A disappointing start for Canada’s new agency meant to facilitate private sector investment in “challenging markets that come with a high degree of inherent risk.”
Comments, concerns and recommendations regarding the Global Tailings Review's draft Global Tailings Standard, with very minor revisions from the version submitted to the Global Tailings Review.
Critique of the Government of Canada’s 2014 “Enhanced Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy: To Strengthen Canada’s Extractive Sector Abroad”
This brief was prepared for the five-year review of Canada’s 2014 “Enhanced Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy: To Strengthen Canada’s Extractive Sector Abroad (CSR Strategy).” The strategy does not ensure that the Government of Canada, through its departments, missions, and agencies upholds its obligation to protect human rights, nor does it ensure that Canadian extractive companies operating overseas respect human rights.
As part of the coordinated effort to reform British Columbia's mining laws, we filed this submission on the Reviewable Projects Regulation Intentions Paper as part of the new B.C. Environmental Assessment Act, along with the Northern Confluence Initiative, Fair Mining Collaborative, SkeenaWild Conservation Trust, Wildsight, and the Wilderness Committee.
This report, from the Deep Sea Mining campaign in collaboration with MiningWatch Canada and London Mining Network, looks at companies that are driving a speculative rush for seabed minerals in an unholy alliance with the very UN body charged with regulating them, the International Seabed Authority (ISA). The report exposes blatant corporate capture of the United Nations-mandated International Seabed Authority (ISA) and the manipulation of Pacific regional decision-making processes by deep sea mining companies and their backers. It calls for a moratorium on the development of deep sea mining (DSM) regulations and on the issuing of exploration and exploitation licences in international and national waters.
Canadian mining multinationals are causing toxic impacts on surface and ground water and on marine ecosystems in overseas countries where they operate, in part through mine waste disposal practices that are effectively illegal in Canada. This brief focusses on impacts through practices that are effectively banned in Canada through protective provisions in the Metal and Diamond Mining Effluent Regulations (MDMER) that prohibit unrestricted release of tailings into fish bearing waters.
Extraction Casino: Mining companies gambling with Latin American lives and sovereignty through supranational arbitration
During the last couple of decades—and particularly during the last ten years—mining companies have filed dozens of claims against Latin American countries before international arbitration panels, demanding compensation for court decisions, public policies and other government measures that they claim reduce the value of their investments. In a majority of these cases, the communities most affected by the mining projects have been actively organizing to defend their territories and natural resources.
Submission to the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment, and Natural Resources (ENEV) on Bill C-69
This is MiningWatch Canada’s submission regarding Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. Our focus is on Part 1, theImpact Assessment Act (IAA). We make the same essential arguments as we did to the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development, but our recommendations are specific to the bill as amended by the House of Commons and the opportunities that the Senate now has to improve it.
State Duty to Protect Human Rights: How Canada’s Embassy Staff and Trade Commissioners Are Not Fulfilling Their Duty
This presentation was made by Catherine Coumans, Ph.D. at the Canadian Network for Corporate Accountability Symposium Taking Responsibility: Canada, Business, and Human Rights held in Ottawa on April 30, 2019.
Canada has a state duty to protect human rights.
Since at least 2002, UN bodies have repeatedly and explicitly emphasized that Canada’s duty to protect extends to Canada’s obligation to protect against human rights abuses caused, or contributed to, by Canadian corporations operating overseas.
Following the alarming findings from the Commissioner on Environment and Sustainable Development released on April 2, 2019, MiningWatch Canada urges the federal Environment Minister to take immediate actions to beef up inspections and enforcement of the Fisheries Act to protect waters and fish from the 255 active mine sites, as well as from the thousands exploration sites and abandoned sites across the country.
This submission is made in support of an investigation and forthcoming report by the United Nations Working Group on the Use of Mercenaries (the Working Group) that examines the relationship between private military and security companies and extractive industry companies from a human rights perspective. Following communications with the Working Group, this submission covers issues related to excess use of force by private mine security and by police who participate in securing mines through memorandums of understanding between mine proponents and police agencies of the states hosting the mines. The sections below follow organizational and informational guidelines provided by the Working Group.
OceanaGold Corporation, an Australian-Canadian company, is one of dozens of transnational mining companies in the Philippines that have been reaping profits by mining gold, silver, copper, and other minerals. Its underground Didipio gold and copper mine in the Northern Luzon province of Nueva Vizcaya started open-pit commercial production in 2013. It continues to operate despite a suspension order issued on February 14, 2017 by then-Philippine Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Gina Lopez.
Jubilee Australia's report 'Growing Bougainville's Future: Choices for an island and its people' examines the choice facing the people of Bougainville and asks the question of ‘to mine or not to mine.’ MiningWatch Canada staff member Catherine Coumans contributed the chapter, "Mining and development: Is “good governance” really the cure?"
Statement from OECD Watch and MiningWatch Canada regarding the Canadian NCP’s improper handling of the OECD Guidelines specific instance Bruno Manser Fonds vs Sakto Group
On May 16, 2018, MiningWatch Canada and OECD Watch issued a media release to draw attention to an attempt by the Government of Canada to cover up its mishandling of a complaint through Canada’s National Contact Point (NCP) for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The Request for Review in question, titled “Complaint against the Sakto Group, Ottawa” was filed with Canada’s NCP in January 2016 by the not-for-profit Bruno Manser Fonds (BMF) of Switzerland. The complaint alleges that the Sakto Group, with corporations headquartered in Ottawa, breached disclosure requirements of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, a guide to responsible business conduct that is binding on Canada and other members of the OECD.
Review of Barrick Gold/Acacia Mining’s Draft “Community Grievance Process - Standard Operating Procedure” for the North Mara Gold Mine in Tanzania
In January 2018, Acacia Mining released a draft Standard Operating Procedure for a new Community Grievance Process for the North Mara Gold Mine in Tarime, Tanzania. This review of Acacia/Barrick’s new draft Grievance Process is informed by field assessments carried out yearly at the North Mara mine by MiningWatch Canada in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017.
Submission to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development (ENVI) Regarding Bill C-69
Bill C-69 brings both promise and disappointment. Overall, however, it does not fulfil the government’s promise of restoring public confidence, and therefore also cannot fulfil the promise of facilitating good development projects. In some respects, it represents a failure of ambition, where a stronger commitment and stronger leadership are required to meet the challenges of the 21st century. In other respects, it is just a matter of design flaws and limitations of implementation. At this juncture, it may be too late to address the bigger structural problems, but Parliament has the opportunity to fix many of the Bill’s deficiencies.
On February 8, 2018, the federal government tabled Bill C-69, which introduces a proposed new Impact Assessment Act (IAA) to replace the current Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012). Bill C-69 follows more than 18 months of consultation and discussion of Canada’s environmental assessment (EA) processes, and is claimed to fulfill the government’s commitment to introduce new, fair processes to ensure decisions are based on science and Indigenous knowledge, and win back public trust.
How does the proposed new IAA measure up?