Thank you, Chair and guests. Thank you for being here, Mr. Globerman, and yourself, for making the effort.
I've spent a considerable amount of my time as a member of Parliament going back well before 1995 into the subtle changes in the terms of the Broadcasting Act. Notwithstanding the fact that a decision was made to do a one-off with respect to Globalive, I'm not sure any of us here really had any interest in or had heard a lot about the need for foreign ownership in terms of telecommunications. So I'm wondering if this is in fact a problem that is in search of a solution, rather than vice versa.
Four years ago the government chose to short-circuit competition in the telecom industry in its forbearance decision. I'm wondering how much of that forbearance decision to short-circuit and to prevent new competition from coming in, particularly in wireless, is the reason we're having this discussion today. I'd welcome any observations you have in that regard.
The second question I would have is to you, Mr. Globerman. You have the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, which is extremely powerful and can be used in certain circumstances, whether there's a question of foreign ownership or investment or not.
I'm wondering, given that we have a Competition Act written by some very large dominant players in Canada with very few significant amendments, headed by an individual who was responsible for creating a merger in the propane industry when she was working in the private sector, do you feel comfortable with the assertion that our Competition Act is up to snuff?
More importantly, do you believe that Canada has the regulatory wherewithal to prevent a dominant position from taking place, where assets in Canada can simply be scooped up with very limited protections and wind up in fact preventing Canadians from getting access to international technologies in the wonderful world that you paint for us?