Evidence of meeting #57 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was product.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Manager, Codes and Standards, Eaton Electrical Canadian Operations
It was the renewal of the Hazardous Products Act and another act that belonged to Health Canada.
We wrote a letter to them declaring that when these products are removed from a building, as in demolition, they become potentially hazardous and should be considered very specifically under that act.
Liberal
Manager, Codes and Standards, Eaton Electrical Canadian Operations
We wrote the letter.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
How did you find out that the program had been shelved?
Manager, Codes and Standards, Eaton Electrical Canadian Operations
It was from a member of Health Canada.
Liberal
Manager, Codes and Standards, Eaton Electrical Canadian Operations
No, it was at an association meeting that Health Canada attended.
Executive Director, Entertainment Software Association of Canada
I will echo Mr. Geralde's comments about the road map that CACN has put together. It outlines some very specific recommendations on what the government could do, specific to increasing the power of border officials, such as providing them with ex-officio power to seize goods at the border and resources to specifically target counterfeit goods.
Resources of the RCMP should be increased so that they are equipped to combat this crime. Changes should be made to legislation specific to our industry--criminal legislation that defines offences for commercial circumvention activities and commercial distribution of pirated digital works.
It's quite a lengthy document, and I would say that our association fully endorses the recommendations in it.
Liberal
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to all the witnesses, especially Mr. Geralde, who's with the Canadian Standards Association in my riding. I've certainly had a look at the road map and I think it is good.
We're doing some work at the public safety committee. Mr. Geist came as a witness and said that trademark infringement could be a problem if the trademark was forged or purported to be the CSA stamp of approval, which we know in many cases is not the case. Maybe you could elaborate on that.
Second, the Canada Border Services Agency does not have the mandate, mission, resources, or authority to search, seize, store, and destroy counterfeit goods. So that's an issue that needs to be dealt with. There are ways of sharing intellectual property information back and forth, so at least in the interim there could be some civil remedies. But I gather there are some privacy constraints with the Canada Border Services Agency. I wonder if you could talk about them briefly.
Finally, the last Parliament enacted legislation on proceeds of crime, the burden of proof, and the reverse onus. Would it be helpful if that were applied to counterfeit goods perpetrators?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
The time is up for the member. Those are excellent and very big questions. Could I suggest we do that in the next round for the Liberal Party?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
It's going to take five minutes to answer those questions. I don't think it's fair to the other parties that I....
Liberal
Conservative
Director, Corporate Audits and Investigations and Chair of the Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network, CSA International
On reverse onus, certainly any fine will be a cost of doing business. So if we take what drug enforcement has done, try to get proceeds of crime, and then have them prove that what they acquired was from a legitimate source, that is a very effective tool.
On trademark and copying, that's exactly what we run into. To regulators and consumers, the mark is an indication of complying with safety, and that poses a problem.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My question is for Mr. Beauchesne. The end of your brief reads as follows:
What can the government do to help us? - Stop trade missions to countries classified as "exporters" - Protectionism: tax Asian imports of products that are available in Canada - Punitive tax on polluting countries - A legal entity to take prompt action against copies of patents - Simplified government assistance - Program to encourage companies from elsewhere to set up operations in Canada...
Could you tell us what led you to come up with such points? I want to come back to this punitive tax on polluting countries. What do you mean by this? I would like to understand the reason behind these recommendations.
Vice-President, Sales and Business Development, Polyform Foam Plastics Inc.
With regard to a punitive tax on polluting countries, currently, the economic context is such that there are fairly strict regulations on the environment, employees and working hours. There are fees we must pay and requirements we must comply with as a result of a whole series of factors.
When we talk about polluting countries, we're talking, among others, about Asia, which is a major polluter. Our competitors are not subject to the same regulations. They are heavy polluters, if we compare their levels to the level imposed on us. Consequently, their costs are extremely low and their employees work under social conditions that are completely unacceptable in Canada. So, if it costs $3 to produce a product in Asia, it will cost $8 in Canada. We will never be able to compete with those costs, due to environmental and social conditions.
A punitive tax would be imposed on countries that fail to respect certain environmental and labour standards. When products are imported, companies would have to pay a 15%, 20% or 50% tax —the amount doesn't matter—, but the purpose would be to prevent such companies from too easily importing products. This could apply to any product. If companies have to satisfy a number of requirements, it would be easier for our products to compete with theirs.
The environment is something you hear about on a daily basis. It is a real problem. It is not actually the reason for our appearance here today, but it is really a problem. Currently, the plastics industry is suffering enormously because some countries are failing to comply with these rules.
What was the second part of your question?
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
I would like to know how you came up with the recommendation: "Stop trade missions to countries classified as 'exporters' ".
Vice-President, Sales and Business Development, Polyform Foam Plastics Inc.
As a Canadian company we are invited on a regular basis to take part in trade missions, be it to Asia or elsewhere in the world. When I am invited to take part on a trade mission to China to forge strategic production alliances, the trip may be fully or partially paid for. I find this completely unacceptable, because, as a manufacturer, I'm going there to forge a relationship in order to do business with people who are not respecting environmental standards, as I said earlier, and to show them what I need and how to make it.
I want to come back to the example I gave earlier regarding Louis Garneau Sports, a Canadian and Quebec company. Its representatives went there, found manufacturers, showed them how to make the products, shared their expertise with them by telling them North American market preferences with regard to esthetics, colours and so forth. They gave them addresses and did business with them.
We've greatly reduced the number of jobs in our plants. Louis Garneau Sports did the same, in addition to closing its helmet manufacturing facility, and sent contracts to Asia. This year, contracts were negotiated directly between China and the customers, meaning Wal-Mart, Canadian Tire, just to name a few. Everyone is in the same boat. Louis Garneau Sports had its clients, its designs and its products stolen from it.
I think that we have to stop participating in trade missions because our involvement means taking work from people here and giving China, among other countries, the opportunity to do business by manufacturing our products.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
Ultimately, we're giving them all of our tools.
Who funds these missions? Is it the exporting country, such as China? Does Canada pick up part of the tab in order to allow entrepreneurs to go to China to create business partnerships?
Vice-President, Sales and Business Development, Polyform Foam Plastics Inc.
I don't know the answer to that question. However I do know that I am invited by Canada and Quebec to participate.
I regularly receive invitations to take part in trade missions. Some of them are to France, Brazil, etc. Some of these places are excellent countries with which to establish good business partnerships, but there are also countries where you know there is a culture of non-compliance. I find this completely unacceptable. I told them to stop inviting me, because I don't ever want to go. Agreeing to go means agreeing to transfer my technology, my knowledge and my clients' needs directly to those companies.
Who pays? Perhaps the Asian government pays a portion of the costs, I don't know. One thing is clear, the Government of Canada is the party extending the invitation to take part in these trade missions.
Conservative