoke about how you would strengthen this bill. I'd like to give you a moment to tell us about any amendments that you would be interested in having brought forward and what those might look like.

[Kevin Thomas]

Thanks.

One that I think we should speak about is the question of scope. Right now, it's narrowly focused on child labour and forced labour, and I appreciate what the other witnesses have brought forward on this question. Those are, obviously, egregious human rights abuses. However, as we speak to, perhaps, what Mr. Dumas has been speaking about—what happens with children—one of the solutions to address child labour is also to make sure that the human rights and workplace rights of the parents are respected.

Every company we deal with on human rights due diligence doesn't stop doing due diligence just for child labour or forced labour. We believe the scope should be human rights, as defined under the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and under the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. That will capture the whole essence of what's happening in these supply chains and, I submit, will actually help us address the question of whether there are adverse affects for children when their parents are not receiving their rights at work as well.

I would definitely expand it that way: make it a mandatory requirement that there is a due diligence system and expand the number of reporting requirements to include things like grievance systems, which are, again, well established in OECD guidance on this and in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

That's where I would go, short and simple.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thanks very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you ever so much, Ms. McPherson.

We will now be moving to the second panel.

Before we do so, allow me to thank all the witnesses who have appeared here and assisted us in better understanding this bill. We're very grateful for your expertise.

Allow me to reiterate one more time, Mr. Thomas, our apologies for the technical challenges you experienced.

Thank you.

The witnesses can leave, and we will suspend for a couple of minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I call the meeting back to order.

We are very grateful that three witnesses will be joining us for this hour. We have with us here, from the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, Ms. Emily Dwyer, policy director, and Ms. Kalpona Akter, director of the Bangladesh Center for Workers Solidarity.

We also have, from the International Justice Mission Canada, Ms. Cheryl Hotchkiss, who is the director of strategy and operations. She is joining us virtually.

Last, we have, from the Regroupement pour la responsabilité sociale des entreprises, Ms. Alice Chipot, who is the executive director.

Each of you will be provided with five minutes for your opening remarks. After we have concluded that, we will open it to questions from the members.

Thirty seconds before your five minutes are up, I will put this up to ask you to kindly wrap it up as soon as possible.

That having been said, we will go first to Ms. Emily Dwyer.

Ms. Dwyer, you have five minutes.

[Emily Dwyer, Policy Director, Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability]

Good afternoon. Thank you very much for the invitation to be here.

My name is Emily Dwyer. I'm the policy director at the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, or CNCA.

We are grateful to parliamentarians for taking this issue seriously, and we urge them to act swiftly to address the many reports of human rights violations in Canada's global supply chains.

Modern slavery exists, and some Canadian companies are profiting from it. Canadians from coast to coast to coast want Canada to take decisive action to eradicate forced labour and other human rights abuses from Canadian supply chains, but in its current form, Bill S-211 would not prevent exploitation and abuse. Bill S-211 would do more harm than good.

Our network of 40 organizations and unions from across the country was formed in 2005 to collectively call for mandatory measures to require companies to respect human rights and the environment in their global operations. We represent the voices of millions of Canadians, and our members have long-standing relationships with communities, women, indigenous peoples and workers around the world.

Our membership does not support Bill S-211, because the bill as currently drafted would allow Canadian companies to continue to profit from human suffering and environmental damage. The harm we're talking about is not trivial. It ranges from forced labour to land and water contamination, workers' rights violations, killings and gang rapes, many of these linked to Canadian mining and oil and gas operations abroad.

Canada needs the right legislation if we are serious about tackling corporate abuse. Simply put, a law that requires you to report but does not require you to stop the harm you're causing may be easy to pass with all-party support, but it is also meaningless.

What is needed is a law that goes beyond a basic reporting requirement.

To get widespread support of civil society and to catch up to global momentum, supply chain legislation should, first, focus on preventing and remedying harm, rather than reporting; second, help impacted people access remedies; and third, apply to all human rights.

At best, Bill S-211 is meaningless, as it will not improve the situation for those who are harmed. At worst, the bill is damaging because it creates the appearance of action to end modern slavery without actually having any such effect.

Bill S-211 does not require companies to stop using or to stop profiting from child or forced labour. It does not require companies to take any steps to identify whether slave labour is in their supply chains. It does not require company directors to certify that their supply chains are free of forced labour.

If companies do make use of child or forced labour, the bill doesn't offer help to the victims at all. This means that a company could comply with Bill S-211 by taking no steps or by taking patently inadequate steps, remaining wilfully blind and continuing business as usual.

The evidence from other countries confirms that reporting-only laws have not been effective in addressing corporate abuse. For example, a five-year review of the U.K.'s modern slavery reporting registry “revealed no significant improvements in companies' policies or practice” and also said that it “failed to be an effective driver of corporate action to end forced labour”.

Europe is moving away from reporting-only approaches towards mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence laws. Canada should do the same.

