Thank you.
I just look at the way the U.S. right now has published a sensitive technology list. Right now, the U.S. has this list of sensitive technologies where they say you cannot get involved with exporting this or getting foreign direct investment from certain agencies into these types of technologies. We do not.
Because the U.S. is our closest trading partner and such an important security partner for us, it would be foolish for anybody in my business to get involved with those kinds of exchanges with countries that may be suspect in terms of using it as dual technologies or being able to funnel it into some other purpose. I think one of the things that I am always cautious of, and it goes back to some of the common themes you've heard from all of us, is that transparency and certainty in process really helps all of us, so those are the kinds of things that I'd be looking for.
Just to reinforce that idea about preconditions that are going to be described in some form of regulation that are not yet described, you're asking us to look at a bill that hasn't set out those prescribed conditions that we need to really know more about the bill in order to be able to say whether this is a good thing or a bad thing before we can close an FDI.
We have scalable FDI so I just think, again, certainty and transparency are so important for investor confidence and without them they're not coming here.
If I may, I'll finish by saying an opportunity lost is not felt by this country, as opposed to, say, a closing of a factory or something that is more real and more tangible, but we are missing out on tremendous amounts of opportunity coming into this country because of the uncertainty the investor feels about Canada and the regulations that we have.
Thank you.