Industry committee  When the legislation was adopted in 2005, I don't think anyone envisaged a sale of the satellite to ATK. Maybe someone did. I certainly didn't. And I would have imagined that there might have been a national security test, not just included in that legislation but made more explicit in terms of possible links to the Investment Canada Act or something like that.

Industry committee  Further to the first part of your comment, it strikes me as unlikely to be coincidental that the sale went through immediately after the launch, because obviously the successful launch dramatically increased the value. The Canadian government took the risk, and ATK reaps the benefits.

Industry committee  It is covered under Bill C-25 as long as we remain the licensee, and this is an absolutely central question: do we remain the licensee once the MDA space program has been sold to an American company, or does the licence transfer to the U.S. government? Even if we somehow notionally remain the licensee, will there be circumstances in which enormous pressure could be brought to bear on ATK, as a U.S. company very closely linked to the U.S. defence industry, to somehow compromise on the notional control that might be retained by Canada?

Industry committee  I think you should ask the Minister of Foreign Affairs and perhaps his lawyers what they think is actually the consequence here. It's of absolutely crucial importance that we discover whether we would retain the licence, because without that licence there's really nothing we can do except be in the queue for the prepaid imagery that we've acquired as a result of the subsidies over time.

Industry committee  The real question is not to what degree have we made concessions and partnered with the United States, because we do obviously have a common interest in most situations, but how do we get that satellite when we really need it for something that is inherently Canadian in its interest and may not be seen as an issue of such great concern to our American friends?

Industry committee  I can only suggest that this is an issue the committee should pursue, but in addition to that, let me say one more thing. To block this sale is not to deny the U.S. government legitimate access to the imagery from the satellite. It can purchase this imagery on the open market, and it has access control over to whom and what kind of imagery is produced and sold under a treaty that was signed between Lloyd Axworthy and Madeleine Albright a number of years ago.

Industry committee  It's a very good question. Thank you for it. The history of RADARSAT-2 is linked to the exceptional character of the technology, the fact that it was so cutting edge. Having this three-metre resolution and its ability to see at night through clouds was something that concerned the United States in terms of having this imagery available on the commercial market, available for anyone to buy.

Industry committee  The issue of ATK's activities is not one that concerns me so much. I understand there are people who are concerned about the fact that ATK produces land mines or depleted uranium shells, but I don't see a legal violation of the land mines convention inherent in what is proposed.

Industry committee  I am an expert in international law; I'm not an expert in domestic law. But in my reading of the Remote Sensing Space Systems Act, it is bridging the divide between domestic and international law, and given that this satellite is a component of our foreign policy and our capacity to assert sovereignty in places like the north, the responsibility when dealing with the sovereignty, defence, and national security dimension is specifically vested in the foreign minister.

Industry committee  There are two points. First, on the national security element of a test, there already is a national security test. That is in the Remote Sensing Space Systems Act, and in a joined-up kind of way I would like to think that the Department of Industry and this committee would consider the kind of test that Mr.

Industry committee  I will be finished in less than a minute. Suppose that the United States sends a ship into the Northwest Passage without Canada's consent. The Canadian government recently announced that it would introduce legislation enabling foreign investments to be blocked if they are contrary to Canada's national security interests, and as I understand it, this move is directed primarily at state-owned companies investing in the Alberta tar sands.

Industry committee  Thank you very much for having me appear here today. Thank you very much. I will be speaking in English, but I do understand questions asked in French. I too have been following the issue of RADARSAT closely for some years now. Most recently, it's been in my capacity as the leader of a project on sovereignty and shipping in the Northwest Passage for ArcticNet, a federally funded consortium of scientists from 28 Canadian universities and five federal departments.

National Defence committee  The response is that it was not a systematic practice of torture. Those were a couple of soldiers who of course were treated to the full rigour of the Canadian military justice system. What I'm more concerned about, and what I think Amnesty International is concerned about, are countries with systematic problems, where the governmental regime is not either intent or able to deal with the bad apples.

National Defence committee  I don't know, but knowing what I know of the seriousness with which the Dutch government takes these matters, I would expect they have.

National Defence committee  I'm not sure whether we need our own detention facility, but certainly building one or helping the Afghan authorities to build one that could be co-managed to deal with these kinds of detainees would cost some money. But, again, the question is what value we put on our adherence to human rights and what value we put on strengthening the infrastructure and institutions of the Afghan government over the long term.