It is urgent that communities and workers harmed in Canadian supply chains be protected from abuse and have access to remedy in Canada. We hope the process currently under way will ultimately lead to such a result, but we want to be very clear: Our network's position is that if Bill S-211 as currently drafted were to go to a vote today, we would be advising MPs to vote no.

We also believe that this committee needs to hear directly from impacted people and workers, and we note their absence from the speakers list. Kalpona Akter, herself previously a child worker and today a world-renowned labour rights activist from Bangladesh, joins me today and can intervene during the question and answer period.

We hope the committee will expand the number of sessions it holds so that it can hear directly from the directly impacted people around the world.

Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Ms. Dwyer.

We now go to Ms. Hotchkiss for five minutes, please.

[Cheryl Hotchkiss, Director, Strategy and Operations, International Justice Mission Canada]

Thank you.

Greetings, committee chair, committee members and fellow witnesses. My name is Cheryl Hotchkiss, and I am from IJM Canada, or IJM.

IJM is a global organization seeking to protect people living in poverty from violence. We partner with local authorities in 29 program offices in 17 countries to combat trafficking and slavery, violence against women and children, and police abuse of power.

It is now estimated that nearly 50 million people are enslaved around the world. Of these 50 million, 28 million are caught up in forced labour. The combined impacts of COVID-19, conflict and climate change have pushed more people into poverty, making them vulnerable to all forms of exploitation, including forced labour, and pressed parents and families to remove children from schools to work to help their families survive.

In countries where there are high rates of poverty, particularly extreme poverty, you will find broken systems caused in part by governments unable or unwilling to provide leadership to creating and maintaining healthy justice and social systems. COVID-19, conflict and climate change cause further degradation of these systems. Unhealthy systems enable all forms of lawlessness, create instability and breed fear. People living in poverty are forced into jobs where they can make a meagre income in risky jobs that often take them away from families, leaving them further isolated and at risk of exploitation. For women in forced labour there's an increased risk of violence, particularly sexual violence.

IJM is exposed to this grim reality in our efforts to help the most vulnerable receive protection and support from systems that didn't prevent and maybe even enabled exploitation. We know that an unhealthy legal system needs many actors to improve it and make it work for the most vulnerable so that they can find decent work where there's no fear of violence and exploitation. We believe that corporations have a critical role to play in helping unhealthy systems to improve and effectively protect vulnerable people. We appreciate that corporations are focused on generating good returns for investors and creating products that consumers want. They are not responsible for playing the role that governments should. But they have influence that can encourage and help governments undertake their responsibilities to protect their citizens effectively.

This is why for IJM, Bill S-211 is important. We know corporations have a positive opportunity to impact justice system reform. The governments in these countries where there is forced labour need corporations to have stable environments in which to do their work or gather resources they need for their products. Unhealthy justice systems mean an unstable society for everyone, including corporations. Voluntary codes of conduct or individual corporate efforts to address exploitation in supply chains create an unlevel playing field for corporations importing and selling products in Canada. Those who want to address forced labour and child labour in their supply chains bear the costs associated with that on their own and pass that on to the consumers.

Bill S-211 will enable justice and labour protection reform. It will do this by creating the conditions where corporations can work together, and will be encouraged to work together, to know what is in their supply chains. We've seen this happen with the Seafood Task Force in Thailand and Malaysia, where companies collaborated to create a level playing field to operate in the wake of similar legislation regarding forced labour in the fishing industry. With that information, they can act on their own or as a collective to press governments to take concrete action to improve justice systems for the most vulnerable, which includes listening to people who've been caught up in exploited labour and forced labour.

The bill will provide a collective and impactful deterrent to end forced labour and child labour through the imposition of the import prohibition. This ban levels the playing field for corporations that are making efforts to address forced and child labour in their supply chains to compete with those who aren't taking any action.

Finally, it will give Canadians, who care about the impact of their consumer choices, information to help them make better choices and use market forces to improve the supply chains for all products sold in Canada.

IJM is encouraged by Bill S-211 and wants the Canadian government to be involved in progressive efforts taken by other G20 nations so that the next ILO report on modern slavery has the numbers going in the right direction—downward.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Ms. Hotchkiss.

We will now go to Ms. Chipot.

You have five minutes as well.

[Alice Chipot, Executive Director, Regroupement pour la responsabilité sociale des entreprises]

Good afternoon, everyone.

Members of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, I'd like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to appear before you today.

My name is Alice Chipot, and I'm the executive director of the Regroupement pour la responsabilité sociale des entreprises, the RRSE.

Our organization is located in Montreal and is comprised of more than 50 committed investors, including religious communities, foundations, non-profit organizations, research centres and individuals. For more than 20 years, we've been working for business practices and corporate behaviours that are in line with the expectations of Quebec and Canadian society. We work for greater social and environmental justice.

RRSE has joined with the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, or CNCA, to push for a comprehensive due diligence framework in Canada.

