Carlos Leitão
Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, Quebec · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, this government's record is that it has created a very resilient economy. Despite headwinds from the south, our economy continues to grow. In fact, last week I encouraged my opposition colleagues to check out the C.D. Howe Institute's Business Cycle Council. I would again encourage them to do so. They should read its report.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are going to keep going. Canadians know that, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, 5,000 small businesses closed their doors. Canadians know that the Canadian economy is under pressure from the United States. No, that is not an excuse. I heard my colleagues say that the international context is an excuse.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that in May, we created 88,000 jobs. Canadians know that in May, there were 154,000 full-time jobs. Canadians know that 27,000 of these jobs were in the construction sector. Canadians know that the trade surplus grew in April and May.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time. It is my turn to speak to Bill C-30 , which seeks to implement the economic update. I want to address several issues, but, first, I want to talk about why we are doing things a bit differently here today.”
“It concerns the April 28 economic update, which contains a number of very useful and very important measures for our economy. I suspect I may run out of time, but before I talk about those measures, I want to address a few problems that have been mentioned today in the conversations and in the debates that we have had here so far.”
“(1900) We are making this commitment because the world is a different place now. Today, our situation is very delicate. Our biggest trade and economic partner is also our neighbour: the United States. It is a partner that has very plainly and clearly told us that it does not need what Canada has to offer.”
The complete record
Every one of 374 lines we hold for Carlos Leitão, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 8.
“Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. I also commend his party, since he said that the Bloc Québécois will be voting against the Conservative motion. In that regard, we are on the same wavelength. There are, of course, many other things my colleague mentioned that I do not fully agree with. There is just one aspect that I would like him to clarify for me. He said that the government's measures are just giving the impression of helping people. Does my colleague think that the Canada groceries and essentials benefit is just giving the impression of helping? That benefit will help 12 million Canadians starting on June 5.”
“Mr. Speaker, before I ask my question, there is something that the members opposite have been saying over and over again, which is that, in 2014, oil prices were what they are now and gasoline prices were much lower. That is just not correct. It is factually incorrect. Perhaps they should stop saying that. Oil prices started 2014 at $100 a barrel, and they closed the year at $57. That was the year of shale oil in the U.S. There were massive oil inventories, and that is why gasoline prices came way down. It is not the taxes. Come on. (1040) [ Translation ] My question is about support for families. [ English ] Does my colleague think assistance to families should be targeted, or should it be generalized so that rich people get the same relief as poor people?”
“Mr. Speaker, what we have said from the outset is that the world we knew before and our relationship with the United States have changed for good. We said that this was not just a minor, temporary situation, that it was a major change and that we would get the best deal possible. That is what we always try to do.”
“Mr. Speaker, yes, it is hugely important, because our objective is not just to get rid of the tariffs, which is important enough, obviously. We also want to have a comprehensive trade agreement, which we do. CUSMA is still in place. We want to reinforce that agreement and make sure it prevails. Second, we want to put an end to the tariffs that have been illegally imposed on a country that has signed a trade agreement with the United States. That is where we are. That is why it is so important. We cannot remain vulnerable to having tariffs imposed at any time, for any reason. That makes absolutely no sense. The tariffs are ultimately illegal and counterproductive.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is true that the forestry sector, whether in Quebec, New Brunswick, Ontario or British Columbia, is suffering a great deal. As we certainly know, the problems in the forestry sector are a little different from those in the manufacturing sector. This trade dispute has been going on for a very long time. Nevertheless, we remain fully committed to reaching a negotiated agreement with the United States, specifically on forestry products. The negotiations are moving forward.”
“Mr. Speaker, that is indeed the case. In fact, regional development agencies are already doing this. Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions has just received additional funding to support SMEs with smaller amounts than that. This will be done through the regional economic development agencies.”
“Mr. Speaker, our exports to Europe are starting to grow quite rapidly. We have natural resources that Europeans need, but we are now also beginning to see the benefits of the free trade agreement with the European Union. That agreement was negotiated several years ago, and it took us some time because the various governments, both here and there, did not seem particularly interested in developing this free trade agreement. However, it is beginning to bear fruit. The future for Canadian manufactured goods in Europe is very promising.”
