Evidence of meeting #17 for Canadian Heritage in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was company.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Keith Schaitkin  Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies
Donald Ross  Legal Counsel, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt
Jean-Pierre Blais  Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, Department of Canadian Heritage
Missy Marston-Shmelzer  Deputy Director, Investments, Department of Canadian Heritage

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

But is it a Canadian company or not?

11:45 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

Keith Schaitkin

It's incorporated in Canada. Do you mean as a jurisdictional matter, a legal matter?

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

As you see it, is it subject to this law? Do we have to go through this filter because it's a Canadian company? You spent more time explaining why they're not a Canadian company and why they have addresses here and not there than you did explaining to us why it would be a good thing for them to be bought by you.

I need to know. Do you think they're a Canadian company? If so, we have to go to this special process whereby you have to convince the government that there's a net benefit for the country.

11:45 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

Keith Schaitkin

Look, we have been engaged in that process for months. We believe that the process applies. We have provided significant amounts of information to the minister and have had lots of conversations, and we have Canadian counsel working with us, so yes, we believe that your law applies and that the review process needs to be engaged in, and we're engaging in it.

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

Okay, so if the law applies, there has to be a net benefit.

11:45 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

What is it?

11:45 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

Keith Schaitkin

As I say, I think the issues of net benefit to Canada are determined by the minister, as I understand it. As I understand it, it is not appropriate for me to discuss the specific benefits that would result from our purchase.

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

Okay, but it's the core of the conversation, right? They're going to make their decision based on that. If you can't answer anything, why are you here?

11:45 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

Keith Schaitkin

I assumed that people invited me here to discuss Icahn--who we are, what we are.

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

Okay, but the decision will be taken according to whether there's a net benefit for the country. That's the principle of the decision. It's in the law, so we have to be able to understand if there is one or not.

How much time do I have? It's two minutes. When there's one minute left, please tell me, and we'll give it to Ruby.

11:45 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

Keith Schaitkin

Ultimately, as you are well aware, because of the way the law works on this issue, the discussions are privileged discussions. There will be a net benefit to Canada. That decision will have to be made. In order for the transaction to be approved, the decision is made by the minister. I think that beyond that, those discussions are privileged by law, so I don't plan to really discuss that aspect.

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

You have one minute.

Go ahead, Mr. Del Mastro, on a point of order.

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I think that a review of the transcripts of the proceedings when this motion passed would show that I did specifically speak to the fact that there is privileged information here that we couldn't openly debate at the committee.

If members have questions related to the Icahn Group's experience, expertise, or reasons for looking at this company, that's all fair game, but with respect to net benefit to Canada, I would suggest to members that you're actually delving into a process in a way that, if committees start to do it, will throw the whole idea of privilege out the window—

11:45 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Chair, I have a point of order.

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

—and groups will not look to invest into Canada if privilege doesn't mean anything.

11:45 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

He has asked a simple question--why is this good?--and we're told that's privileged information. He's completely on the right path, and those are the questions we should be asking. Let's get back to work.

11:50 a.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

Well, that's not what you agreed to when we passed the motion.

11:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Okay, let's—

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

If you want general info, I can go to the Internet, and so can you. Anybody can go there, but they're here on a specific—

11:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Before we go any further, there are some questions that our witnesses cannot answer, and we have to respect that, so....

You have one minute. Go ahead, Ms. Dhalla.

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON

I'm moving away from the net benefit question, even though I think it's an important one.

On page 2 of your presentation, you state in the second-last bullet point from the bottom that “...4% of Lions Gate shareholders are currently Canadian”. Then appendix I, where you have some documentation, says in the first major paragraph, and I quote:

Icahn Partners LP, a limited partnership governed by the laws of Delaware, Icahn Partners Master Fund LP, a limited partnership governed by the laws of the Cayman Islands...

I'm confused as to who is more Canadian. What percentage of shareholders within Icahn are Canadian? It says here that you're governed by the laws of the Cayman Islands.

11:50 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

Keith Schaitkin

Icahn is set up.... The public company is a Delaware limited partnership. We have public stockholders, and 92% of the stock of Icahn Enterprises, which controls these entities, is owned by Mr. Icahn, so—

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON

How much is Canadian?

11:50 a.m.

Associate General Counsel, Icahn Associates Corp. and Affiliated Companies

Keith Schaitkin

I would suspect that very few of our stockholders are Canadian.