Finance committee  We were conferring. Can you please repeat the question?

Finance committee  It's very different. You're right, it's different because it's not about the copyright sections of trade agreements; however, trade secrets are also covered by trade agreements. It is a good concern to raise in this committee as to the impact the proposal could have on trade.

Finance committee  That's correct.

Finance committee  That's the question at hand: Who has the burden of proof? Right now, it's for the bureau to build the case. They will have a complaint by a citizen and they will send a mystery shopper or they will look at the website and monitor the website over a period of time. The burden to build the case is with the bureau.

Finance committee  That's correct.

Finance committee  It's exactly what you said: It's the burden of proof. Right now, if the company has not kept records, the burden of proof is on the bureau to bring evidence at a tribunal that they were in the wrong, because they have kept records that the company did not. The burden of proof means that if you have not kept records....

Finance committee  That is exactly the question for the committee. There's a trade-off between the ease of enforcement versus compliance costs for businesses. Every marketplace framework law tries to get the balance right. It is a totally legitimate debate to decide where we put the balance between compliance costs and the effectiveness of the....

Finance committee  That's right. You'd have to ask the Competition Bureau, because it's the Competition Bureau that launches an investigation. Only when it's not resolved through a consent agreement does it go to the tribunal. There was no case at the tribunal last year for a small business.

Finance committee  Yes. As mentioned, these two lines are the instruction in Bill C-59. It says this section of the act is amended after the following, so we were all confused about drip pricing earlier. It's because there are four instances in the Competition Act where we have drip pricing. Bill C-59 was amending two of them.

Finance committee  Yes, I'm happy to explain. I believe this amendment is founded on a suggestion from the commissioner of competition. In his testimony, he recommended tightening up the language around drip pricing. What we have here in Bill C‑59 are consequential changes addressing changes made in 2022 to clarify that, according to the Competition Act, drip pricing is a form of misrepresentation.

Finance committee  Mr. Schaan touched on this a little earlier. He mentioned the legal aspect. The government wanted to use all the tools at its disposal to fight greenwashing. There was already a mechanism in the Competition Act that required evidence to make a claim about a product in the context of a transaction, as Mr.

Finance committee  Good morning. My name is Martin Simard, and I report to Mark Schaan. There are six recommendations. I don't know how much time we have, but I can quickly explain why the government introduced this bill. The rest will be up to the committee. First, the commissioner is proposing an amendment regarding drip pricing or last-minute price changes.