Explaining yourself, in theory, at some point - Macleans.ca

Explaining yourself, in theory, at some point


Without specifically addressing his government’s decision on Petronas, Stephen Harper promises an explanation of the government’s general approach to foreign investment.

In a brief news conference Monday, Mr. Harper would not comment on his government’s decision, announced at midnight Friday, to turn down a $6-billion bid by Malaysia’s state-owned Petronas of Calgary-based natural gas producer, Progress Energy Corp…

But Mr. Harper noted that his government is still working on a new framework that would clarify the Investment Canada Act, suggesting the companies may be left in the dark for several weeks. Mr. Harper first announced the plan to issue new guidelines in response to the controversial $15.1-billion proposal by China’s CNOOC Ltd. to acquire Nexen Inc. “The government does in the not too distant future have an intention to put out a clear and new policy framework regarding these sorts of transactions,” the prime minister said.

Stephen Gordon begs for an explanation. Mike Moffatt laments for lost wealth.


Explaining yourself, in theory, at some point

  1. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/bc-lng-plans-at-crossroads-after-petronas-progress-deal-blocked/article4627080/

    This could be one more nail in the coffin of Northern Gateway, particularly if they now approve Nexan? And contrary to some the opinions expressed here as regards the market, i would think this now only increases the pressure to say yes. That’s what incompetents and ideologues do…paint themselves into corners.

  2. This should have been determined years ago!

    Perhaps if Harper spent less time attacking Libs and Dippers, and more time on actual problem solving and governance of the country…..

  3. I would avoid knee-jerk analysis of what transpired late Friday evening, typical of what Moffatt offers.

    Resource stocks are highly cyclical. The $22 per share offer on the table for Progress is below its 2008 peak price of $23.38.

    If, as Moffatt claims, “$2.3 billion of wealth disappears” why is the stock now, as I write, down only $1.91 or roughly 10%, not the $10 he used in his calculations? And what assurance does he have that the interim refusal and takeover play on this stock might not attract other suitors who may also appreciate that the stock was undervalued prior to the friendly bid being received?

    Warren Buffett, who made his fortune by taking a long term view, would yawn.