Thank you very much, Chair.
I will be sharing my time with Mr. Trost.
In the same spirit that Mr. Julian saw fit to have Mr. Sinclair be his sole respondent, I might actually give Mr. McMahon some balanced time on this issue, just so that we get a thoughtful and balanced perspective.
It's rather interesting; as I've heard the testimony, the main actors in this situation, of course, are the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador—I dare not say, Mr. Simms, the “republic”, as it's a bit early to call it that--as well as AbitibiBowater and the Government of Canada. Lest we forget, the tragedy in this is the tragedy that it came to pass at all. I don't think it's the ultimate outcome that anyone would have wished.
As I think about this whole circumstance, what we have is a rules-based system that allows companies to properly become engaged in legal contracts. Should there be disputes, then we have a dispute settlement mechanism that creates outcomes. As I think of it, in the absence of a rules-based system, to me it asks the question of what the expectation would be.
Mr. McMahon, you made the point, and I think it's a very good one, that if we expect fairness in Canadian business dealings internationally, without the rule of law being maintained, particularly in trade, how would you strike that balance? In other words, what would Canadian businesses expect abroad in terms of their dealings?
Could you expand on that just a little bit for us, please?