A/HRC/45/12/Add.1 rests with the State. 4 However, businesses too have critical responsibilities to prevent exposure. B. Canadian businesses and human rights 6. All business enterprises in Canada have responsibilities to respect human rights. In fulfilling these responsibilities, business enterprises should carry out robust due diligence in their supply chains and business relationships in order to identify and assess the impacts of toxic exposure and ensure prompt and accurate public reporting.5 7. During his mission, the Special Rapporteur focused on the extractive industries, in particular those involved in mining metals and oil sands and in constructing oil and gas pipelines, and on the chemical industries, including those using pesticides in agriculture. Over 50 per cent of multinational mining companies are based in Canada. 6 In 2015, agriculture and agribusiness, including food processing, contributed to approximately 2.6 per cent of the gross domestic product of Canada. C. Cooperation, collaboration and shared jurisdiction 8. Canada has taken positive steps to increase collaboration between relevant authorities to protect the human rights of those exposed to toxics. Federal and provincial jurisdictions overlap in important areas, namely health, the environment and agriculture. Health Canada and Environment and Climate Change Canada share responsibilities for many toxic chemicals under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. This is a good practice that other States may wish to emulate. Other examples of cooperation include the Chemicals Management Plan,7 which brings existing federal chemical programmes together under a single strategy. Strengthened collaboration between various government bodies can be leveraged to address intersectional inequalities in accessing rights in relation to toxic exposure. 9. In some respects, discussed below, the flexibility given to provinces and territories to set standards more stringent than the federal requirements has reduced actual and potential exposure to toxic substances. For example, the legally binding and more stringent air pollution limits in certain provinces illustrate the potential positive role of provincial autonomy. 10. The fact that jurisdiction is shared by the federal, provincial and territorial authorities has also created challenges, however. One example is the jurisdictional quagmire faced by indigenous peoples, whose reserves often fall between the cracks of federal and provincial jurisdiction, posing a risk of unregulated toxic exposure. For example, throughout Canada, the provincial drinking water quality standards are not applicable on reserves and the federal standards, which have yet to be set, are not legally binding. Jurisdictional separation is not an excuse for shortcomings by the Government in taking prompt action to address toxic exposure. 11. The active participation of Canada in international forums on toxics is welcome. Canada has ratified all international treaties on chemicals and wastes and co-chairs the intersessional process initiated by the International Conference on Chemicals Management to prepare recommendations for the implementation beyond 2020 of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management, a non-binding global policy framework on toxic chemicals and wastes. 4 5 6 7 Ibid. Ibid. Submission by the Assembly of First Nations (2019). www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/accountability-performancefinancial-reporting/evaluation-reports/evaluation-phase-chemicals-management-plan-2011-20122015-2016.html#exsum. 3