I would note, as well, that the committee has already voted against NDP-1, which is similar to this provision but applied to the Copyright Act.
Similar to my comments on that earlier amendment, I would note that this is not necessary, as Bill C-8 already clearly exempts parallel imports from the application of the border measures. In this case, the exemption can be found at clause 42, proposed paragraph 51.03(2)(a), which states that the prohibition does not apply if:
(a) the trade-mark was applied with the consent of the owner of the trade-mark in the country where it was applied;
That effectively is the definition of a parallel import. Given that parallel imports are made with the consent of the trademark owner in the country where they are made, the bill clearly excludes these grounds from the application of the border measures, and the language in Bill C-8 does not change the existing law dealing with parallel importation.
In our view, similar to the earlier ones, we agree strongly with the policy intent but would argue that the legislation already contains a very clear exemption.