“Mr. Speaker, obviously I disagree totally with what our colleague just mentioned. In fact right from the start, from the election campaign, our Prime Minister has said, and we repeat it very often, that this was a rupture and that the world as we knew it would no longer be the same. We also kept on saying that a bad deal would be worse than no deal. We stand by those principles.”
“Mr. Speaker, there is a wide range of support measures for the various industries. We are not just talking about loans. Many other measures have been put in place since last summer, and we will continue that work. We are working on two parallel tracks. For now, we are working on emergency measures, but, in the medium term, we are also working on more structural measures to diversify markets and capture new ones.”
“That is why we are going to take whatever time is necessary, and no more, to reach the best possible agreement with the U.S., because the goal is to get rid of these tariffs and retain access to the U.S. market. However, we are not going to do so at any cost. We have our limits, after all. Although we are not going to discuss these limits publicly—that would be counterproductive—there are some things we will not do. Over the longer term, we must relentlessly build a stronger domestic market and penetrate new foreign markets. Canada is not backing down. Together, we are meeting every challenge not out of fear, but to take action, show resilience and demonstrate optimism.”
“The Government of Canada has a role to play, as do the governments of Quebec, Ontario and the other provinces, so that we can continue to support businesses in their efforts to diversify. I truly believe that this will pay off in the medium term. We keep hearing that the situation with the United States not having been resolved yet is a failure on our part. I would like to remind our colleagues that many other countries, including European countries, rushed to sign agreements with the United States. What happened? New tariffs were tacked on European automobiles just last week. The EU thought it had an agreement with the United States, but no, apparently not. In the EU, it is raining new tariffs. That is why we have been saying for so long that a bad agreement is worse than no agreement at all.”
“That is the crux of the issue because a lot of SMEs in Quebec and Ontario specialize in products made with metal precisely because we have primary steel and primary aluminum. They redeveloped the existing metal product manufacturing sector, which was meeting with great success in the North American supply chain. I will now address the third part of the motion, which we view as a bit problematic. It proposes that the House express concern that this new trade environment will have irreparable effects on the manufacturing sector. Yes, this will have a very serious impact, but I hope we will be able to respond in time to support the industry as it seeks new markets and I hope we can avoid irreparable effects. The manufacturing sector has proven itself to be very resilient. Obviously, the government has a role to play.”
“Once construction is complete, the increased capacity of the Port of Montreal will open up opportunities for other Canadian and Quebec-based companies, especially those located near Contrecoeur, to gain faster access to foreign markets, particularly European markets. (1045) Getting back to our Bloc Québécois colleagues' motion, let us look at the first point: That the House condemn the imposition of new United States tariffs that came into force on April 6, 2026, as contrary to the principles of free trade. I am sure we all agree on that. By definition, tariffs are contrary to the principles of free trade. Here is the second point: That the House note that the application of additional tariffs on the full value of products containing steel, aluminum or copper is affecting a growing number of businesses, particularly SMEs.”
“This is a very concrete example of how the Canadian government can support innovative companies that are gaining an increasing share of the Canadian market. Not far from there, the Hitachi Energy plant in Varennes also received government support to not only modernize but also ramp up production of its very large transformers, which are also vital to our power grid. We help and support Canadian and Quebec businesses that want to expand, compete in new markets and gain a larger market share. In this vein, the expansion of the Port of Montreal in Contrecoeur will gain significant momentum. Moreover, the construction of the port itself will create jobs in the region.”
“It is an integral part of Canada's economic industrial strategy. In the short term, we will be providing liquidity to support and stabilize our businesses. In the medium term, we will be helping them adapt and pivot to be more competitive internationally. I would now like to take a moment to briefly review what we are already doing. We offer not only emergency assistance, but also the resources and policies needed to support businesses so they can look beyond their current operations, diversify, and explore other markets. Last year, on Montreal's south shore, GE Vernova in Sorel received government support to secure public contracts for its very large turbines used for electricity generation.”
“We are taking concrete action to strengthen Canada's economy by standing behind our steel, aluminum and copper industries. The new measures announced yesterday will protect workers and ensure companies have the tools and financing they need to keep operating, growing, and strengthening all the businesses in Canada. They will also keep production lines running and help our businesses transform and modernize in response to future market conditions. Canadian steel, aluminum and copper manufacturers are resilient. Our workers are qualified and well trained. Our businesses are ready to compete on the world stage with the right support. Through these investments, the Government of Canada is standing shoulder to shoulder with Canadian businesses and workers. This is not just a response.”