There are several points I'd like to highlight.

First, we applaud Parliament's efforts to eradicate modern slavery and all forms of forced labour in internationalized supply chains. That said, we believe that the bill currently under consideration misses its purpose and target by seeking to segment the human rights issue without providing effective legislative mechanisms.

The current wording of Bill S‑211 espouses the philosophy of small steps and, at it stands, is too weak to have the right effect. It's based on the idea of reporting and on marginal, even symbolic, penalties and fines for bad actors among companies.

At RRSE, we're a group of investors. We've been doing shareholder engagement for 20 years. What does that mean? It means that we work with the concept of reporting, with data based on ESG criteria, that is to say environmental, social and good governance criteria, and that we look closely at information on value chains. We work with what companies report, with what they agree to report, and with the information made available by rating agencies and other institutions.

While some companies are showing improvements in human rights, it's easy to say that reporting isn't enough to really have the desired effect and avoid negative consequences for the environment and the human condition.

Only a review of Canada's legislative and regulatory framework to protect against and punish repeat bad actors will provide an appropriate response. It's essential to identify existing risks, but also to provide mechanisms for condemnation and redress in the event of abuse. To do that, judges must be given a role and a place, because that is the only real deterrent.

There are good practices. They're not present or represented in this text. They should be looked at on the European side, particularly in France, Germany and the Netherlands. This would allow us to create a common basis, a reality of territories that complement each other.

We've just come out of COP27, where we heard the claims of the people of the southern part of the globe. So I add my voice to that of Jacques Nzumbu, a Jesuit expert on Canadian mining companies, who came to see you a few weeks ago and who repeatedly explained the reality of his community, that is to say the reality of the children and women who work in mining companies in the Congo.

I would also like to add my voice to those of the Uighurs in Montreal who came to see us at the RRSE to ask us to help them and to make visible the reality of modern slavery in supply chains, wondering what action Canada was taking.

Finally, I would like to add my voice to that of Kalpona Akter, who travelled a long way from Bangladesh to come and talk to us about the reality and condition of the workers she is working with.

In a nutshell, from the RRSE's perspective, reporting is not enough. In this day and age, we need a more ambitious and effective voice that provides a stronger ethical framework for the practices of large companies.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much.

Now, for the first question, we will go to Mr. Genuis.

Mr. Genuis, you have four minutes.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much to all of our witnesses.

I want to make a comment about consideration of this bill, just at the beginning.

I know we've had proposals for amendments, and there may be other members who are considering amendments. I think it will be very worthwhile for anyone who is considering putting forward amendments to ensure that members of this committee have an opportunity to review them in advance. I think it would be worthwhile actually for witnesses to be able to see and comment on amendments in advance, because dropping amendments at the last minute that important witnesses haven't had an opportunity to provide feedback on is not really a very effective way to legislate. I do hope that those who are contemplating those kinds of proposals will share them with the public and with committee members in sufficient time that allows some of the folks who are here and other witnesses to be able to provide feedback—if not verbally, then certainly in writing. That seems like a best practice when it comes to legislating.

In terms of my questions, I want to start with Ms. Hotchkiss.

I wonder if you can just share a little bit more about the work of IJM when it comes to these issues. The committee is looking at some other issues, such as the situation in Haiti and the breakdown of the rule of law there, where your work on police reform, on justice, might have some relevance as well. If you could maybe take a minute to share more broadly for those who are less familiar with what IJM does, I think it would be very worthwhile.

[Cheryl Hotchkiss]

Thank you. Sure, I'd be happy to do so.

I think where IJM's focused is inside the systems, people working within the systems. I can't speak specifically to the situation in Haiti, but I do know that in situations like that in Myanmar, where there is instability in the government, the training we've done of police and other officials on the ground has continued to ensure that efforts related to trafficking into forced labour, into the Thai fishing industry for example, continue.

We also know from a prevalence study that we have done in Tamil Nadu related to bonded labour that IJM's work directly impacted the reduction of 77,000 people in bonded labour, and we also know that our efforts in system building, educating judges and police and so on resulted in over 430,000 people being freed from bonded labour.

We believe very strongly in the role and the opportunity of government and government actors to be trained to understand their roles and responsibilities with their citizens in protecting citizens, and the knock-on effects that has on others who may be potentially victimized by criminals who are operating and forcing people into labour.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

What do you think Canada's international development assistance can do to strengthen justice systems and promote police reform around the world?

[Cheryl Hotchkiss]

Where we have seen some successes is in the ones that I've mentioned to you, partnering with organizations like IJM that are doing judge training. In fact, we have just had an IJM volunteer who's a judge, Justice Dallas, return from Bolivia, where they were doing training with judicial officials there. We're looking at continuing that, and we know that the impact it can have is in ensuring that cases move through the court system, and where there's a crime of sexual violence or forced, exploited labour, those cases can actually be brought before the courts and the criminals are brought to justice and receive punishment.