Thank you.
I have another question, and it is for Mr. Lareau. Perhaps you can answer both questions at the same time.
The Liberals would like me and us to believe that when we think about Barbados and other tax havens, this is a figment of our imagination. I doubt that Mr. Arrindell would be here if there wasn't some advantage for him to attract Canadian businesses that's not offered in Canada.
There was a recent study at the University of Quebec that showed that major corporations and banks have used tax havens to avoid paying $10 billion in taxes since 1981.
The study goes on to say that in the House of Commons a few years back, when Scott Brison was still in the Conservative side of things, he said:
The tax treaty with Barbados is a special case because of the fact that there is a disproportionate percentage of Canada's foreign direct investment in Barbados that does not make sense given the size of its economy and the nature of the investment.
In 1994 Paul Martin closed a bunch of tax havens and said: “Accordingly, we are taking measures to prevent companies from using foreign affiliates to avoid paying taxes.” Then he proceeded to justify why he needed to keep the Barbados tax haven open in terms of the Canada Steamship Lines.
Recently, we know that Revenue Canada is auditing Merck Frosst for $2 billion in unpaid taxes because they'd used the Barbados tax haven.
Is this a figment of my imagination?
Mr. André Lareau, would you like to respond?