Thank you very much for the question.
I would agree that the two objectives you outlined, making sure Canadian companies were more competitive and ensuring costs were brought down, were the two policy objectives of the decision the government took to move forward with these treaties.
Stakeholders have been supportive of parts of the provisions. The committee will note that elements of this bill are also contained in Bill C-8, the anti-counterfeiting bill that was debated extensively here in the fall.
For example, they're supportive of elements like the expansion of trademark registration to more modern forms of trademarks. These non-traditional marks that were discussed at the time have received support.
There are procedures like allowing applicants to split their applications. For example, if they are in a process and they have a portion of the application that is controversial that may be the subject of opposition, but another component that isn't, they can split them off and proceed with the one where there is no controversy so they can acquire and protect that IP as quickly as possible. That also has received support.
I think it's fair to say that in general, everyone is supportive of the accession to the Madrid Protocol and the Singapore Treaty. There has been some discussion on whether or not the benefits will accrue equally. There's clear observation that internationally, multinational companies have a preponderance of the types of marks, and therefore they will benefit more than potentially small businesses that don't need the Canadian market or are present in only a small number of countries.
It depends a bit on whom you are talking about in terms of who will benefit.
One issue that has come up, which has been raised certainly with us in a number of pieces of correspondence, is the issue of use. That has been a decision that was taken in terms of how to administer this protocol to the benefit of Canadians. A form in particular has been eliminated, or the proposal is to eliminate it as part of this. There's a compliance cost to businesses to filling out this form, and it doesn't exist in other jurisdictions outside of Canada that are party to the protocol, with the exception, I believe, of the Philippines.