Evidence of meeting #11 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was core.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
You are talking about the ombudsman's power to investigate. That power is essential, but how will it change things in the context of the many ongoing violations? What would change if we really had that power?
Coordinator, Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability
Allow me to answer in English.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
I have no objection, Ms. Dwyer, since we have interpretation services.
Coordinator, Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability
The power to investigate is absolutely fundamental to this position. If you look at what an ombudsperson's office does, it does not issue binding fines; it does not send anyone to jail; it does not make any findings of guilt. What it does is independently investigate the facts and make findings of fact to help determine what happened, who was involved and how to prevent and remedy those harms.
If you can't get at the basic underlying facts of the situation, then you can't make public reports that make findings of fact. You can't make recommendations that are tailored to the facts of the situation to help prevent these things from happening in the future, and you can't adequately make recommendations for future law and policy reform to help prevent this or to adequately remedy it. Without the power to investigate, the office is entirely dependent on companies under investigation—companies accused of serious human rights abuses—voluntarily sharing information that may implicate them in abuses.
Impacted communities that our members have worked with for over a decade are looking for prevention of harm and remedy, to be sure, but they're also looking for acknowledgement of what they have suffered and a commitment for things to change in the future.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Ms. Meyerhoffer already said that it would be useful to have enforcement powers, but that the office can still have an impact without them. She mentioned the power to recommend that government support be withdrawn.
Do you think that power is sufficient?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
You're going to have to hold on to that. I'm sorry.
We're now moving to the next round and Ms. McPherson for seven minutes.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think we can probably get to that answer, but I wanted to very quickly thank Ms. Dwyer for joining us today. It's incredibly important to hear your perspective, Ms. Dwyer.
I want to walk through a bit of a timeline with you, if I may. In 2015, we were told during the run-up to the election that this position would be put in place. Obviously, it has been decades since we've been asking for a CORE ombudsperson with teeth and the ability to compel testimony and documents. In 2018, we actually had the announcement from Minister Carr. We get an ombudsperson in 2019, which is devastatingly disappointing because we know they don't have the ability to do the job they need to do, and it's now 2021. Almost three years have gone by, and there have been zero investigations.
The ombudsperson spoke to us earlier today about how there was a deep need to consult. Do you think that is a reasonable timeline, considering the urgency of some of the human rights abuses that we've seen by Canadian mining companies abroad?
Coordinator, Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability
It is absolutely urgent for impacted communities and workers around the world to have access to an effective mechanism to help redress and remedy harms they have suffered. As I mentioned before, they're really serious abuses.
It is a shame on Canada's international reputation. We've had multiple United Nations bodies tell Canada that we're not living up to our international human rights commitments because we don't have an independent body to investigate.
Canada announced this in 2018 and received international attention. It is dragging its feet and not fulfilling that commitment, while globally we're seeing great momentum towards imposing legislation that requires companies to prevent human rights abuses throughout their global operations and supply chains and that provides them with access to remedies. Throughout Europe, we're seeing legislation in France and recently a commitment in Germany and at the European Commission around mandatory human rights due diligence legislation.
The kinds of abuses people are suffering are severe, and we've had this office before. When Ms. Meyerhoffer was speaking about this office being new and that being the requirement for needing to take all of this time to consult, one really asks, what is new about it? If what it is about is more budget, why did the government not simply increase the budget of the CSR counsellor's office or the budget of the national contact point, if all it was going to do was create another voluntary dispute resolution mechanism that puts people more at risk and doesn't help advance Canada's international human rights obligations?
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
This is one of the things I was going to ask you about. I have stood on the ground in Nicaragua and have seen the results of Canadian mining companies poisoning aquifers. I have seen sick children from Canadian mining companies. I have listened to the attacks. It blows my mind that we still don't have this ombudsperson.
I was going to ask you about the reputation of Canadians and how it has suffered, but I think you've addressed that.
Why didn't we get the ombudsperson we were promised? Why isn't the government living up to the promise they made to Canadians in 2015 and again in 2018? What happened?
Coordinator, Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability
What appears to be the case is that Canada announced an office that would be effective, and immediately the mining industry engaged in a lobby campaign to say that they would not support this.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Ultimately, in your opinion, the lobby of the mining companies got into the government and lobbied successfully against any restrictions on their ability to do whatever they want around the world without clear oversight in place.
Coordinator, Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability
It is clear in my mind that the government caved in to mining industry pressure and gutted the office before it was even able to start.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Speaking of gutting the office, my colleague Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe asked you a question just a few moments ago about the ombudsperson speaking about how she did have the ability to do her job, she did have the ability to make an impact. I think you didn't get an opportunity to answer him, but I'd love to hear your answer on what you think she's able to accomplish in terms of her investigative powers.
Coordinator, Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability
I think it's telling that when you asked Ms. Meyerhoffer how she could investigate, how she would respond if companies under investigation did not voluntarily provide information crucial to an investigation, she was unable to answer that question. Quite frankly, it does not seem there is any detail on the most crucial and important function of an ombudsperson's office.
In terms of what she can do without the power to investigate, it remains primarily a mediation-based approach and the ability to undertake a review, potentially without access to necessary information. How can you publish a report with your findings of an investigation if you don't have access to key information? At the end you can say, “Here are the allegations that I've heard, but I haven't been able to verify X, Y and Z because I haven't had access to the information I need.”
It's also telling that other similar bodies in Canada, other ombudspersons' offices, have the power to compel documents and testimony and have the power for search and seizure.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
You only have 15 seconds, Mr. McPherson.
We're going to move to the second round now and—
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I'll take my 15 seconds just to thank the witness and to highlight once again how important it is that this work be done, and to highlight again that it is all well within the power of the government to implement this ombudsperson with the powers they had promised.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Now we'll move to the second round. This will be a short round. It will be two minutes for each member for questions, just as with the previous witness.
We'll start with the Liberals.
Ms. O'Connell, you have two minutes.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Dwyer, for being here.
With only two minutes, I'll try to get right into it.
Following up on Ms. Khalid's question.... The U.S. was seen as a jurisdiction that had some success in this area, but they were using the Alien Tort Statute, which was an 18th century law. It had been challenged in the Supreme Court, and ultimately they lost the ability to actually pursue human rights claims on U.S. corporations.
Given the legal challenges, and seeing that the U.S. actually did have a law, with cases where companies were held and had financial findings against them and individuals and it has—
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
I apologize, Mr. Chair.
I think there is a problem with the sound. It is difficult for our interpreters. It is late, and they are doing amazing work. We would not want things to be too difficult for them.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Is anybody else having sound problems like Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe?
Is it just you, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe?
Bloc
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Okay. I was getting interpretation. Were you not getting interpretation?
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
I was told there was an interpretation problem. It is up to the interpreters to tell you, Mr. Chair. I just heard that the sound was not good enough for interpreting at some point.