I thank the ministers for being here. I will be sharing my time with my colleagues.
I want to say to both of the ministers that as far as our party is concerned, we support the objectives of this legislation. We still have some questions about it, but we do not intend to throw any huge monkey wrenches into the works.
We are concerned about the speed with which this legislation has been produced and also the speed with which it is expected to be carried. But I can say from my experience, both provincially and federally, that I know there are times when this has to be done because of the urgency of the situation and the nature of the assets in question.
We will be suggesting in the course of the clause-by-clause that there be a provision in the act that provides a sunset for the legislation and for the establishment of a committee that would look at the relationship between this legislation and the other pieces of legislation that both ministers have referred to. I think there should be a way to simplify what is being put forward.
I hope the government can consider that proposal. I certainly will be discussing it with my colleagues in committee as we go forward.
Anybody can answer the questions I have. The definition of a foreign state, under clause 2, obviously means a country that isn't Canada, but also any of its political subdivisions or agencies.
To deal with this sort of situation, you're dealing with a period of transition, in which case some of these states won't necessarily have stable governments. Are there any other criteria you can think of applying that would somehow define what the state of the government making this request would have to be?
Do you see what I'm getting at, Mr. Kessel?