My colleague's comments are somewhat simple because certain things must be done quickly and others must be done properly. The only positive effect of the delay in this project is that Panama has come off the grey list. That is already an improvement. The Americans signed before us most likely because Panama gave them guarantees with regard to what could be done to share tax information.
The other day, the ambassador talked about the Panama Canal as a mature or almost mature project. One of the things being developed is the Panama Metro. Are those people improvising or are they making long-term plans? I am sure that, if they want to build a metro in Panama City, they have probably thought about it and obtained estimates from a number of businesses from around the world. Bombardier is not the only company involved. If an agreement is signed, that does not mean that Bombardier will automatically have the contract. There are other companies from around the world that may be much more competitive.
We should not be blinded by the opportunity for unrealistic contracts, as we have sort of missed out on the canal expansion. Had we been involved 10 or 12 years ago, when Panama was talking about expanding the canal and the initiative was still in a draft stage, perhaps we would be in a great position. However, I have a feeling that the projet is now fairly advanced and the only thing left might be large crumbs, but crumbs nonetheless.
What do you think Mr. MacKay?