Yes, thank you. That's an excellent question.
I think that critical minerals are one of those sectors that we should be focusing on, because these are risks that are not just hypothetical; they're very real.
I think a lot of our attention for the last few years has been looking at foreign-owned entities purchasing outright entire mining operations and then controlling and dictating flows. I think what we've seen play out in one case in particular, about 100 kilometres east of Yellowknife, was about controlling supply chains and value chains, as you mentioned, Mr. Simard. It's sometimes as advantageous for China, with its monopoly, to keep those critical minerals in the ground as it is to extract them. It's having that offtake in making sure that we do not have the refining and processing capabilities in Canada or friendly countries to control that value chain.
Here's where I think it's both looking collectively with allies to invest and share the risk associated with the costs of extracting these minerals and refining them but also leveraging tools like the Investment Canada Act. In my mind, it's one of the primary instruments of asserting Canada's sovereignty. It's a different way. It's not an icebreaker hull in the water or a CF-18 flying in the skies, but it's still a way of asserting our right to control activities in our jurisdiction.
Here, if we are serious about a green transition, accessing the latest defence technologies and contributing to those supply chains, it's incumbent upon us to really move in terms of critical minerals and act upon that strategy that's been articulated.