Claude Drouin

[Competition Act, October 24th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have this opportunity to address Bill C-248, an act to amend the Competition Act.

My colleague, the member for Pickering--Ajax--Uxbridge, has a long standing interest in competition law and he should be commended for raising its profile in this place.

Competition is important, not as an end in itself, but rather as a means to an end. Competition encourages firms to lower costs, reduce prices, improve services and develop new products. As consumers, this makes us all better off.

The Competition Act applies to virtually every industry and business in Canada. It seeks to maintain and enhance competitive market forces.

Bill C-248 would amend the act to limit the application of the so-called “efficiency defence”. Simply put, the efficiency defence allows for the consideration of gains in efficiency when examining the anti-competitive effects of a merger. Bill C-248 would limit this defence by addressing two specific circumstances under which it could not be used.

First, it would require that the gains in efficiency exceed the anti-competitive effects and lead to lower prices. This proposed price test is widely viewed as one of the simplest and most direct means of verifying that efficiency gains resulting from a merger will ultimately benefit consumers.

The second feature of the bill is that the efficiency defence would not apply if the merger would result in the creation or the strengthening of a dominant market position. The obvious extreme example would be a merger to monopoly.

Perhaps the inspiration for this bill was a decision by the federal competition tribunal in a merger between ICG Propane and Superior Propane.

This 1998 merger brought together the two largest propane suppliers in Canada and it was the first merger case where the efficiency defence was used to counter the anti-competitive impact of a merger.

The commissioner of competition challenged the merger on the grounds that it would clearly lead to both a substantial lessening and prevention of competition in the market for propane.

Superior Propane argued that the efficiency gains resulting from the merger would offset those anti-competitive impacts, so the merger should be allowed to stand.

In August 2000, the competition tribunal decided that the merger was likely to prevent competition in Atlantic Canada and lessen competition substantially in many local markets across Canada and for national account consumers.

It also concluded that the appropriate remedy for this anti-competitive result of the merger would be an order compelling the divestiture of ICG. However, the tribunal did not issue such an order.

The tribunal agreed with Superior that no order could be issued because the efficiencies resulting from the merger would be greater than and would offset the effects of any prevention or lessening of competition.

The commissioner appealed the decision to the Federal Court of Appeal. The federal court overturned the tribunal's ruling and sent the matter back to the tribunal for a re-determination hearing. Most recently, Superior Propane was denied leave to appeal the matter to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The matter of Superior Propane's acquisition of ICG Propane is important both for Canadians who use propane fuel and for Canadian competition law.

The question of how to treat various elements of efficiencies and how to balance them against the anti-competitive effects of a merger is one which became topical when Superior Propane proposed to acquire ICG Propane in 1998.

The hearings before the tribunal involved a large number of witnesses, including many economic experts. The tribunal heard a wide range of views on how efficiencies should be measured and how they should be balanced against anti-competitive impacts.

The federal court, in its reasons for judgment, disagreed with the standard of review used by the tribunal, but added that it would not itself tackle the question of what is the correct method for determining the anti-competitive effects, which reflects on the complexity of this area of competition law.

The bill before us received first reading on February 7, 2001, prior to the Federal Court of Appeal's ruling on the commissioner's appeal of the tribunal ruling. This was a period of uncertainty in Canadian competition law because it was unclear whether the federal court would uphold the tribunal's ruling, reverse it, or cast the efficiency defence in an entirely new light.

Bill C-248 appears to have anticipated a federal court ruling supporting the tribunal's decision, and therefore sought to clarify the issue by limiting the application of the efficiency rule.

It is difficult to propose rewriting a law while it is before the courts, but we must understand that there was considerable concern that if the tribunal ruling stood, there could be a wave of mergers to monopoly which would be unstoppable because of efficiency claims.

As I have indicated, the question of how efficiency claims should be treated in merger analysis is very complex. The Federal Court of Appeal has pointed this out in its ruling. While I understand the underlying motivation for this bill, I think the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada have spoken unambiguously on this subject.

