User:Joskoe

Bill C-300
A private members bill introduced on February 9th, 2009 by Canadian MP John McKay (Scarborough-Guildwood Riding). Also known as the Corporate Accountability of Mining, Oil and Gas Corporations in Developing Countries Act.

Functions of Bill C-300
•	Would regulate the relationship between Canadian government agencies (Export Development Canada, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, and the Canadian Pension Plan) and Canadian extractive companies operating in developing countries. •	Would create eligibility criteria (“guidelines that articulate corporate accountability standards”) for political and financial support that is provided to Canadian extractive companies by Export Development Canada, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, and the Canadian Pension Plan. •	Would require that “guidelines that articulate corporate accountability standards” include the International Finance Corporation Performance Standards, related guidance notes, and Environmental Health and Safety General Guidelines; the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights; “human rights provisions that ensure corporations operate in a manner that is consistent with international human rights standards; and any other standard consistent with international human rights standards.” •	Would create a complaints mechanism where complaints are filed with the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. If accepted, the complaint would lead to an investigation of a company’s compliance with the guidelines and a public report on findings within eight months of receipt of the complaint. A company may become ineligible for government support for as long as it is out of compliance with the guideline.

Potential Impact of Bill C-300
The purpose of the Act is to ensure that corporations engaged in mining, oil or gas activities and receiving support from the Government of Canada act in a manner consistent with international environmental best practices and with Canada’s commitments to international human rights standards.Canada’s extractive industries comprise 5% of total GDP and in 2008 over 75% of the world’s exploration and mining companies called Canada home. There is disagreement and uncertainty as to whether the intent of the bill is to contribute to efforts to improve Canada’s performance in CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) or if it’s purpose is to empower the Ministers to investigate and report on any Canadian extractive company regardless of whether it currently received support from the government. What is certain is that the Bill would restrict the Canadian government’s ability to fund multi-national corporations that carry out harmful practices while mining in foreign countries.

Alleged Canadian Extractive Industry Human/Environmental Rights Violations in Developing Nations
Canadian company Barrick Gold Corporation was accused of heavy metal contamination, particularly mercury, at it’s Porgera mining site in Papua New Guinea in 2008. These accusations caused Norway’s Ministry of Finance to sell its shares in Barrick Gold from the nation’s pension fund for ethical reasons in 2008. Human Rights Watch alleges that Barrick Gold dumped 16,000 tons of liquid waste into the Porgera River every day at one point. Blackfire Exploration, a Canadian company, has been accused of intimidation, violence, bad mining practices, environmental destruction, and harassment while working in Mexico. The murder of Mariano Abarca, an outspoken critic of Blackfire’s mining practices, is viewed by some as ultimately the consequence of the violence that followed the arrival of the mines.

A lawsuit stemming from Ecuador was filed in Ontario in 2006, alleging that a company’s armed security attacked unarmed locals with pepper spray and fired rounds to disperse protests.

A 2002 United Nations report, “Report on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth in the Congo”, called on the Canadian government to launch an investigation into the actions of seven Canadian companies accused of illegally exploiting resources from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which had been entrenched in civil war at the time. The Canadian government chose not to investigate. Accusations that Canadian company Anvil Mining funded the murder of 73 people in the town of Kilwa by supplying vehicles, pilots, and supplies to Congolese militia emerged on 2004. Anvil Mining asserts that the vehicles were confiscated from them and they had no choice but to comply under Congolese law.

In 2005, a foreign affairs committee investigated an incident in which fifteen Canadian-employed mine workers were gunned down in the Philippines, the result of a conflict between Canada’s TVI Pacific Inc. and the indigenous people.

Advocates of Bill C-300
McGill University Law Professor Richard Janda believes Bill C-300 would make Canada international leaders in CSR and would put Canadian industries more in line with nations such as Norway that have already adopted similar laws. Professor Janda believes exceptional CSR performance would actually give extractive companies a competitive edge, country to the beliefs of most of the lobbyists opposed to the Bill. Janda also suggests that Bill C-300’s expectations on Canadian corporations have a strong legal foundation and is within federal jurisdiction, therefore, not extraterritorial. There seems to be a consensus between both industry insiders that oppose the bill and those who are in support of it that CSR performance is of importance.

Foreign nations were in support of Bill C-300, with Tanzania standing out as one such example.

Canadian NGO Development and Peace (http://www.devp.org) launched a grassroots campaign in support of the Bill, obtaining over 290,000 signatures from Canadian citizens in favour of passing the legislation to present to the Prime Minister at the time.

Mining Watch Canada, Amnesty International, and the Canadian Network for Corporate Accountability are also major advocates of Bill C-300.

Critiques of Bill C-300
Export Development Canada points out that they work to ensure that required standards are met before distributed their support to Canadian corporations. EDC maintains that their support in the extractive industries sector has helped to generate $21.4 billion in Canadian GDP and sustain 139,000 Canadian jobs in communities across the country- all of which might be jeopardized if Bill C-300 were to become law. Many consider Canada to already have international recognition as a global leader in CSR. Passing of the bill might severely undermine trust between extractive companies and the Canadian government causing corporate flight from Canada.

The Canadian extractive industries also have raised issues of sovereignty; does Canada’s jurisdiction supersede or overrule local government in developing nations who have their own standards and practices? Investigations into the actions of Canadian companies actions in developing nations might inevitably lead into investigations of the actions of foreign governments themselves. This poses both a diplomatic and legal problem.

Proponents of the Bill are critical of the fact that it is unable to create and ombudsman position that would investigate allegations of Canadian-financed abuses in the developing world.

Defeat in Parliament
Bill C-300 was voted down in its third reading in Parliament on October 30th, 2010. The final vote was 140-135 against passing the legislation. 20 MP’s were absent from the vote, and the Conservative Party, which had vowed to kill the Bill in order to preserve Canadian jobs and the interests of one of Canada’s richest industries, voted unanimously against the measure. 28 MP’s abstained from voting.