Agriculture committee  Mr. Chair, one of the concerns that arose out of the consultations was the delineation between the term “storing” and the term “stocking”. Of course, when we endeavoured to draft the legislation, we always considered that the act of storing was implicit. How else are you going to

Agriculture committee  Yes, there are slight nuances, and what we hope is to bring forward amendments that will provide clarity on that aspect.

Agriculture committee  Mr. Chair, it would be my pleasure to respond to that question. I think the empirical evidence suggests a different story when we look at other countries that have implemented UPOV 91. Even if we look at our own history, the difference between having no internationally based int

Agriculture committee  Thank you for that question. Mr. Chair, it will be my pleasure to address that. Fundamentally, if you look at the differences between UPOV 78 and UPOV 91, the advantages fall into three key categories. The first is strengthening the intellectual property protection. One of the w

Agriculture committee  Absolutely. There are mandatory, what they call compulsory, articles of UPOV, that in order to accede or ratify a certain convention you must have that in your law. Failure to even have one of those compulsory elements means you don't meet the requirements of UPOV 91. Then there

Agriculture committee  Mr. Chair, I'd be happy to take that. The UPOV level provides a framework for minimum requirements and consistency at the international level, but it doesn't preclude sovereign states that are party to it from putting in additional measures or tweaking it to meet their needs. O

Agriculture committee  It would be my pleasure to answer that question. It's very interesting. What we've seen are general trends when countries strengthen their intellectual property protection. Moving from having either no intellectual property protection, or from 78 to 91, some interesting things s