I think it would be unfair to suggest already that the tribunal needs further guidance than that provided by the superior courts on the issue. It would not be helpful to change section 96 of the act while the tribunal is adjudicating a matter on that very section.

We do not presently have reason to believe that the act needs clarification through amendment in respect of the efficiency defence.

Let us be reasonable and let the competition tribunal do its job and revisit the propane merger now with the benefit of the wisdom of our superior courts.

Once again, I would like to thank the member for Pickering--Ajax--Uxbridge for bringing this important issue to the attention of the House.

The matter which gave rise to this bill is again before the Competition Tribunal and may yet again be brought before the Federal Court of Appeal and possibly the Supreme Court of Canada.

Given that this matter is currently before the courts, it would not be prudent of members in this place to presume the outcome. I trust members of the House will use their good sense to ensure that we make the right decisions.

[Canadian Tourism Commission, October 19th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the transition report of the Canadian Tourism Commission, for the nine month period ending December 31, 2000.

[The Parliament of Canada Act, October 18th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, I do believe that in the past the Speakers of the House, even though they were not elected by their peers, treated members from both sides of the House respectfully.

I will simply repeat what I already said--while taking note of the opposition member's proposal--to the effect that the process currently in place fully meets the public's expectations.

[The Parliament of Canada Act, October 18th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, voters gave their verdict, as did the ethics counsellor, on November 27. That verdict is to the effect that this side of the House, the Liberal government, works in a transparent fashion, this in the interest of Canadians.

I believe that our current process and approach fully meet the public's expectations. Again, Canadians passed judgment on November 27 and they made it very clear that they appreciate this government's way of doing things.

[The Acadians, October 3rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for giving me this opportunity to talk about government assistance to Davie Industries.

The government sympathizes with the workers and the management of Davie Industries, whose future is uncertain.

Numerous factors are at the root of the difficulties of that industry, including a lack of investment and innovation, and also foreign trade practices.

It is in light of these difficulties that the government took some measures to implement a new shipbuilding policy. In October 2000, the Minister of Industry established a new partnership project on shipbuilding. The project was co-chaired by officials representing the owners and the union. The partnership held broad consultations across Canada and it submitted its report to the minister in March.

In response to this report, the minister adopted a new policy framework with over 20 realistic and affordable measures, including: a new competitive financing mechanism for foreign and domestic buyers of Canadian built vessels; improved export financing through the Export Development Corporation; increased benefits for the Canadian industry from the development of offshore oil and natural gas; access by the shipbuilding and industrial marine industries to Technology Partnerships Canada for the development of innovating technologies; and the creation of a new energy and marine branch at Industry Canada for the effective implementation of the department's policy framework.

We worked very hard to develop a shipbuilding and marine industries policy that is competitive and efficient. We will help the industry, including Davie Industries, to take advantage of all the opportunities that it is entitled to under the new policy.

[All-Numeric Dates Act, October 2nd, 2001]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today on behalf of the Minister of Industry to speak to Bill C-327, an act to establish a national standard for the representation of dates in all-numeric form.

As the hon. member for Peterborough mentioned, all of us here in the House will be familiar with the experience of seeing a date such as 03-04-2001 and wondering whether it means March 4 or April 3. The member was most eloquent.

This confusion can affect more than on-time bill payments. It can affect the use of prescriptions, for example, or “best before” dates on a wide range of products.

I am pleased to be able to respond to this issue as it allows me to speak very briefly on the importance of voluntary standards and Canada's national standards system. A standard is a document that describes the performance, dimensions or impact of a product, survey or system.

Standards are used in a very wide range of applications, from the Internet to iron ore composition to quality management.

In Canada, voluntary standards activity is co-ordinated by the Standards Council of Canada, a federal crown corporation that fosters and promotes voluntary standardization. The council oversees the work of the National Standards System, a network of about 250 organizations. Four of these organizations develop standards. These are CSA International, Underwriters Laboratory Canada, the Canadian General Standards Board and the Bureau de normalisation du Québec.

