I think, as you're saying, there's good progress but it has to be implemented. What we found on the ground, not only regarding Canada but many other countries, is that at the operational level companies have weak grievance mechanisms. Very often they are not in the local language and not following principle 31 on the efficiency or the quality of the grievance mechanism.
Then, when you have platforms at the Canadian level or any other country level they remain mostly unknown. Just as an example, yesterday I was conducting training for 75 Latin American union leaders. None of them had ever presented anything in their own company and 50% of them work for subsidiaries of multinationals with different origins. They had really no idea of what the best mechanisms were to get their voices heard, not even in their own company at the headquarter level. Those are unionized workers from strong unions. If you go down the supply chain and you go farther away from the large capitals or the larger cities, that diffuses even more.
Anything that can actually strengthen the capacity of human rights defenders, including union leaders, to basically use the mechanisms that are in place and that exist in their favour...but if they don't know how to use them and they don't even know that they exist, of course, they don't use them and the mechanism fails.
The perception that mechanisms are bad because they don't produce the outcome expected.... Well, it's no wonder why they are under scrutiny. If you don't make them accessible and fit for the purpose of accessing a remedy, of course, they remain unused if they are basically unknown.