Erin O'Toole

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, January 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, this bill is for job and economic promotion in Canada. In the parliamentary secretary's area of the province of Ontario, in particular that larger area of Mississauga and Brampton, is the highest concentration of headquarters of Fortune 500 companies in Canada. These companies invest in our country by manufacturing, distributing, and selling goods here. Their intellectual property rights have been robbed for years.

Over eight years ago, Canada was identified by the U.S. trade representative as a country that is not equipping its borders and does not have the IP regime to stamp out this crime. We were on a list with countries in the Middle East and in other parts of the world that do not recognize IP. This would bring it up and ensure that these companies and brands that invest in Mississauga and the GTA keep their investments flowing and keep jobs being created.

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, January 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, having worked in the private sector on this for one of the largest brand owners in the world, my perspective is that industry has been working with law enforcement and border officials on training and on preparing to have this registry and these rights. This is an area where active participation in partnership with IP rights holders will save money over time because it is the expertise of the people who own the marks, make the texture, or make sound, who are training and working with our professionals at CBSA in a way that would make its operations more efficient and give it the tools to move quickly. This is a terrific case where CBSA will get the tools it is asking for and partner with IP rights holders who are affected to save Canadians from the risks of counterfeit goods, while also making it more efficient and saving money.

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, January 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to rise today in the House to speak, for the second occasion, on our important work to update our intellectual property regime and, more specifically, to combat counterfeit products, Bill C-8.

This is not just a modernization of our IP regime here in Canada but a bill that would have major impacts on public safety, on economic activity and revenues, and on jobs, because counterfeit products not only lead to risk for Canadians but lead to job losses.

Our present legal framework for intellectual property is also incredibly out of date. Like many areas, our government is moving on important issues of public policy, while other previous governments preferred to kick the can down the road. In fact, the Trade-marks Act was last amended in the 1950s and is out of date. That is before many members of the House were born. Also, with respect to trademarks, it does not even recognize the current state of intellectual property.

A few years ago, I had the good fortune to have a column in Marketing magazine, and in 2012 I wrote a column on the emergence of sound trademarks in Canada. It might interest the House, especially on a Friday, to know that in the U.S. sounds have been trademarked for some time. We are all familiar with the NBC TV broadcast chime that started with radio and is on television. We all know the MGM lion roar. Well, the MGM lion roar is now a sound mark. In 2012, the Canadian intellectual property office allowed, for the first time, a sound mark. A lot of our big companies and big brands will use a sound to associate a connection with that brand. In the marketplace it is called a sound mark or a sting.

Even the language of the act would be modernized from using the old term “wares” to using the more broad and modern term “goods”.

The landscape has changed. Sounds, colours, three-dimensional shapes, textures, and even taste are a critical part of a brand's identity. Companies, employers in Canada, spend millions of dollars securing these brands and this intellectual property.

Speaking of colours being associated with brands, I cannot resist to note that the colour blue is widely known to associate with strength and trust, while the colour red is considered boisterous and flashy. I think these differences between blue and red illustrate the differences between the Conservative leader and Liberal leader perfectly.

Bill C-8 would also enable IP rights holders to stop counterfeit goods at every step in the process: ports, distribution, and retail. As I mentioned the first time I rose to speak on this subject many years ago, for five years I was in-house corporate counsel at Procter & Gamble in Canada. In 2006, I was confronted with the ugly face of counterfeit goods in my job as a lawyer for the company. I assembled a brand protection team, with the support of the company president, Tim Penner; my general counsel, Eric Glass; our head of security, a proud OPP veteran working for P&G, Rick Kotwa; and a regulatory scientist, Jennifer Cazabon, who was in the gallery earlier today with her daughter, Maya. We put together a team to investigate and stamp out counterfeit goods that were affecting that company. They were not only affecting its revenues, its investments in Canada, and its jobs but potentially the safety of people who buy products because they trust the brand. They trust the logo, the trademark.

Bill C-8 would allow rights holders, like Procter & Gamble and other companies, to stop counterfeit goods throughout the criminal activity used to bring them to consumers' homes. The bill would provide better tools to investigate commercial counterfeiting and help reduce trade and counterfeit goods by promoting new enforcement tools to strengthen our current enforcement regime. The bill would provide new criminal offences that criminalize the commercial possession, manufacture, or trafficking of counterfeit goods or trademarked counterfeit goods.

