Thank you. Perhaps Colin would at least clarify what the words “all options” would mean, because I think the motion as amended now seems to advise the minister that he in fact should do something very specific. I'm not sure when he says, “That the Minister consider all options”, what essentially that means.
Let me just refer again to the Investment Canada sort of scenario, which says, after the part I read previously, it is important to recognize that in order to make the net benefit determination, the IRD consults the provincial governments of those provinces that will or may be affected by the implementation of the investments as well as the Competition Bureau.
In the case of larger or more sensitive cases, it goes on to say that the investor will be required to provide the federal government with written contractual undertakings in order to satisfy the minister that the acquisition will be of net benefit to Canada in an undertaking typically related to such matters as new capital investments, employment, research and development, expenditures, re-investment of earnings, the employment of Canadians, and their involvement in the management and equity ownership of business and exports.
I would hope this is a process that's already under way by Investment Canada. The minister who's responsible for Investment Canada and Investment Canada have to go through all of the various reports, and there are not an awful lot of options for the minister other than one or two things. He can, as the committee is advising, take the maximum time possible under our legislation to make the right decision for Canadians, in terms of net benefits to Canada. That would mean a fairly lengthy process, which is presently being undertaken by Investment Canada through the minister. That's really the only option, because at the end of the day the minister has to make that determination.
I think what our motion also said is that there are other things going on too. As you know, the Inco-Falconbridge merger--even though the marketplace is the proper and appropriate place to determine these things in the private sector--is going through some regulatory assessments elsewhere, i.e. in the United States and Europe.
Europe has taken eight months to figure out whether or not an Inco-Falconbridge merger is going to have a positive or a negative impact on Europe. The United States is also doing the same thing. Here we are saying let's take at least 75 days essentially to determine whether or not this is the best scenario for Canada.
So the motion does two things. One is to say to the minister, delay doing anything until you do all of the things that are required under Investment Canada, and take the full 75 days, but more importantly, let's wait to see what the international community is saying about Inco-Falconbridge vis-à-vis Europe and the United States. If we're going to want a level playing field in this country, in terms of foreign investment, then maybe that's a subject of discussion for another day. In fact, as we try to build our manufacturing sector and look to all of those competitive issues, including what's happening internationally, then at least we and the minister should not make a decision until such time as other regulatory bodies around the country, around the world, essentially determine something that two Canadian companies want to do.
So I think when Colin says “all options”, I'm not sure there are a whole bunch of options, other than gathering the information, doing the net benefit test, and at the same time, as the motion says, waiting for the international community to assess what's happening with regard to Inco and Falconbridge. That is the level playing field that I think Canadians would expect, that this committee should expect, and that the minister should want. And I think we're all on the same page.
But I'm not sure what “all options” means. So if you had some views as to what “all options” would be, I'd like to hear them.