Thank you. I'm glad to have another round.
I just have to follow up on what Mr. Lake said. It's bizarre to me to characterize the Prime Minister and the industry minister as “commentators”. They are decision-makers: people who are supposed to be crafting the direction of government and policy.
On the case of the Investment Canada Act reviews and what happened in the past in previous Parliaments, I do believe that a study actually had been started but then got cut short when the Prime Minister broke his own fixed election date legislation to call an election in 2008.
Moving to the present, we have had in Parliament a motion that was passed by all parties to engage in a thorough study of the Investment Canada Act, as well as a motion passed by this committee itself. As the Conservatives are in the majority position, they're the ones who dictate when, where, and what we are going to study as a committee.
The fact that the Investment Canada Act, despite there being large cases with Petronas and CNOOC-Nexen next year.... This government has decided in fact to not engage in a thorough review and study of the act. Instead, all we have are two meetings to deal with rather large and substantive changes to the act.
Earlier in Mr. Regan's questions, you mentioned capital confidences and the issue of not being able to say who with or where consultations have been done. The Minister of Industry, when he was here a couple of weeks ago, spoke of round tables that have been done. How many round tables have actually been done in consultations with stakeholders in regard to these changes that have been brought forward in the budget implementation bill?