“In addition, there will be no interest for the first three years; interest will start after that. Interest rates are at preferential rates. The BDC will focus on businesses that were viable prior to direct exposure to tariff measures in order to give them financial breathing room to weather the temporary cash crunch. (1040) The government expects Canada's financial institutions to continue to work with the businesses as we lean in collectively to support this sector. This new program aligns with the government's priority to provide rapid liquidity to viable businesses facing significant economic challenges as a result of these U.S. tariffs. These tariffs are unjustified, arbitrary and ultimately counterproductive for the Americans themselves, but that is a whole other story.”
“Administered directly by the Business Development Bank of Canada, or BDC, the program will offer loans to affected businesses that make significant use of these metals in their production. The BDC program will therefore provide financing at favourable terms to allow businesses to address immediate pressures. The bank will also offer the industry a new tool to transform and adapt to future market conditions and opportunities. The BDC will offer working capital loans scaled to fit the size of businesses and their needs, from $2 million up to $50 million, with repayment conditions at preferential rates over 36 months. It is important to remember that, for the first year, there will be no obligation to repay the loan. Repayment will not start until after that.”
“A wide variety of products are affected, and they are part of the broader industrial supply chains within critical Canadian manufacturing activities. This potential disruption could have a substantially negative impact on the Canadian economy. I quite like the expression used by my colleague, the member for Joliette—Manawan , who said that U.S. tariff policy has shifted from targeted measures to blanket measures. I think that is where we are now. Consequently, the Government of Canada is working with urgency to transform our strategic industries so they can adapt, compete and win in this new global environment. To this end, the government has launched a $1-billion support program for industries that manufacture and export products containing steel, aluminum or copper.”
“The impact of these changes will likely be felt more strongly in products where metal makes up a significant part of the weight relative to the value of the good. Companies operating in Canada-U.S. integrated manufacturing networks will be the hardest hit, particularly when contracts are fixed, margins are thin, and short-term adjustments are difficult, if not impossible, to make. In these situations, the tariff burden will rise sharply and put immediate pressure on business viability. Many of the affected companies are now facing an immediate cash flow problem and cannot adapt quickly enough to absorb these costs. In fact, I believe that this tariff rate makes it nearly impossible for these companies to absorb these costs. The potential impact of these changes is not limited to direct producers of metals or metal derivatives.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in the debate on the Bloc Québécois motion concerning U.S. tariffs on Canadian aluminum, steel and copper. We are at a critical juncture for Canada's future. Canada's thriving steel and aluminum industries are facing unprecedented tariffs. The adjustments made by the U.S. on April 6, 2026, to its tariffs on products containing steel, aluminum or copper risk undermining our advanced industrial capacity and our critical supply chains across Canada, and particularly in Quebec and Ontario. The revised tariff measures have significantly increased the burden on many manufacturers by applying duties to the total value of the product rather than just its metal content.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canada's debt stands at the figure that my colleague mentioned, or 41% of the GDP. That is one of the most manageable levels of debt in the G7. Now, I have a question for my colleague. Where do the Conservatives want to make cuts? What programs do they want to eliminate? Will they reduce old age security benefits? Will they cut the $8 billion that goes to the Canada child benefit? Where would you make cuts? Tell us.”
“Mr. Speaker, businesses in Quebec and across Canada are facing difficulties. Where do these difficulties stem from? They stem from the tariff war. They stem from the excessive, unjustified and ultimately counterproductive tariffs that the Americans are imposing on Canadian businesses. That is the problem. That is why we must help businesses. That is why we are supporting businesses and spending what needs to be spent to keep our businesses alive.”
“Madam Speaker, I am proud to be part of a government that is investing heavily in our families. We have social programs. We have programs that our American neighbours do not have. We are proud to be able to preserve, maintain and build upon these programs. That is what sets Canada apart. It is what makes Canada Canada. We support one another. It is not every person for themselves. It is not survival of the fittest. We know that by working together, we will go further.”