It would also create new offences for trademark counterfeiting and equip law enforcement and prosecutors with the right tools to stamp out this problem.

The act would also give border officials, the CBSA, the authority to detain suspected shipments and contact the intellectual property rights holders about their brands and their rights being attacked. It would allow Canadian businesses to file a request for assistance with the Canada Border Services Agency, in turn enabling border officials to share that information with the rights holders regarding suspect shipments.

This bill is yet another example of our government consulting widely with employers and key stakeholders, and listening. These changes, protections, and new enforcement mechanisms are what industry and rights holders have been demanding for over a decade. Increasingly, our well-trained and professional workers at CBSA have also been asking for these tools to do their job better and more efficiently.

It is also important to note, on the subject of counterfeit goods, that criminal networks around the world are feeding on counterfeiting as a highly lucrative profit to help fuel other enterprises. We know that these international criminal networks throughout the world bring tremendous harm and oppression, not just here in Canada but around the world, and the proceeds from these IP crimes fuel that. In 2005, the RCMP declared organized crime to be the primary actor in this area of malfeasance. Stamping out counterfeit products and IP crimes starves these criminal networks of funding and the ability to hurt.

The public safety elements of Bill C-8 are also very important and deserve highlighting. The bill would give border officers additional tools to work with their government partners at Health Canada and the RCMP. This would ensure that unsafe or unsanitary products that could harm Canadians are pulled from the market.

In my case, Procter & Gamble found that law enforcement officers could tell it that they knew there was a suspicious activity regarding one of its brands, but there could be no tracking and no proper investigation. There would be no prosecution because the tools were not there; so law enforcement, busy as it was, would have other priorities that were more likely to lead to criminal charges and jail time.

I hope we can move ahead quickly with the passage of this bill. By protecting consumers and families and by encouraging businesses through innovation, protecting their brands, and encouraging them to invest in Canada, these amendments would not only promote innovation and creativity; they would help stimulate job growth.

In my situation, while I was at Procter & Gamble, this one employer in eastern Ontario was the largest private sector employer in the communities of Belleville and Brockville, making important investments in manufacturing jobs in an area of our province that has chronic unemployment. Large companies around the world estimate losses in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars due to the theft of the goodwill surrounding their brands.

The Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network, leading Canadian employers, brands, and academics have all been asking for us to update our intellectual property regime in Canada and provide law enforcement with the tools to stamp out these products, which will not only lead to job losses but will fuel crime and pose health risks to Canadians across the country. I truly hope that all my friends in the House will recognize that there has been a decade of asking for this. With our government, we are delivering.

[International Trade, January 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, negotiations are under way, and the government will only sign a trade agreement that is in the best interests of Canada.

It is also critical to know—and the Ontario government knows well—that the European Union, Australia, and the United States have signed deals with South Korea. Since the U.S. signed in 2012, we have lost $1.5 billion in exports to that country.

We are here to ensure that a free trade agreement with South Korea will level the playing field and ensure Canadian exporters have opportunities and more jobs for Canadians.

[Business of Supply, January 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member asked his question in the way that he did.

I had the profound honour to serve aboard HMCS St. John's, the proud frigate for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Atlantic Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador in particular, has a higher level of enrolment in the Canadian Forces. Within the Canadian Forces and within the navy, all the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians want to get on that ship.

The member is right; we are recruiting from those areas. The issue we have to address is where they are going to settle after service and how they are going to access need. I would ask the member to think about the next 25 years for these people who are signing up now at the recruiting centre. How will they draw services?

Veterans in my area, and I have talked to some, even ones that have been released with service injuries, do not visit the traditional bricks and mortar office. They tend to use the phone. They tend to register for and use a “My VAC Account”.

As I said in my remarks, we need to address the needs now and in the future, and offer flexibility for these veterans who are critical, including our special veterans from Newfoundland and Labrador.

[Business of Supply, January 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his question, and I would like to offer my condolences to the family of Mr. Langridge.

These changes are so that we can help to treat people like Mr. Langridge. We know there are mental health challenges; I think everyone in this House knows it.

These are the decisions of government. Do we try to hire more mental health workers? Do we open more operational stress injury clinics? Do we fund the veterans transition network, run by a veteran who has overcome PTSD? Or, do we only do things the way they were done in the past?

