Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I must say I'm finding this an interesting session. I'm not here to defend or criticize the company--it sounds as though they have made more than their share of mistakes and are due for a certain element of criticism--but I'm interested in making sure that Canada defends the rule of law and meets its international obligations. I'm interested in improving our legislation for future times when this might happen, because this case is moving on. It particularly interests me--as some of the witnesses have stated--that international investors get more protection under chapter 11 than domestic investors will get under domestic legislation for their properties in cases of expropriation, and so forth.
My question is to our lawyer friends here. Can you give me a basic understanding--I'm a non-lawyer--as to what protections there are for property from expropriation, etc., under chapter 11, under domestic law, and who actually receives more protection? Is it fairly equal; if not, why? Would it be very advisable to make it more equal?
I know you could probably do a third-year law class on that, but do your best in four minutes.