The previous regulatory changes or proposals under the previous government involved very extensive consultation and engagement with stakeholders. I find the 15 days unacceptable. The minister has put this committee in a position where we've been effectively excluded from the opportunity to be engaged in learning more about this as legislators. In fact, the stakeholders themselves were not engaged sufficiently and early enough.
Later I will be proposing a motion that the committee send a letter to the minister expressing our disappointment in that lack of consultation, and that in future cases the industry committee itself should be used as part of the outreach for these kinds of consultations with stakeholders. We are perfectly positioned as a committee to constructively help the government evaluate these. If you look at pre-budget consultations and use the finance committee as an example, there are ways we can help contribute to sound government policy. We were effectively excluded from this.
I have concerns, after regulations have been gazetted, about the message they send to the investment and international community on our commitment to patent protection--to effectively seek a further extension once the regulations have been gazetted. So I will not be supporting Ms. Nash's motion, but I will be proposing a motion later that the committee express to the minister very directly that this lack of consultation and engagement of the committee is something we do not want to see again.