Industry committee  Presently the Canadian law does not criminalize theft of trade secrets. It's done by common law or by provinces.

Industry committee  The bill generally does not indicate where there is policy flexibility. It does the reverse. It will indicate where there is policy limitation. There is nothing in the bill that specifically says where the policy flexibility is in that area.

Industry committee  That analysis doesn't exist in report form.

Industry committee  Again, the chapter provides certain policy limits in flexibility—

Industry committee  There were various considerations in putting together the negotiating position, but there are no documents related to that analysis.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes, it's entirely true that the regulations are more flexible because they are established at the executive level. They are, nevertheless, just as binding as a statute. I appreciate, then, that we are talking about a matter of principle as well as flexibility. I would point out that the name of Bill C-47 refers to “amendments permitting the accession to the Arms Trade Treaty and other amendments”.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes, brokering or courtage in French. The treaty deals with a smaller group, which is what we would expect here, in the regulations and in the statute. Yes, they could be more flexible, and, yes, they could be changed. However, because of the legislation's name and the regulation-making authority set out in the bill, it will have some impact on flexibility when regulations are being made.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'd like to highlight again that Bill C-47 amends the summary conviction maximum to be $250,000. The act will continue to allow for an unlimited amount of funds for indictable convictions. It will be up to the prosecutor and the judge to decide whether they bring it as a summary conviction or indictable offence, and then discretion will be given to the judge to decide the appropriate circumstances and what the fine or other penalties would be.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'm not an expert in criminal law convictions—we deal with the Export and Import Permits Act and other things—but I can say that it would be up to the prosecutor whether or not to bring an indictable offence. Presumably, if the offence was beyond the scope of the summary conviction maximum, it would be brought as an indictable offence.

Foreign Affairs committee  Summary conviction offences, as Ms. Gilmour pointed out, in other legislation have lower caps. The whole point of a summary conviction offence is that it's intended to be for a less significant offence overall. I'm not a prosecutor, nor am I an expert in criminal law. Where that line varies would be an issue for the criminal prosecutor.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'm not aware of that being done in any legislation. The difference between a summary offence and an indictable offence is something that's quite common in the Criminal Code and in other criminal sanctions. It's generally a question for prosecutors, judges, and defence attorneys to argue about.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes, that's correct. The regulations and legislation obviously are both binding legally, but the legislation gives the authority to pass the regulations, so it gives the broad scope. This legislation, in implementing the Arms Trade Treaty, would give legislation the authority to implement at the level the ATT requires and broader, and those can be changed by regulation, the same way that sanctions law, for example, and the UN-ACT or the Special Economic Measures Act are done by regulation to allow more flexible movement.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes, but as a drafter of treaties, I would also note that there are often many people who want to have their own exceptions or other provisions put into a treaty.

Foreign Affairs committee  My response to them is to look at the substantive obligations. Do you need a carve-out or not. I won't speak to that particular discussion in 2011, but the preamble provides some colour and then the real question is whether you need something beyond the preamble, or whether you even need a preamble.

Foreign Affairs committee  It adds to the maximum for summary convictions. The indictable offences provision already exists to provide an unlimited amount of potential fines, so this is really giving tools for prosecutors to ask and for judges to order larger amounts in the case of the prosecution and conviction.