Industry committee  I didn't.

Industry committee  Thank you very much. I really appreciate getting them on the record. In terms of strengthening net benefit, I'll mention three. First is binding commitments with regard to production and employment levels, existing worker contracts, new investments in fixed capital and technolo

Industry committee  First of all, I think there's some value in identifying or defining what you mean by “strategic”, but I think to do that you have to have a strategy, right? So it has to be strategic within an overall industrial policy strategy, and I think that's lacking. I think the Red Wilso

Industry committee  It's a bit of both. There's definitely a problem with the act. I don't think the calculus of net benefit and the enforcement...there is probably too much space for the companies concerned to kind of wriggle out. More broadly speaking, in those mining takeovers you mentioned, as w

Industry committee  I think you've put your finger on something that's really important. I think of the importance of transparency, clear rules, and consistency. If you have one arm of government contradicting another and then in turn that being reversed, I think that clearly leads to uncertainty an

Industry committee  I think if you're talking about public consultation and the obligation, should it be at the minister's discretion whether to consult with the workers involved, communities involved, or with the lower level--

Industry committee  You mean to make public the commitments and undertakings.

Industry committee  Absolutely, it's in the interests of transparency. I guess I would go one step further and say that it should be an obligation rather than at the minister's discretion. That should be made public. Those should be part of the results of the deal. I wonder if I could comment on--

Industry committee  Thank you.

Industry committee  The short answer is yes, and I don't think it's advisable to raise the thresholds.

Industry committee  Absolutely, and I think they should have been made public right upfront so that everything was clear from the perspective of the company as well as for the communities in which those companies operate. I think that would have certainly resolved the matter in a much better situati

Industry committee  Exactly. Let's face it, I think Alcan can be considered along with PotashCorp. That was about equivalent in size to the Potash proposed takeover, about $40 billion. It is one of our national champions. It is open to scrutiny whether that was a wise decision to make. If it was, th

Industry committee  What I would definitely say is that I would be very skeptical of raising those thresholds from the current levels. I know there have been recommendations that they be raised to a billion, in some cases, and to weaken the net benefit tests. I think before making a judgment as to

Industry committee  I'm not privy to all the proceedings of that relationship and review. But I do know that in the case of Rio Tinto certain undertakings were made, certain commitments, and those commitments were not fulfilled, it would seem. They made commitments to capital spending, which they d

Industry committee  If we're going to talk about strategic sectors as part of the net benefit calculation, then we have to have a strategy. I think this review should also be considered part of a bigger review of what the strategy is. I'm not so much concerned about the reciprocity, although in my o