Thank you.
The issue of foreign direct investment is something that can be looked at from two perspectives. One is that where there is value and mutual business interests, significant investments will occur. So I would echo the testimony of Professor Zhan about the relatively low level of business investment right now between our two economies. There is much more potential, particularly in the infrastructure sector for Canada and in the energy sector here in Canada for Indian investors. Significant investments are of course preceding the FIPA. We have some very dynamic joint ventures happening between Canadian and Indian financial services firms, and very dynamic exchanges of benefits in the ICT sector. Again, I thought the testimony of Professor Zhan was spot on about the mutual benefits around various aspects of the value chain in manufacturing.
With that being said, the FIPA is something that gives investors and businesses a level of confidence that their governments are also fully aligned with their private sector investments. In this case, there are international courts that can help settle disputes and there are of course domestic courts. But the FIPA would bring weight to it. The Canadian government is a huge aspect of our competitive value-added in the world. The government in and of itself, its regulations, activities, dynamism, openness, and the rule of law, brings huge value-added to Canada as a destination, as a location, and as a global platform for business.
If I could speak briefly to the FIPA in India, it's my understanding that negotiations have been concluded for some time. But example if one were to compare the current draft FIPA with other FIPAs, there may be some interest in ensuring that the FIPA is at the same level of a comprehensive package as previous FIPAs. Each one does respond to the market dynamics in each country. I believe that India is taking a very close look at its regime in light of some specific cases that it has seen to ensure that the FIPA meets its domestic interests.