“Madam Speaker, of course, issues related to the cost of food are very important. We are all saddened by the fact that some Canadian families have to turn to food banks to put food on the table. That is why we are making significant investments in social programs that help families, including the Canada child benefit. Thousands of families in every riding are getting thousands of dollars to help them get through these tough times. Social programs are important and they are what sets Canada apart—”
“Madam Speaker, yes, the situation is serious. Our neighbours continue to change the rules of the game arbitrarily. Although they are still our neighbours, they are completely unreliable. First, it is important to identify the source of the problem. It stems from our neighbours' completely senseless actions. We are putting the necessary programs in place to help our businesses get through this very difficult time. Announcements are coming soon. We need to remain flexible in how we provide support. We will be making announcements on this very soon.”
“Madam Speaker, yes, of course we realize the seriousness of the situation. I also gladly accept my colleague's offer to collaborate. Naturally, this situation results from the unjustified and unjustifiable U.S. tariffs, but also from products manufactured in Asia and dumped on our markets. Investigations are in progress and announcements will follow very soon.”
“Mr. Speaker, we have moved along several parallel tracks. We are trying to speed up major projects; this is very important. We have also put in place different programs to support Canadian businesses and companies affected directly by tariffs in the steel, aluminum, auto and copper industries, with direct assistance to those companies. We are also working, keeping in mind that Canadian families need assistance, need help, and we have put in place several social—”
“Mr. Speaker, what I meant to say, and what I did say, is that this formula, which determines the Canada health transfer escalator, is not permanent. It is a formula that is adjusted over time. I was present for the negotiations that led to the establishment of the formula at the time. This formula can always be adjusted; it can always be updated. If that is the intention of the federal and provincial governments in the years to come, so much the better. It can be done. We are not locked into a framework that cannot change; the framework can change.”
“Mr. Speaker, I can only speak for the finance committee, as I am a member. So far, we have been able to talk, we have been able to discuss and we have been able to reach consensus in that committee. If we can be an example to the other committees, so much the better, but things function and can function.”
“Mr. Speaker, yes, the Canadian economy is very resilient. Despite all the shocks that I mentioned, 2025 was actually a year of significant economic growth. We have been able so far to resist that fog of uncertainty. Going back to the sovereign wealth fund, the purpose of the sovereign wealth fund, as we define it here and as has been done in the case of Quebec, is to allow the state, the government, to be an equity partner in major projects. We want the Canadian public to be able to benefit from investing in those projects. We know that those projects will take 10, 20 or 30 years, but they will be very important for Canadian wealth. If Canadians can own a portion of those projects, that would be a major bonus. That is why we are setting up a sovereign wealth fund.”
“Mr. Speaker, concerning the Canada health transfer, a formula has been negotiated by the federal and provincial governments, and the amounts are indexed. What I can say is that negotiations and discussions will take place during upcoming federal-provincial meetings, and I am sure that this transfer formula will be updated during negotiations held in the years to come. The formula is not set in stone. It can and should be adapted.”
“Mr. Speaker, I did point out that was on net federal debt. I was not talking about the total debt, but if we want to include total debt, including the provinces, then we also have to look at the assets. There are many financial assets that the provinces also own, but if we want to look at debt, excluding the CPP, then the total Canadian federal debt is still around 40% of GDP, which is still one of the lowest in the OECD.”
“The government was running a deficit. It is not exactly the same thing, but it was created and it is a huge success. As for the CDPQ, it is important to bear in mind that it currently has a portfolio of approximately $90 billion in shares in Quebec companies. That is the model that we are going to use for the fund that we are setting up here today. That fund will enable us to invest directly in Canadian companies that will participate in developing projects of national interest. The government will be a partner and part owner in these projects. That is how we are going to create wealth and prosperity for all Canadians in the very long term.”
“[ Translation ] I would now like to address the House in French. I would like to talk about the best example out there with respect to the sovereign wealth fund, which we announced yesterday and which has not yet been created. We have been accused of having all kinds of ulterior motives, but we will begin the consultation and dialogue process with lots of stakeholders from across the Canadian economy to set this fund up properly. I think that one of the best examples is that of two Quebec-based funds. Anyone listening who is from Quebec surely knows what I am talking about. The first is the generations fund, which the Government of Quebec created nearly two decades ago. The second is the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, the CDPQ. When the Government of Quebec created the generations fund, it did not have a surplus either.”
