Industry Committee on March 24th, 2011

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Are there any political criteria that you apply to...?

[Sandy Walker]

There's a section in there that refers to national and industrial and economic policies of the federal government or the provincial government; of course, it doesn't say political considerations.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

What is the role of the provinces in the current legislation? Do you see a need for that to change? Do you like it the way it is? I don't know what the actual role is.

We certainly heard from the Premier of Saskatchewan during the PotashCorp issue, but I'm not sure what the role of the province is, and I'd be happy to hear--

[Sandy Walker]

When making the decision, the federal minister has to take provincial policies into account. It's in the act. I'm not within the federal government, but from what I understand, the people within the investment review division at Industry Canada seek the views of their counterparts in relevant provincial departments. For example, if it's an energy deal, they might speak to the energy department in the Province of Alberta. There's already that consultation.

Do I think there should be joint decision-making by the provinces in which the assets are located and the federal government? I think it's a federal government jurisdictional issue, although I've heard arguments about the provinces having power over energy resources, natural resources, etc.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Maybe I misunderstood what you said, but based on the current act, I would interpret it that compared to what other countries are doing, we're fairly flexible and maybe don't have as many legislative barriers in terms of sectors that you can't touch, and so on.

Does that not make Canada a more open location for foreign investment?

[Sandy Walker]

I don't know that I said they were.... What I said was that the Investment Canada Act looks like general framework legislation, and it may look more daunting than that of some other countries that may look carefully at specific sectors. Despite the Investment Canada Act, I think Canada has generally been viewed by foreign investors as a fairly open place, but there have been these hiccups along the way. When foreign investors see that, they wonder what's going to happen next.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Wallace and Madam Walker.

Mr. Masse, I see you there as a regular member, but I understand that Mr. Gravelle has signed in.

Mr. Gravelle, you have seven minutes.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In your opening statement you used the word “transparency” quite a bit. Do you think that when a foreign company is taking over a Canadian company, they should be transparent with the communities in which they are buying this Canadian company? Do you think they should be transparent with the workers and with all the other industry people involved?

[Sandy Walker]

In what specific sense do you mean transparent?

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

I mean in telling us what their plans are for the future and for the workers. In the case of a mine, it would be how they are going to develop future mines.

[Sandy Walker]

I think it's up to the company, as opposed to having the government dictate how the company addresses it. In certain instances you may have transparency. For a public company, for example--

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

If you know of any foreign companies that have been transparent in the process, could you supply us with a list of them? We certainly don't know of any that have been transparent in the past.

[Sandy Walker]

As I said before, I think you may find the extent of the transparency in press releases that were issued by the government or in the company press releases related to it, and in some cases they don't provide much detail.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Presently only the industry minister is involved with the negotiations with a foreign company that is taking over a Canadian company. Do you think it would be the right thing to get this industry committee involved in negotiations? Without telling us the trade secrets, would it not be better if we had all these elected officials helping to make this a good decision for the country?

[Sandy Walker]

Probably not; I think you need to—

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

So we're useless, then?

[Sandy Walker]

No, but I think this is a decision of the minister, and it might well slow down the process, which already takes quite a long time.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

So you don't think elected officials could help the minister make a good, sound decision?

[Sandy Walker]

Well, maybe in theory they could, but I think it might lengthen the process. Also, there is a consultation process with the provinces provided for in the act, and someone with a view on a particular transaction can make submissions, as we saw in the matter of the PotashCorp decision. There were lots of opinions about that transaction that people were able to communicate to the government.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Transparency in that case is just a one-way street; it doesn't work both ways. The company doesn't have to be transparent with the minister, and they don't have to be transparent with the communities. They don't have to be transparent with this committee—

[Sandy Walker]

No, I'm sorry; the company in negotiations with the government does have to indicate what their plans are, etc. There is transparency there. There has to be; otherwise, you can't arrive at plans and undertakings.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

You said a while ago that you were surprised that the Potash Corporation takeover was rejected, but if the shoe had been on the other foot and PotashCorp were buying BHP Billiton from Australia, that would have been rejected outright.

[Sandy Walker]

That's what some people say.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

In the case of Inco and Vale, when Vale purchased Inco, if the shoe had been on the other foot, Inco would have been rejected outright. You can't buy there.