PDAC: C-300 will hurt Canadian mining

The Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada is advocating against proposed Bill C-300. Below is some of what PDAC has to say about the bill. For more information and advice on how to take action, www.pdac.ca/c300.

What is Bill C-300?

Bill C-300, An Act respecting Corporate Accountability for the Activities of Mining, Oil or Gas in Developing Countries, is a private member’s bill introduced in Canada’s House of Commons in February 2009. By mid-June 2010, the bill had passed through first and second readings and through committee hearings. It is expected to go to third reading and a final vote in the fall of 2010.

The bill provides for the creation of a set of human rights and environmental standards that would be enforced by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and International Trade through a complaints-based and investigative process with annual reports to Parliament. Companies found to have broken the rules would lose their Export Development Canada and Canada Pension Plan Investment Board funding.

How will Bill C-300 affect you? If Bill C-300 passes the House of Commons, it will send a strong message internationally that the Parliament of Canada has lost confidence in Canadian mining companies. This will damage the image and reputation of Canadian mining companies with governments around the world. This will also be used against us by our international competitors.

Specifically, Bill C-300 will allow anyone with a grievance against your company to file a complaint. The government would then be called in to investigate — at a significant cost to your company. Regardless of the outcome of an investigation, the reputation of the industry and your company would immediately come under suspicion and you would be considered guilty until proven innocent in the court of public opinion. There are 13 reasons why Bill C-300 won’t work

1. It ignores the reality that Canada’s mining industry is a globally competitive industry with a strong corporate social responsibility record.

2. Bill C-300 will damage the image and reputation of Canadian mining companies with governments around the world.

3. Bill C-300 will be used as a tool by Canada’s competitors to undermine the competitiveness of Canadian firms in the highly competitive global extraction industry.

4. Bill C-300 undermines Canada’s current position as the world’s mining finance capital and will have economic consequences in Canada.

5. The government of Canada already has a working CSR regime, including an independent CSR counsellor, which is the result of an extensive industry and non-governmental organization consultation process.

6. Through the independent Canadian CSR Counsellor and Canada’s National Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Contact Point, there already are mechanisms in place for people to lodge a complaint.

7. No other OECD country imposes such measures on its extractive sector as those proposed by Bill C-300.

8. Bill C-300 runs counter to the collaborative spirit of the United Nations-based process led by John Ruggie, which will make specific recommendations within the year.

9. Bill C-300 is flawed because it concentrates discretionary power in the ministers of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and could lead to a politicized complaints process.

10. Bill C-300 requires every complaint to be investigated by the minister at a cost to the taxpayer and the company involved — and every investigation will be made public by the complainant regardless of the merits of the complaint.

11. Bill C-300 won’t work because foreign governments won’t cooperate in investigations and the Department of Foreign Affairs currently has neither the capability, nor funds, nor experience to investigate these types of complaints.

12. Bill C-300 is effectively an extension of Canadian law into foreign jurisdictions. There has been no consultation with developing country governments.

13. Bill C-300 is impractical because it imposes a one size fits all approach to ground situations that are continuously changing and where the facts are rarely clear-cut.