With regard to the Investment Canada Act, in 2010 Parliament voted unanimously to pass an NDP motion identifying serious problems with the Investment Canada Act, committing the government to making specific improvements. But these proposed changes really don't live up to that promise. There has been great concern over the definition of net benefit to Canada. What does that mean when we have seen foreign investments authorized, takeovers carried out, jobs lost, technology moved out of the country, and BHP's high-profile attempt to take over PotashCorp? There was no definition of net benefit to Canada, but the government opposed that takeover.
The only other time the government has stood up to a foreign takeover or foreign investment was in the case of MacDonald Dettwiler. It was the very first time this investment had been blocked. The company had launched very important RADARSAT technology. It was something the government had talked about as being essential to Canada's protection of the north, of the Arctic, and then within weeks there was an announced takeover of this company and sale to the largest American munitions manufacturer. The minister at the time, ultimately, in the face of significant public pressure, decided to block the foreign takeover.
The rules are not clear. They're sporadic, and there are many Canadians who do not feel the rules work in their interest, because affected communities have no say. There is no open, democratic process for people to have input into hearings when there's a proposed takeover. The people who are directly affected, who work for a company, have no opportunity to participate in hearings, and there are, as I said, no clear rules about net benefit to Canada.
The government here is making a very modest change, in the sense that merely having companies pay a fine in the form of security rather than cash really doesn't change the basic rules of the Investment Canada Act. That's just unacceptable for Canadians. We've had so many foreign takeovers and so many cases of people being thrown out of work, companies being closed down, and technology being taken out of the country.
We need foreign investment. We want foreign investment, but we need clear rules, clear accountability, a process that allows for democratic input, and a process that ensures that Canadian interests are protected. We don't see those things in the amendments that are proposed. They're very inadequate.