Canada’s corporate accountability watchdog was still accepting complaints until Prime Minister Mark Carney publicly announced that the office would be dissolved.
The announcement appeared sudden, even though Carney said the decision to close the office had been made “months” earlier.
CORE Was Created to Investigate Corporate Human Rights Concerns
The Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise, known as CORE, was created in 2019 under former prime minister Justin Trudeau.
Its purpose was to review possible human rights abuses involving Canadian companies operating outside Canada.
The office was intended to provide a way for communities and advocates to raise concerns about corporate conduct abroad.
Carney Said the Office Was Ineffective
During an unrelated news conference last month, Carney briefly mentioned that the federal government had decided to eliminate the role.
He said governments must review programs to determine whether they are working and make changes when needed.
Carney described the office as ineffective and said the decision to end it had been made months earlier.
Complaints Were Still Being Accepted
Despite Carney’s statement about the timing, Global Affairs Canada said the CORE office continued accepting complaints until the prime minister’s announcement.
A department spokesperson said the office stopped receiving complaints only after Carney revealed its pending closure.
That timeline has raised questions about how the decision was communicated and why complainants were not warned earlier.
Advocates Criticize the Sudden Closure
Aidan Gilchrist-Blackwood, head of the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, called the decision extremely insensitive.
He said advocates were stunned not only by the closure itself but also by how casually it appeared to be announced.
Complainants Left Without Clear Communication
Rob Parker, an independent researcher and advocate, said he had been helping facilitate a complaint from Namibia that was submitted to the watchdog in 2024.
He said there was very little communication about what would happen to the case after the closure decision.
Parker said he was shocked that complainants were left uncertain and not contacted during the process.
He said the government had treated affected communities with clear disrespect.
Top Watchdog Role Had Been Vacant
The head position at CORE had been empty for more than a year.
That vacancy led the United Nations Human Rights Committee to urge Canada to appoint a new watchdog quickly.
Gilchrist-Blackwood said the long vacancy may have suggested the government was preparing to abandon the office.
However, he said the closure contradicted recent comments from senior government officials who had continued to speak positively about the watchdog.
Ministers Had Recently Supported CORE
Several ministers had referred to the office in the months before its closure.
Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne, who announced the role when he was international trade minister, had previously promoted the office.
Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand said in March that CORE “remains important.”
Trade Minister Gave No Sign of Closure
Just hours before Carney mentioned the decision to cancel CORE, International Trade Minister Maninder Sidhu was asked in the House of Commons about the vacant watchdog position.
Sidhu said a decision would be made in due course.
His answer matched language used in documents tabled in the House the previous day and gave no indication that the office was about to be shut down.
CBC News asked Sidhu’s office for clarification about the timeline, but his team referred the question to Anand’s office. Neither office provided a response by the deadline.
Complaints to Be Moved to National Contact Point
The federal government says complaints submitted to CORE will be transferred to another body called the National Contact Point, or NCP.
However, both Gilchrist-Blackwood and Parker criticized the NCP, arguing that it does not have strong investigative powers.
The NCP website says the office focuses mainly on mediation between companies and complainants.
Critics Say NCP Lacks Power
Gilchrist-Blackwood said the NCP has a long history of being ineffective when it comes to protecting human rights.
He also claimed that in some cases the process has made situations worse for complainants.
Parker said he and his partners had considered the NCP before choosing CORE, but rejected it because they believed it lacked real authority.
He said their case is now being moved to an office they would not have agreed to use.
CORE Followed Years of Advocacy
CORE was created after nearly a decade of lobbying from advocates who argued Canada needed a stronger mechanism to examine corporate human rights abuses abroad.
Gilchrist-Blackwood noted that the NCP had already existed since 2000, long before the campaign that led to CORE’s creation.
Carney Linked Decision to Enforcement Concerns
Carney mentioned CORE’s cancellation during a news conference about the federal food strategy.
He brought it up while answering a question about possible new U.S. tariffs allegedly connected to forced labour concerns.
The prime minister said the government is working to improve enforcement powers.
He argued that CORE had not been effective, pointing out that the office had launched only one investigation since it was created.
That investigation involved allegations of forced labour.
Advocates Wanted CORE Strengthened, Not Closed
CORE had previously faced criticism for lacking the powers needed to fully carry out its mandate.
However, Gilchrist-Blackwood said the solution should have been to strengthen the office rather than eliminate it.
He said the government should deliver on earlier promises and give CORE the tools it needs to do its job properly.
The closure of the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise has raised concerns among advocates and complainants who relied on the office to examine alleged human rights abuses by Canadian companies abroad.
Although Prime Minister Mark Carney said the decision was made months earlier, the office was still accepting complaints until his announcement. Critics argue that instead of eliminating CORE, the government should have improved its powers and provided clearer communication to affected communities.