“We are among the global leaders in artificial intelligence. (1630) We have many things that the world wants, things that we will continue to supply the world and things that will lessen our dependency on this one neighbour. I think I made the point that the time to invest and the time to use the Canadian fiscal capacity that we have is now, not five years from now. Five years from now will be too late. That is what we are doing. My other point, which is another part of the discussion we are having here today, concerns the sovereign wealth fund that we put in place. That is actually the purpose or theme of the Conservative motion. This will not be a surprise to any member, but we are going to vote against such a motion. Why is that? Many things have been said about this sovereign wealth fund we are creating.”
“Just this morning, before coming here, I was attending a seminar with folks from the Arctic Economic Council, which is based in Norway, where we shared many stories on development in the north and on ways to develop the north, particularly on ways to collaborate with our partners, be it Norway, Sweden, Finland or Denmark with Greenland. Those relationships are deepening. It is the same thing when we go to Europe and we talk to our European partners. They are very much interested in doing business with Canada, with investing in Canada. Canada has what the world needs at this point. We have critical minerals and more traditional minerals that are usually important these days, such as copper and nickel. We also have energy, both renewable and non-renewable energy, and a developed high-tech sector.”
“That partner will always be our neighbour. It will always be there. We cannot change geography, but we can no longer afford to be totally reliant on that one partner. We have to diversify our markets, diversify our exports and look toward other partners that share our values of having a predictable and rules-based world, which is something the current U.S. administration does not appear to favour very much. Those partners are in Europe, in the European Union. They are in the Asia-Pacific area, particularly in Japan and South Korea. They are also in South America, with Mexico and with things such as Mercosur. Yes, we are working hard to diversify our markets, form new alliances and form new partnerships with other partners.”
“This is the time that the government is putting forward different policies, different ways to support the economy and to reshape the Canadian economy to make sure we find new partners and new markets for our products to lessen our dependency on the United States. This is another big difference between our view of the world and the Conservatives' view of the world. The Conservatives' view of the world and of what is going on in the United States is that what is going on in the United States right now is not very nice, but not to worry, because Mr. Trump will not be there forever and things will go back to normal. Well, we say that no, things will not go back to normal. Protectionism in the United States will remain a strong force. If we have learned anything from all this, it is that that partner is not reliable.”
“The big difference is that we think this is the time when governments must be ready and willing to intervene, ready and willing to support the economy. The worst thing that could be done at this time, the worst thing that could be done in 2026, in public policy, economic policy and fiscal policy, would be to run an austerity budget, to cut $30 billion to $40 billion out of the Canadian budget at this time. This would be the worst thing that we could do. This would be the perfect recipe to trigger a recession. This is the time to intervene. The world has changed, and this is the time that action is required. This is the time we are intervening.”
“That is not on the horizon for the time being, but it is always a possibility. We live, as the director of the IMF has put it, in a state of profound uncertainty. The fog of uncertainty is, indeed, extremely dense at this time, which has an impact on the economy, on prospects going forward and on government policy. (1625) This is where there is a major difference in the way we view things and the way the Conservatives view things. The Conservatives view the world as if none of this has happened, as if these shocks did not really exist and anything that has happened is all the fault of the Liberals. Of course, it is the Liberals who went on and bombed Iran. It is the Liberals who closed the Strait of Hormuz. It is the Liberals who caused COVID. Hey, why not?”
“Then, as if that was not enough, when we thought we were back to a more even keel, there was the war in the Middle East, and the price of crude oil has now doubled. If we think about it, in two months, from the end of February until now, crude oil prices have gone from about $60 a barrel to $120 a barrel. That has some impact on prices, on inflation, on energy prices and on gasoline prices. Another big risk is that this may trigger another inflationary spiral. According to the Bank of Canada yesterday, there is no evidence of that yet. It left its policy rate unchanged because, for the moment at least, the risks seem to be well balanced, but of course, the central bank will remain very vigilant on that. Unfortunately, if need be, there might be an increase in the policy rate.”