I would suggest to my hon. colleague that a combination of work with the Canadian Forces while the person is still serving, and with Veterans Affairs after release, has to catch mental health issues quickly. We have to train their unit to recognize these challenges and work with the families as well.

[Business of Supply, January 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a distinct honour for me to rise in this House of Commons, but today I rise with a profound mixture of sadness and disappointment.

As a member of Parliament who has served, I am sad whenever I see veterans who feel their government or indeed their member of Parliament from any side of this place is not here for their best interest. I know I speak for myself and some veterans who are on this side, but I also speak to my friends on the other side, including my friend from Winnipeg Centre who hosted an event for veterans with me last year.

I am disappointed, though, because Ottawa has become a place where we cannot actually have a serious debate about an important public policy area like this. There is someone on that side proving that point right now.

I am also disappointed with the low level of knowledge amongst people in this place and people who gather and speak to us outside this place on how our veterans have been served, historically through to today.

I am also disappointed that just this week, on a panel, when I suggested the Legion plays an important role in the care of our veterans, I was mocked for that position.

I am going to use my time and the privilege I have as a member of Parliament to try to raise the level of debate for one moment and to provide some education. I hope my friends on all sides listen intently.

I joined the Canadian Forces at 18, and when I was released after 12 years of service, I said to my commanding officer, Colonel Al Blair at 423 Squadron in Shearwater, that I would be a committed civilian, supporting our CF and our veterans. I rarely speak about that work, but it has been a critical part of my adult life and a critical reason why I ran for Parliament.

I am actually an average soldier, or airman. I joined because I love this country. My area of Canada, Durham, has had profoundly successful and important soldiers, sailors, and airmen. Our community also lost Trooper Darryl Caswell during the war in Afghanistan. I know his family. I know the people who attended that funeral. Like many, I stood on the Highway of Heroes with my community to show support.

My area has also been represented by parliamentarians. Rev. John Weir Foote, a Victoria Cross winner from Dieppe, served Durham in the provincial parliament. Our only padre to receive the VC when he leapt out of the boats to care for his men and was imprisoned for the rest of the war, he was our local MPP. Another VC winner from Dieppe, Cec Merritt from British Columbia, actually served in this place.

We have had some profoundly important veterans in this place. I would invite the members to look at the statue of Baker out in the hallway. He was a sitting member of Parliament who died in World War I.

A sitting member of Parliament from Uxbridge, in my riding, the MP for Ontario North, served at Vimy during World War I and died, not at Vimy but at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal. He was brought back from the war because of a nervous breakdown. That is what it was called in World War I. He had PTSD. He leapt from a window in Montreal before having to face the families of Uxbridge who lost sons under his command. We are now addressing these real needs.

Just yesterday my friend, the member for Kingston and the Islands spoke about the hon. John Matheson, another MP and one of my personal heroes who served our country with distinction.

We have almost 600,000 veterans in Canada and 80,000-plus members of the Canadian Forces, regular force and reserve, who will be veterans in the future. Of them, 130,000 have a file with Veterans Affairs, and 7,500 have an assigned case manager. A case manager is assigned when there is assessment that the veteran needs additional support based on an assessment of income, health, living arrangements, family support, activity, and addictions.

Veterans Affairs receives 730,000 calls per year. Fifteen thousand veterans have registered for online My VAC accounts, primarily newer Afghanistan veterans. Home visits are not tracked; that is unfortunate. It is something we should work on tracking, because veterans with injuries can be visited at home. There are 68 VAC offices, consisting of stand-alone VACs, 24 integrated personnel support centres, and 17 OSI clinics. Soon services are going to be offered at 600-plus Service Canada offices.

To address the Legion point—my friends opposite did not think it plays an important role—I say that the Legion is the most important supporter of our veterans. It was founded in 1925. In 1926 an act of Parliament was passed in this place. Section 4 of the act empowers it with the purpose to care for the welfare of our veterans. There are 1,461 branches across Canada and 1,400 veteran service officers. John Greenfield, the veteran service officer for branch 178 in Bowmanville, has personally handled 450 cases. He attends their home, or they visit him. He helps them, face-to-face, and gets benefits for those veterans.

