This is part of the problem. I know the national security reviews that I have been involved in, but I don't know the national security reviews that others have been involved in. One can read media reports, one can speculate about reviews, but there's not a great data source about the number of reviews that have happened, what sort of process there was, who the foreign investor was, or what the subject matter of the investment was. That's precisely the sort of information that would be helpful to have.
We're not here today suggesting that it's inappropriate to have a national security review; quite the contrary, it is appropriate to have a review of foreign investments on the basis that they could be injurious to national security. Many other countries around the world have similar tests. What we are suggesting is that it would be helpful to have more disclosure about the types of reviews, the nature of reviews, etc., so that we can advise our clients and be aware of them.
That said, anecdotally—I can speak from my own experience—reviews are happening, and it seems that they're happening more frequently than we believe they are or than the public is aware that they are happening. There is a scrutiny of foreign investment on the basis of national security, including the review of very small transactions.
So we believe that those sorts of reviews are happening, but we would welcome increased transparency to be able to better understand.