I welcome you here today.
You are probably aware of the U.S. Steel purchase of Stelco in Hamilton and the complicating factors that occurred in that particular situation. The promise was that certain levels of employment would be kept, and that didn't happen. There was a court case. The government ultimately seemed to collapse in the court case. I'd have to know more detail to really prejudge that one. But for the people involved in that, it was the fact that they couldn't access the terms of the deal, that the government wouldn't release them to them so that workers would have an understanding. In fact they got a copy of the deal because of a lawsuit in New York State.
In 2010 Parliament voted unanimously on an NDP motion identifying some of the serious problems relative to the Investment Canada Act. I would suggest, and I'm not asking you for a political commentary here, that the government, by voting with the opposition, at least gave the impression that it was committing to in due course make some changes to the investment act, and we don't see them here in Bill C-38. They certainly don't live up to the promise that we thought would be there.
Do you have any thoughts as to why there are no specific amendments that would address the situation the government was in during that particular deal and also to allow for public hearings to allow input from people? The minister is making the determination of the value to Canada, but you would think that part of that might involve hearing from the people involved.
If you could, answer please.