Industry committee  That's a challenging question. In many cases, it's actually an accountancy question. Different companies book intangibles differently. Sometimes they're booked as an asset. Sometimes they're booked as an asset at a fairly low value. Then there's also the notion of fair market value.

Industry committee  Again, that's an accountancy question. Generally speaking, it is often for the purpose of the sale, or it's the transaction value, which will in some cases be a more realistic assessment of fair market value than, perhaps, a low book value. In many cases, companies have to prepare reports or do a detailed accounting prior to engaging in a sale, or the purchaser may do a fair market value assessment of the intangible assets.

Industry committee  Again, this is different from the national security provisions, which would apply to sectors regardless of the value. This is more of what might trigger a net benefit review in terms of that, but I think in many cases, for the enterprise value test that's used under the net benefit test, the thresholds capture the fair market value versus the book value of the assets.

Industry committee  It depends on the interest that the non-Canadian has. Again, the goal is not a critical mineral. I believe the acquisition of a controlling non-Canadian stake in a Canadian mining operation, in many cases, would be or could be subject to the Investment Canada Act, whether that be the general provisions or the national security provisions.

Industry committee  I think the government has improved its guidance historically, but I still think there is probably room for further improvement. It's difficult to come up with guidance, but I think if you look at jurisdictions like the U.K., Australia and the U.S, my view is that they have far more and more detailed guidance than has historically been the case with regard to the Investment Canada Act.

Industry committee  Here is a 33-page national security guidance document from the Australian regulator. It's very detailed guidance—

Industry committee  I think Canada is a bit behind. I don't think we're so far behind that we can't catch up. I think the issue, from a national security perspective, isn't so much the impact of AI on the Canadian economy or individual Canadians, but is rather about making sure that investment in AI is done by people who are compatible from a national security perspective.

Industry committee  I'm not suggesting that the folks employed by or who staff the IRD are not very qualified. What I think is that they have a particular skill set. To make the IRD more effective, if the IRD is going to have a bigger role in assessing national security issues, you have to ensure that additional capacity and capabilities are brought to the IRD.

Industry committee  The minister is already required to consult with the national security apparatus in assessing whether a transaction could raise issues. The issue is that right now—and this is the perception, because I'm not an insider—sometimes there is a bit of a disjoint or disconnection between the two and that perhaps the process, because of that, is not as efficient as it could be.

Industry committee  Yes. I think there are two things. One, it is in a regulation. All we have are guidelines on the application of the national security review provisions. The guidelines are non-binding. They are very high-level, so I think we should, if we are going to provide much-needed clarity and transparency, adopt something similar to what's been done either in the U.S. or, perhaps, in the U.K.

Industry committee  I have the same response as Mr. Bhattacharjee.

Industry committee  Yes. Basically, I don't keep count.

Industry committee  I have no idea.

Industry committee  In the U.S., the definition in the regulations is a U.S. TID business, with TID being short for sensitive technology, infrastructure and data. That is defined under the regulations that are applied through the CFIUS process.

Industry committee  I think there are issues in your question that are far broader than the Investment Canada Act. I think it's important for the Investment Canada Act to be calibrated, including the national security provision, in such a way that it doesn't deter good foreign investment that's in line with Canadian national security interests.