Foreign Affairs committee  Thank you for recognizing me. I think one could reasonably take the view that it would have been better to keep the development of Radarsat-2 vested entirely within the government agency, the Canadian Space Agency, rather than constructing the private-public partnership that was used to build Radarsat-2.

Foreign Affairs committee  I certainly take the view that the second-largest country on earth should have surveillance ability of its territory at all times, including at night, which is why we built the Radarsat technology rather than optical technology. This technology is made-in-Canada technology for a reason, because of the nature of our country and the fact that the Arctic is in complete darkness for some months each year.

Foreign Affairs committee  I think Mr. Prentice has to stick by his decision. In fact, any uncertainty he's created in the market would only be exacerbated if he flipped back and allowed the sale to proceed. What he has done is that he has made the right decision, but he's done so with an act that is not a 21st century investment act.

Foreign Affairs committee  I think the answer to that is that there are some public goods that private industry will not provide on its own. That is why Radarsat-2 was built through this public-private partnership. One could conceive of other things being subject to the net benefit test and not passing that test even if there was no government involvement, but that simply is not the issue and is not really conceivable with respect to a remote sensing satellite of this kind.

Foreign Affairs committee  Thank you very much. Thank you for inviting me to speak and for allowing me to do so by video conference today. By staying in Vancouver, I'm able to address another even more intimidating audience later this afternoon in the form of 150 undergraduate students. The issue of Canada-U.S. relations is very close to my heart.

Foreign Affairs committee  Thank you for those very pertinent questions. On the Northwest Passage, I think both countries have tenable arguments. I wouldn't want to litigate this because the risks of losing would be too high, and I believe the United States would take the exact same view, that this should be dealt with through negotiation, not litigation or arbitration.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes, I do.

Foreign Affairs committee  The European countries you're referring to are all partners in NATO. If the two North American partners in NATO decided they had to do this for a security reason, I'm quite confident that our European allies would fall into line, particularly if, as part of this agreement, we made a firm commitment to allow any reputable international shipping company to use the passage within the constraints of reasonable environmental and safety regulations.

Foreign Affairs committee  Thank you very much. It is the Arctic Council, an international organization created thanks to Canada and specifically Lloyd Axworthy, former Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Foreign Affairs committee  On the Antarctic, you're right, there is a comprehensive multilateral treaty governing that continent. But one has to remember that the Arctic is not a continent. The Arctic is largely an ocean. It's a very different situation from Antarctica. The treaty that I referred to in response to your colleague's question, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, is therefore the dominant governing instrument for the Arctic.

Foreign Affairs committee  In 2007, just a year and a half ago, planet earth lost 1.2 million square kilometres of Arctic sea ice. I spend a lot of time speaking to international experts on climate change and sea ice, and we can expect a similar pace of change in the years ahead, to the point where my colleague David Barber, who holds a Canada research chair in the study of sea ice at the University of Manitoba, is predicting that in late summer around 2013 we will see an ice-free Arctic Ocean.

Foreign Affairs committee  That's a difficult question. It's a sensitive question. I'll give you a straight response, which is that a decentralized country like Canada does sacrifice some of its weight in the world by not speaking with one voice. Countries like the United Kingdom or France, which are relatively unified central states, do punch above their weight in international affairs, and Canada has lost some of its weight over the last couple of decades as we've decentralized our Confederation.

Foreign Affairs committee  It's a wonderful question, and it enables me to raise the point that some ships actually travel submerged and the issue of submarine transits of the Northwest Passage is a very pertinent issue, particularly because the Los Angeles Times last Saturday reported that a U.S. nuclear-powered submarine from Norfolk, Virginia, is going to be participating in an exercise north of Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, in the next couple of weeks.

Foreign Affairs committee  Oh, I'm a big proponent of international dialogue and as many ties as possible. But there's a difference between having lots of international ties and actually sitting across the table from another country's representatives and actually negotiating a deal on a critical issue of foreign policy.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes, absolutely. I think we do ourselves and the United States a disservice by postponing diplomatic engagement on this issue. Postponing diplomatic engagement was a viable option 20 years ago, before the ice started to melt. But during the last two summers the Northwest Passage has been wide open.