The remaining organizations provide conformity assessment services such as testing, certification, or registration to quality management systems such as ISO 9000 or environmental management systems such as ISO 14000.

The Standards Council is also responsible for Canada's participation in the development of international standards. The council is Canada's member on the International Organization for Standardization, or ISO, and the International Electrotechnical Commission, or IEC.

ISO and IEC bring together volunteers from over a hundred countries to develop standards for almost every product imaginable, from ski bindings to medical devices. These standards support the trade of safe and reliable products across borders. In Canada alone, there are 3,000 volunteers that participate in international standards development.

Canada is not just a participant in this effort, but also a leader. Over 100 ISO and IEC technical committees, subcommittees and working groups are headed by Canadians, including the committees that developed the influential ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 series.

As the world moves towards a single, global market, international standards are becoming increasingly important. Efforts are underway to harmonize Canadian standards with those of our trading partners. A growing majority of national standards of Canada approved by the Standards Council are based on international standards.

This brings me to the bill in question. The hon. member has modeled his proposal on ISO standard 8601, titled “Data elements and interchange formats-Representation of dates and times”, developed in 1988 by the International Organization for Standardization.

This standard gives guidelines for indicating dates and times in a numeric format, represented by eight digits, as year-year-year-year, hyphen, month-month, hyphen, day-day.

I would note that Canada has already adopted a national standard in this area which is virtually identical to the ISO standard. The Canadian standard, CAN/CSA Z234.4, entitled “All-Numeric Dates and Times”, does indeed specify a numerical approach as recommended by the hon. member.

I would like to make one comment on the exception in clause 6 of the bill, which reads as follows:

The last two digits may be used to represent the year (a) in the case of years nineteen hundred and ninety to nineteen hundred and ninety-nine, inclusively; or (b) in the case of the year two thousand and thirty-two and subsequent years.

This exception is not part of the existing Canadian standard and could introduce confusion.

I can relate that Industry Canada is advancing a wide range of measures to promote the use of the existing national standards. These measures include the use of the date, standard and departmental correspondence and documentation, and encouraging the similar use by industry portfolio agencies and support for the Standards Council of Canada's efforts to promote adoption of the standard.

I wish to thank my hon. colleague from Peterborough for raising this important issue. Although the bill to create a national standard is not necessary at this time given the existence of such a standard, we will continue to make every effort to support its use in Canada.

[Wireless technology, September 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, Canada and Newfoundland are sponsoring the international Wireless Vision Congress, Marconi's legacy, which is currently taking place in St. John's.

Wireless technology has a tremendous impact on our daily life, in the health care sector as well as in education and in the economy.

The congress welcomes more than 350 delegates representing over 20 countries. There will be a demonstration of wireless medical services between St. John's and Labrador, and the first Canadian course given in space, thanks to a link between students and the international space station.

[Shipbuilding, September 26th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the government of Quebec and Investissement Québec reviewed Davie's proposal and rejected its call for help.

We agree with the decision of Quebec's minister of finance, because the proposed plan is not realistic.

The Minister of Industry met with Davie Industries officials on Thursday. It goes without saying that we are concerned about the need to preserve jobs at the shipyard.

[Petitions, June 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, I am pleased to present a petition regarding rural route mail couriers in the riding of Beauce.

[Cannes International Film Festival, May 14th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I inform the House of the participation of Quebecers at Cannes international film festival.

First, the French-Quebec production La répétition is in official competition. Actress Pascale Bussières is extremely popular, and all of Quebec and Canada is proud of her. We already knew that Ms. Bussières was extraordinarily talented. It is an honour to have that talent recognized on the international cultural scene.

Then there is a Quebec production from Bernard Émond entitled La femme qui boit , featuring actors Elyse Guilbault and Luc Picard. This film is not in official competition, but it is a magnificent reflection of the excellent movies that are produced here in Canada.

Good luck to the film La répétition and to Pascale Bussières during this prestigious competition.