July 21, 2008
Dear Mr. Ruggie,
Thank you for your July 7th correspondence regarding the July 4th CNCA statement on your final report. The CNCA has appreciated and followed your work very closely given its important role in advancing international dialogue in the area of business and human rights. Our statement obviously caused you some concern. We wanted to respond and to signal our interest in continued and constructive dialogue with you in the important work ahead of your renewed mandate. Attached is an updated version of our statement, which addresses some, though not all, of your points.
Thank you for pointing out errors of fact. We have corrected the statement so that it summarizes your framework accurately in terms of state “duty” to protect and corporate “responsibility” to respect. We have also changed the reference to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination as having “encouraged” and not “called on” Canada to take steps.
You also described your work as being divided in two phases, and only the second as being appropriate for more specific guidance to states. As you know, the discourse on this subject is contested and charged terrain, and advocates have the impression that they have been waiting overly long for signs of light at the end of the tunnel. Many actors, including the CNCA, follow your work with a keen interest. As a result, we considered what was included, as well as what was not included in your report, to be politically significant. As CSOs we had hopes for more specific recommendations. Nonetheless we now look forward to these issues being treated in the next phase of your work.
Regarding Southern participation during the mandate extension, we were certainly not impugning your previous work.Our key point, which has been echoed by others including CIDSE (Coopération Internationale pour le Développment et la Solidarité), the Brussels-based network of 16 Catholic development agencies of which CNCA organization Development and Peace is a member, is that it's even more important that Southern experts be consulted and included in policy discussions in the "operationalization" phase of the mandate.Our hope is that you will expand their role moving forward.
We also believe that Southern experts could help to clarify some of our
concerns around your suggestion that it is desirable for ODA to be channelled to regions that are recipients of foreign direct investment involving export credit agency (ECA) support. While the suggestion for
official development agencies to help build governance capacity in host countries may seem sound in theory, in several instances it has been highly problematic in practice.Conflicts of interest can arise when an industrialized country promotes and facilitates foreign direct investment in developing countries, while at the same time making commitments to help these same countries to change their governance and regulatory regimes. The track record of official development agencies in this area is mixed to say the least.We feel that experts from the global South are uniquely important on policy questions such as this one, where theory and practice have seriously diverged in the past. We have added text to our statement in this regard.
The CNCA certainly wishes you well in your new mandate. We look forward to continued and open dialogue with you regarding business and human rights, and advancing this agenda both internationally and within the Canadian context.
With kind regards,
Ian Thomson
On behalf of the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability (CNCA)
153 rue Chapel Street, # 104, Ottawa ON K1N 1H5Tel: (613) 789-9368Fax: (613) 241-4170
E-mail/courriel: Web: