Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to my honourable colleague. There was some stuff in there that I agree with. We had a conversation the other day. He is very passionate about the issue of helping people in Africa who need help. He mentioned that we have one solution before us and I've said repeatedly that I would disagree with that. I don't think we have any solution before us in this bill. I don't think this bill offers the solution we're looking for.
He mentioned the government and what the government is or isn't doing. I would argue that what this government is doing is working on solutions that are making a difference and increasing funding, our investment, in the global fund. Where other countries are not doing that, our country is increasing the investment and taking advantage of our role in leading the G-8 this past summer to put forward an initiative on maternal and infant health. That is tremendously important and it is something that is looking forward, looking toward the solution.
Unfortunately, I don't see a solution in this bill. Maybe when this is all done, we'll have the chance to talk. Those of us in committee who want to continue to look at ideas that might help can have conversations. I have committed to continuing the conversation with some of the folks who have been before the committee as witnesses as it relates to trying to have an impact on the devastation that is happening in parts of the world, where things are a little different from what they are here.
To go back to the bill here, if I could, we're on clause 4 right now. If I can bring the discussion back to clause 4 and taking a look at what clause 4 does, I'll give some explanation as to why I would vote against the Liberal amendment.
Clause 4 takes section 21.04 of the Patent Act and basically and systematically, in three subclauses of Bill C-393, wipes out three subsections of the Patent Act. Again, large portions of the Patent Act will be wiped out by this one clause, clause 4, in Bill C-393, and are replaced with a few paragraphs. For subsection 21.04(1), I think it adds one word, for subsection 21.04(2) it adds one word, and for subsection 21.04(3) I think it adds 16 words in replacing paragraph after paragraph of references to the WTO and TRIPS and those things.
So again, we see wording in a bill amending something as important as the Patent Act in a way that wipes out massive portions of it, and again, I think with substantial potential for very negative unintended consequences in the long run. The Liberal amendment addressed only one of the subsections that was being wiped out and left completely unaddressed the most substantial parts that were wiped out. That would be why I voted against the amendment and will be voting against clause 4 of Bill C-393.