rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

The Federal CSR Counsellor has left the building: Can we now have an effective ombudsman mechanism for the extractive sector?

The Office of the Extractive Sector Corporate Social Responsibility Counsellor (CSR Counsellor) was announced with much government fanfare in October 2009 as a central "pillar" in the government's "CSR strategy" for Canada's extractive sector. The CSR Counsellor was to provide remedy for people who had been harmed by the overseas operations of Canadian extractive companies by mediating disputes.

On October 18, the CSR Counsellor, Marketa Evans, quietly resigned after four years in the position. No news release, no information about her departure on the official website of the office. In four years she did not mediate any of the six cases brought before her, and none of the complainants received remedy.

For those who have followed the creation -- and failures -- of this office, Evans' departure is a welcome chance to acknowledge the flaws of this mechanism and to create a more effective ombudsman's office.

MiningWatch Canada and others were critical of the weak mandate of the Office of the CSR Counsellor from the start, and repeatedly detailed its shortcomings. Among other things, the CSR Counsellor was not mandated to investigate complaints, nor to report out on whether or not a company had breached the standards set by the Government of Canada.

The one service she could offer those who had been harmed by the actions of a Canadian mining company, dispute mediation, was contingent on voluntary participation of the company in question. As predicted, companies made use of the voluntary nature of the office to walk away from offers of mediation with no consequences.

Of six complaints filed, three ended before they began when mining companies Excellon Resources, McEwen Mining, and Silver Standard Resources turned their backs and walked out. Silver Standard's recent snub seems to have been the final straw for Evans.

One case, against New Gold's Mexico operations, remains open. Evans closed the final case received, against Golden Arrow Resources, at the end of September due to her stated inability to establish communications with the indigenous Argentinean complainants who sought better consultation by the company and respect for their right to Free Prior and Informed Consent for mining activities in their territory.

These cases highlight the most egregious aspects of the weak mandate and flawed process of the CSR Counsellor's Office. Corporations hold all the power in this process. The mechanism puts complainants in the untenable position of having to rely on the very company that stands accused of having harmed them to decide if it is inclined to participate in mediation, to decide if it is interested in providing any kind of remedy, and, if so, the nature and size of the remedy it may decide to provide.    

Moreover, fruitless participation in the CSR Counsellor's process further harms the weakest parties, the workers and indigenous and community representatives who put themselves in the hands of this mechanism to seek redress. These people have, at best, wasted their time and limited resources. At worst they have exposed themselves to further harm at home for sticking their necks out.

A particularly problematic case is that of Maître Lemine from Mauritania who brought forward community complaints about human rights and environmental abuses related to the operations of First Quantum Minerals. Having been convinced by the company that there was a project level grievance mechanism to which Lemine could turn, Evans sent him back to Mauritania to try his luck there first. MiningWatch has followed up on this case and found that no effective local-level mechanisms existed and Lemine is still seeking redress for the community for ongoing harm from the company's operations.

The Mining Association of Canada (MAC) has appealed to the government to give the failed Office more time and more money. In an interesting twist of logic, Pierre Gratton, MAC's president and CEO, places blame for the Office's lack of effectiveness on "constant criticism" of its fundamental shortcomings. He downplays the most obvious factor in the Office's downfall, the failure of mining companies, including a MAC member, to participate: Excellon Resources was the first company to walk out on the CSR Counsellor's process. The company then joined MAC, but never took up the standing offer of the CSR Counsellor to come back to the table.

Just days after Evans' side-door departure, 23 member organizations of the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability launched the network's "Open for Justice" campaign. The campaign calls for the establishment of an extractive-sector Ombudsman that is empowered to undertake independent investigations to determine if a company has breached guidelines and caused harm, and, if so, to make recommendations to the company and to the Canadian government in order to remedy the harm. The Ombudsman will make its findings public and could recommend the suspension of political, financial, and diplomatic support by the Government of Canada.

An Ombudsman's office was first recommended by a joint industry-civil society report to the Government of Canada in 2007, and its key features were incorporated in John McKay’s narrowly defeated private member’s bill C-300. It is high time for the Government of Canada to create a truly effective, independent, and mandatory extractive-sector Ombudsman.

A version of this article appeared in the Ottawa Citizen on October 31, 2013 as: "Canada needs effective mining oversight."

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.