New Watchdog for Canadian Companies Abroad

Summary#

This bill creates a new federal watchdog, the Commissioner for Responsible Business Conduct Abroad. The Commissioner would monitor and, when needed, investigate Canadian-linked companies that operate abroad or import goods into Canada to check compliance with international human rights law (Bill s.7, s.10–s.12). The Commissioner can publish reports and make recommendations to companies, the responsible Minister, and Parliament, but cannot issue binding orders (Bill s.14).

• Sets up an independent Office led by a Commissioner with the rank and powers of a deputy head (Bill s.8–s.9).
• Allows anyone to file a confidential complaint about a company’s overseas impacts (Bill s.10(1)–(3)).
• Gives the Commissioner court-like powers to compel documents and testimony (Bill s.12(3)).
• Authorizes recommendations to pull trade advocacy and Export Development Canada support from companies (Bill s.14(3)).
• Imposes fines up to CAD $250,000 for obstruction or false statements; directors can be held liable (Bill s.16–s.17).
• Requires public reports on investigations and annual reports to Parliament (Bill s.14(5), s.18–s.20).

What it means for you#

• Households and consumers

  • You can submit complaints about suspected human rights harms linked to Canadian entities abroad; your identity can be kept confidential (Bill s.10(1)–(3)).
  • You will be able to read investigation reports and annual summaries posted online (Bill s.14(5), s.18(1)–(2)).

• Workers and communities affected abroad

  • You can file complaints directly or through representatives (Bill s.10(1)).
  • If the Commissioner finds issues, they may recommend that an entity provide compensation, issue an apology, prevent future harms, or change policies (Bill s.14(2)). These are recommendations, not orders.

• Businesses (including importers and parent companies)

  • Scope: Applies if you make or sell goods abroad, import goods made abroad, provide services abroad, or control such entities; covers entities with a place of business, assets, or business in Canada, or listed on a Canadian exchange; excludes non-profits and unions (Bill “entity” definition; Application).
  • Investigations: You may be compelled to attend, give evidence under oath, and produce documents; evidence from the investigation is not admissible against the person in other proceedings, except for perjury (Bill s.12(3)–(4)).
  • Process: You will be notified before an investigation and can make representations (Bill s.12(5)–(6)). Investigations pause if criminal charges are laid or could be affected (Bill s.12(7)–(8)).
  • Consequences: Reports will be public. The Commissioner can recommend that the Minister withdraw trade advocacy or make you ineligible for future advocacy or Export Development Canada financing (Bill s.14(3)).
  • Penalties: Obstructing an investigation or giving false or misleading information can draw fines up to $250,000; officers and directors can be personally liable; there is a due diligence defense for offences by employees (Bill s.16–s.17).

• Federal government and agencies

  • Must table annual and special reports in Parliament and may receive recommendations for legal and policy changes (Bill s.18–s.20, s.14(4)).
  • Trade and financing arms (Global Affairs Canada and Export Development Canada) may be asked to withdraw support from entities (Bill s.14(3)).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No fiscal note identified. The bill does not include an appropriation or budget amounts. Data unavailable.
• The bill creates a new Office, with a full-time Commissioner, staff appointed under the Public Service Employment Act, and authority to hire technical experts; salaries and expenses are to be set by the Governor in Council/Treasury Board (Bill s.9(4)–(5), s.8, s.9(1)–(2)).
• Potential penalty revenue: fines up to $250,000 per offence for obstruction or false statements; frequency and totals unknown (Bill s.16(1)–(2)). Data unavailable.
• Transitional clause keeps the current Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise in place until term-end, but the bill does not state costs or savings from this change (Bill “Transitional provision”). Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Improves accountability by giving the Commissioner power to compel testimony and records, closing a key gap in current oversight of overseas conduct (Bill s.12(3)).
• Protects complainants and whistleblowers through confidentiality rules, which may increase reporting of abuses (Bill s.10(2)–(3)).
• Sets clear human rights benchmarks by tying reviews to a defined list of international instruments, with a mechanism to update the list (Bill s.7(2)–(3); Schedule).
• Creates practical, non-criminal consequences that matter to companies, such as loss of trade advocacy and EDC financing eligibility, which can deter misconduct (Bill s.14(3)).
• Enhances transparency via public investigation reports and annual parliamentary reporting, helping consumers and investors make informed choices (Bill s.14(5), s.18).
• Elevates the role by giving the Commissioner the rank and powers of a deputy head and limiting outside employment, supporting independence and focus (Bill s.8–s.9).

Opponents' View#

• Broad reach may impose compliance and legal burdens on many entities, including smaller importers, due to expansive definitions and control tests (Bill “entity” definition; Application).
• Investigations with court-like powers and public reports could harm reputations even without criminal charges or court findings, raising due process concerns despite notice and representation rights (Bill s.12(3), s.12(5)–(6), s.14(5)).
• Effectiveness is uncertain because the Commissioner cannot issue binding orders; recommendations to companies and the Minister may not be acted on, creating costs without strong enforcement (Bill s.14(2)–(3)).
• Risk of duplication or conflict with existing investigations; mandatory suspension when charges are laid could delay resolution and create confusion (Bill s.12(7)–(8)).
• Standards may shift over time since Cabinet can amend the list of applicable human rights instruments by order, creating regulatory uncertainty (Bill s.7(3)).
• Penalties up to $250,000 and director liability for obstruction or misleading statements increase legal exposure for procedural missteps; reliance on a due diligence defense may be costly to demonstrate (Bill s.16–s.17).