International Trade Committee on Dec. 14th, 2016

Evidence of meeting #51 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Bill C-30

Committee Business

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Philippe Méla Legislative Clerk

Steve Verheul Chief Trade Negotiator, Canada-European Union, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Mark Schaan Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry

Denis Martel Director, Patent Policy Directorate, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry

4 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

This one is the most recent one that we've submitted, and I think it's meant to correct an error that we identified during some stakeholder outreach, so this is housekeeping, so to speak. It provides some clarification that is needed when disputed applications expire following a court proceeding. In an attempt to eliminate that confusion, I think this amendment provides greater clarity and certainty to the applicants, which will allow them to benefit from the regime as anticipated, contemplated, and intended.

4 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Are there comments?

Ms. Ramsey.

4 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Yes, I want some clarification as to why this change is necessary. Why the difference between all of those and the change to “if two or more”? What was the intent of that change? I hear you saying that you think it would be a positive change, but I'm just wondering why it's necessary.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

The current language, I think, led to some confusion. A possible interpretation could be that an application would expire at the end of the dispute period, even when only a single application remains. We're just trying to get rid of some of that confusion, because that obviously was not intended. We're trying to accurately reflect what the intention was.

4 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

If you had one that was remaining, then are you suggesting that does not expire, that it continues, and only if there are two or more?

4 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Correct.

4 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Okay.

4 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Shall amendment LIB-2.1 carry?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

On amendment LIB-3, are there any comments?

4 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

I think LIB-3 is consequential to our amendment to clause 40. Again, this was made in consultation with both the generics and the innovative medicines in trying to come up with a compromise that is acceptable to the stakeholders. Again, we hope it's acceptable to the members of this committee so that we can pass the amendment.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Are there any more comments?

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Gerry Ritz Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

[Inaudible—Editor] also been adopted before, as a continuation of—

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

It will, yes, when we get there. It's all consequential.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

All in favour of amendment LIB-3?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Does clause 59 carry with those three amendments?

(Clause 59 as amended agreed to)

Now we have another big stretch here, with clauses 60 to 79. If I don't hear anything, we're going to pass those.

4:05 p.m.

A voice

Yes, to clause 79.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

(Clauses 60 to 79 inclusive agreed to)

(On clause 80)

We have amendment NDP-8.

Go ahead, Ms. Ramsey.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

What we're doing here is bringing the level back to $600,000—

4:05 p.m.

A voice

It's $600 million.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Yes, $600 million. Pardon me.

Thank you, Gerry.

If we go to $1.5 billion, then all countries that we have most favoured nation status with will enjoy that as well. Once we enter into it, other countries like China and the U.S., under our most favoured nation status, will be able to access at that level. That's the way we're looking at that language.

4:05 p.m.

Chief Trade Negotiator, Canada-European Union, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Steve Verheul

No. Those countries with which we have free trade agreements that include investment provisions will also be able to benefit from this change. It won't be provided across the board to all countries with which we have MFN relations.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Okay.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

All in favour of amendment NDP-8?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 80 agreed to)

We have no amendments between clauses 81 and 135.

Go ahead, Ms. Ramsey.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

I want to go to page 73, to the Coasting Trade Act.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Where do you want us to go?

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

It's on page 74, clause 91, under the Coasting Trade Act.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Can we just finish up these other clauses?