Thank you for that question.
First, let me say that you are right that northern Ontario was probably the hardest hit part of the country in the last recession and is the slowest to recover. You can appreciate that that bothers my minister, who's also from your part of the country.
In fact, in the IFIT program, which in its first iteration actually had no projects in northern Ontario, in its final outcome we actually did have two big projects in northern Ontario, and in both of those cases, it was the private sector that pulled out. They pulled out in a couple of cases very, very close to the end of the fiscal year, which was problematic for redirecting the funds. There are issues of confidence in northern Ontario. There are issues of the role of the private sector and what it's doing or not doing and its relationship with the provincial government, and while the Government of Canada has, I believe, played the appropriate role that we can play, we cannot solve all of those issues.
The issue of tenure, as you rightly pointed out, is absolutely not an issue which the Government of Canada has any responsibility for, and we would not normally get involved in any way in a transaction like that. My sense of that is it's fairly complicated, and in practice, the sale of the mill was a private company selling an asset that it owned to another private company, and I think even in the case of the Government of Ontario, it would have had a limited role. That was a transaction between two private companies. Certainly, it would appear to be unfortunate that that transaction did not go through, but I do not see an appropriate role for the Government of Canada in a case like that.