“Then, as we were recovering from that, finally getting the economy on a much stronger footing and inflation back under control, we had the tariff war with the United States, the imposition of unjustified and totally counterproductive tariffs on Canada, which caused major diversions and interruptions to international trade. The United States was and still is Canada's largest market and partner. Suddenly, that partner was no longer reliable, which provoked a huge shock to the economy. A lot of private investment was put on hold because many Canadian companies, as well as companies abroad, were uncertain as to what the investment climate was, given the total uncertainty from the United States. That put a lot of investment projects on hold.”
“After that, yes, there was a strong pickup in inflation because the supply chains were interrupted due to a lot of pent-up demand that was released all at the same time around 2022. Then, when we were beginning to get that under control, we had another major shock, which was the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and the interruption in the production and sale of grains, of which Ukraine was a major exporter. Of course, Russian oil and natural gas exports were also interrupted, which led to a food and energy price shock after the pandemic shock. There were more deficits in governments across the G7. We have to remember that Canada is not an island. We exist on a planet with neighbours.”
“(1620) Basically, governments shut down the economy. We did not know how to handle the pandemic at the time, so we shut down the economy and governments intervened with massive assistance. In France, for example, the motto of the government and President Macron at the time was “ quoi qu'il en coûte ”, that whatever it takes, he needs to support the economy as the government was shut down. In the case of Canada, for example, we will remember that, when former governor of the Bank of Canada, Mr. Poloz, was questioned about the actions of the central bank in those days, he said we would never think of blaming a fireman for using too much water when fighting a fire. That was what had to be done, and that is what was done.”
“Yes, there have been deficits over the last 10 years, but let us take a look at what has happened during those years. We have had shock after shock. The economy was doing reasonably well in 2018-19. Economic growth was rebounding strongly and unemployment was very low at the national level and in most provinces, including the province of Quebec, where we had 5% unemployment, which was unheard of. Things were going in the right way and federal deficits were declining rapidly. In some provinces, as was the case in Quebec, there was a budget surplus in 2018. Things were going well. Then what happened? We had a major shock. The pandemic made it so that governments, not just the Liberal government but governments around the world, particularly in the G7, were forced to intervene massively in the economy.”
“Germany still has a AAA credit rating, but so does Canada. The current deficit, which turned out to be $11 billion less than what we had estimated back in November, is $67 billion. Yes, that is 2.1% of GDP, hardly an unmanageable level. Again, going back to the United States, which seems to be in the ideal situation, because our colleagues keep referring to business in the United States and saying that we should get out of the way and lower taxes and that business knows what to do, the U.S. deficit is approaching 10% of GDP. That is a real problem. U.S. net debt is 100% of GDP. Canadian federal net debt is 10% of GDP, which is one zero less than in the United States. All this to say, Canada's fiscal position is sustainable and strong.”
“Allow me to talk a bit about our fiscal stability and strength, which is something that our colleagues from the other side do not seem to believe. They keep saying that over the last 10 years or so, it has been deficit after deficit and that Canada is something resembling a basket case: everything is broken, nothing works and Canadian cities are war zones. Think about it. If that is the case, how come Canada still has a AAA credit rating? How come bondholders from many different countries are perfectly willing to buy Canadian debt? In fact, the 10-year yield on a Canadian government bond is now, I believe, about 3.5%. The comparable bond yield in the U.S. treasury is almost one full percentage point higher, so Canadian debt is much better received in financial markets than U.S. debt and that of many other G7 countries.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is my turn to, if I may— An hon. member: No. Carlos Leitão: No? Okay, democracy in action, I see. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to take part in today's debate. In budget 2025, we outlined our plan to build Canada strong. Since then, we have moved fast to build major infrastructure, homes and industries that grow the Canadian economy and create lasting prosperity; empower Canadians with better careers and a more affordable life; and protect our communities, our borders and our way of life. We delivered concrete savings for Canadians while supporting key national priorities and keeping investments focused on results. We are maintaining a strong fiscal position with the spring economic update 2026, showing that projected deficits are lower than the fiscal horizon and we are on track to meet our fiscal anchors.”
“Mr. Speaker, no, it is not that at all. What we are hoping to achieve with the legislation is to be practical, to be pragmatic and to be able to move quickly. There are sufficient Canadian companies interested in and capable of doing this. It is very important that we do this with Canadian companies and for Canadian companies.”