No.
Evidence of meeting #63 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #63 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
They were not.
Approximately how many clients would you say you've advised over the years, since you've been in this business?
3:50 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
Do you mean on the Investment Canada Act?
3:50 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
I don't know; it's over 100.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Good. Okay.
When you act for foreign investment here, do you normally act for the receiving company or for those who are wanting to come here?
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
But under the Investment Canada Act, it's the purchaser's responsibility to go through the process, so you are way more involved if you are the purchaser's counsel.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Okay. How do we compare--if you know--to other countries in terms of foreign investment processes?
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
Well, we have this general framework. Other countries have national security as a screening mechanism. I don't know if you read in the paper today, but Italy is standing in the way of Parmalat being bought by a foreign, I think French, company. If you look in the books--not meaning the financial statements, but the laws--of a lot of these countries, they may not have a general framework law as we have in Canada and as they also have in Australia. I know I looked at French law one time, and there were something like 11 sectors that were considered strategic or special, etc., so to a certain extent we may have gotten a bit of a bad name--the Wilson report picked up on this--because we have this general framework legislation, but review occurs only for investments above a certain threshold.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
If we could use PotashCorp as an example, would you have preferred that the minister be able to have more flexibility in telling the Canadian public why the decisions were made? Since they withdrew, should it still be the responsibility of the minister to comment on why they withdrew?
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
Well, if you read their press release--and I had to write a paper recently on this, so I actually bothered to read their press release--it's quite clear that they withdrew because they didn't think they could get it through the Investment Canada process. In that sort of situation, I think it's very helpful to other foreign investors to understand the reasons behind the decision.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
So you'd be in favour of some more flexibility and of the minister being able to speak to those issues?
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
Yes. I think the minister—
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
The minister is never able to relay confidential information.
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
However, I don't think the minister is prevented. The minister may issue a decision in relation to an approval and is required to issue decisions in relation to a disapproval, a rejection. I'm not sure, and I haven't actually studied that particular sentence, but there may be a bit of a gap there on the issue of a withdrawal of the application. I think that in any event, it still would have been helpful to hear. I think the minister would probably be quite capable of providing some reasons.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
One of the reasons we like to have witnesses like you is that you are practitioners in the everyday activity in this piece. Do you, as a law firm or legal adviser, have a definition or set of criteria that define what “net benefit to Canada” is, one that you express to your potential clients?
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
Yes. I've been through the process enough to have a good idea of what the factors will be and how they will be considered. Absolutely.
3:55 p.m.
Partner, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, As an Individual
Sure. I can tell you off the top of my head the ones in section 20, but I'd say the hit parade would be the participation of Canadians and senior management, head office location, capital expenditures, employment levels, any technology transfer, and that sort of thing. Those would be some of the big ones.