Comparative Chart: Don’t Mistake Reporting for Accountability

ESSENTIAL FEATURE

MODERN SLAVERY REPORTING BILL C-243/S-211

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY BILL C-262

Does it require companies to respect human

rights?

NO. Companies are required to report annually on whether they took steps to identify and prevent the use of forced labour, and what they found. It does not require companies to respect human rights.

YES. It recognizes that companies have a responsibility to respect human rights, and must proactively take steps to prevent human rights violations throughout their supply chains and global operations.

Does it require companies to prevent harm?

NO. It requires an annual report. It does not require companies to prevent harm.

YES. It creates an explicit obligation for companies to prevent serious adverse impacts throughout their supply chains and global operations.

Does it require companies to take steps to identify, mitigate, prevent and account for human rights and environmental harm in their supply chains (due diligence)?

NO. Companies are not required to take any due diligence measures. A company may report that it has not taken measures and be in compliance with the law. 

YES. It creates an explicit obligation for companies to put in place adequate due diligence procedures. It makes reference to international best practice guidance from the OECD and the UN Guiding Principles on BHR.

Are there meaningful consequences if companies cause harm or fail to implement adequate due diligence procedures?

NO. There are no consequences for failure to prevent harm or for failure to implement due diligence procedures. Failure to report or submitting false reports may result in a fine. As long as a company reports, it can continue to profit from abuse without even a fine.

YES. The legislation provides people with a statutory right to sue a company in Canadian court if it 1) causes or contributes to serious adverse impacts, or 2) acts negligently and fails to put in place adequate due diligence procedures. The company can seek to defend itself from a court order with evidence that it exercised all due diligence.

Does it help affected people to access justice or remedy?

NO. The legislation does not address people’s right to remedy or justice for harms.

YES. There are several ways in which the legislation helps address existing barriers to accessing Canadian courts. Including that:

1) Impacted people would have a statutory right to bring a civil suit in Canadian court.

2) The legislation creates an obligation to prevent harm and to undertake due diligence throughout a company’s global obligations and supply chains.

Does it provide agency to impacted communities / workers?

NO. There is no role for impacted community human rights defenders and workers.

YES. Consultation with rights holders is required in a company’s due diligence procedures. Impacted people can access Canadian courts for remedy and to prevent harm.

Does it apply to companies of all sectors and all sizes, down the entire chain?

NO. The law only applies to companies with 250+ employees, with significant revenue or assets. [8]

YES. The law applies to companies of all sizes, from all sectors, down the entire value chain. Exemptions for small businesses operating in low risk sectors would be done on a sector by sector basis via regulation.

Does it apply to all human rights?

NO. It applies only to forced labour and child labour. This ignores the internationally accepted principle that human rights are indivisible, interrelated and interdependent, a principle upheld by successive Canadian governments. [9]

YES. It upholds the principle that companies must respect all human rights. It makes reference to the core international human rights conventions, the fundamental ILO conventions, UNDRIP and makes specific reference to the right to a safe, healthy and sustainable environment.