Thank you for your question.
First, the comment about the potential impact the bill could have on Canada's reputation is more about the calculation of the administrative monetary penalty that could be imposed in the event of abuse of dominant position, as proposed in the bill.
Essentially, the concern is related to the method of calculation. Professor Quaid already mentioned it, I believe. It can be hard to calculate the benefit from a problematic practice. The calculation takes into account up to 3% of the company's revenues, but is not limited to revenues generated by or linked to activities in Canada.
The fear is thus related to the calculation of a fine. The need to increase the value used in the calculation can certainly be debated; the maximum is $10 million for a first offence. However, it's problematic to have a new cap that could be calculated based on worldwide revenues, depending on the company in question. We believe that there must at least be a discussion to better identify what we're talking about, particularly as relates to the calculation of the penalty based on a figure of 3% of the company's revenues.
I believe that Canada's reputation could be tarnished if, going forward, the calculation was based on all of a company's worldwide revenues without any impact for Canadians.