In 2012, 12,000 veterans were helped by these visits from veteran service officers, who only have expenses paid and training through the poppy fund. The Legion has also helped with the veterans transition network, out of the University of British Columbia, and in recent years, the Veterans Affairs ministry has empowered the Legion to run the visitation program, where thousands of veterans of Korea and the Cold War have been visited by veteran service officers to assess their health and well-being. The Legion remains the most important direct, face-to-face contact for our veterans. I thank the Legion deeply for that.

The question before us here in the House and in conversations I have had in recent days, including with some veterans who came to the Hill, is the concern about the closure of some offices. We have to talk about assessing the needs of our veterans now and in the future. As my colleague from Etobicoke Centre said, there are our veterans who are in their 20s, from Afghanistan, and our veterans who are in their 80s or 90s.

My area of Ontario, the Durham region, has never had a stand-alone Veterans Affairs office. Have the veterans not been cared for? Yes, they have. There are a range of ways they have been cared for and will continue to be cared for. The important issue we have before us as parliamentarians, as Canadians, is to ask whether it is better to stay put and watch offices have five, six, ten, or twelve visits per day, or is it better to open up two, three, four, or five offices across the country to address mental health? Veterans Affairs offices are administrative points of contact. We have heard that term. They do not deliver benefits for our veterans. They help them access them. I would suggest the top people who help them access benefits are the veteran service officers across the country. They can also access these services through a range of other means. What our government is doing with Service Canada offices is now allowing that direct access point where face-to-face contact could be required to help with forms or other things.

In October, when some of these veterans came to Ottawa, I met with them. I attended the media event. One of them said to us that their issue relates specifically to whether Veterans Affairs training or experienced case officers would be available in Service Canada. We listened. The eight closures will have Veterans Affairs case workers in them as of next week, full stop, permanent. With a caseload of less than ten visits a day, one is appropriate. In most cases, the Service Canada office is in the same building or nearby. In my region of Durham, this will now give four offices in the area for that personal contact if one of our Legion veteran service officers cannot help them. Veterans did not have this before these changes.

I know this is an important debate. I know my friend from Sackville—Eastern Shore is passionate about these issues. I met him as an officer at Shearwater, and I truly believe he has veterans at heart. However, we also have the responsibility to ensure our system addresses the needs now and in the future. We have to make sure we meet the needs of all veterans. We have to meet the growing mental health challenges that our veterans face. These changes are part of our plan to serve our veterans better.

[Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, January 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to echo the comments made by a few of my colleagues welcoming the hon. member for Toronto Centre. I listened intently to her maiden speech, and as the parliamentary secretary, I hope she joins the trade committee soon to participate in our discussion.

She also mentioned a book that I am going to put on my reading list, and I would put one on her reading list. On the day she was elected, November 27 of last year, our government introduced the global markets action plan. In her speech she asked with regard to Africa, “Where is Canada?” That global markets action plan not only discusses South Africa but also discusses emerging markets like Côte d'Ivoire, Cameroon, Nigeria, Mali, and Zambia. That document is the culmination of many years of strategic thought she seems desperate for. Which are her top countries in our global markets action plan that she will work with us on to create jobs for Canadians?

[Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, January 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague and friend from the trade committee for his speech. He clearly has a future in diplomacy.

My question for him really relates to a multi-generational issue. I am not talking about the last few decades, but the multi-generational isolationist policy of the New Democratic Party, opposing every trade deal, and even the auto pact that brought prosperity to Canadian families.

My friend listed off a range of countries, but in my experience the NDP has opposed free trade with the U.S., NAFTA, and it does double-speak on CETA, the European trade deal. The NDP has never supported trade with any other country but has followed a multi-generational isolationism.

What would the member's strategic plan be for growing those one in five jobs attributable to trade in Canada?

[Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, January 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important to note that we are trading with Honduras now. It is a key destination for our aid now. It is trading and has free trade agreements with the United States and with the European Union, now, putting Canadian job creators at a disadvantage.

My position has been clear. I would ask the member to challenge his colleagues, in a party that has been isolationist and anti-trade for 50 years, by saying that this is a way we can engage with countries, to actually help lift their economy out of much more difficult circumstances while also promoting job creation here in our country. Our changes to DFATD would make sure that we not only target economic opportunity but that it be alongside aid, engagement, and institution building. This would actually help the people of Honduras. The isolation of the opposition would do no good.