I concur.
As Mr. Abbott is fond of analogies, I'll give one as an example. Big tobacco is being sued right now. There is litigation on the question that they knew there were problems. They were aware of them. There was evidence provided that the way they were conducting their business was affecting the health of people.
This is something the government should be embracing to protect Canadians. It's about public dollars being involved with private enterprise abroad. We don't want to find out ten years, five years, or two years from now that the Canadian public was exposed because we didn't do what we should have done. I think it's important that this is laid out. To say that we can't do more is not the case. And as you've laid out, the tools we have right now are not sufficient. I think you were quite comprehensive in your comments.
My final question is around an issue that some have concerns about on establishing guidelines that are fair, transparent, and workable in the bill. To underline, this is something that will be open to discussion and consultation. I'd like to hear whether you think it's fair to have the ability to discuss with all players how those guidelines should work in the bill and that there is an importance in having that consultation under subclause 5(2).
To those who would say this is a done deal once the bill is passed, I would point out that the bill actually says to discuss those guidelines and to consult. Do you think that's a fair thing, or should we just say it's done, the bill is written, and we should just go ahead?