IVISON ON CHINA BUYING AECON.

When Canada’s largest construction group signed a $1.5-billion deal to be acquired by state-owned CCC International of China in late October, the company’s chairman, Brian Tobin, called it “a very positive outcome.”

The former Liberal cabinet minister is also vice-chair of BMO Capital Markets, which is advising Aecon on the acquisition, so it’s no wonder he is happy. (Apparently such an arrangement, though not illegal, is unusual. Aecon says that a special committee oversaw the sale process and that Tobin was not a member of that committee.)

It remains to be seen whether the merger will be equally positive for other Canadians.

The prime minister has just returned from China where he courted foreign investment and advocated a free trade deal that would offer protection and certainty.

Canada already trades with China and stands to gain from a robust agreement.

But that does not mean that we should wave through all acquisitions made by Chinese companies.

Aecon argues that, quite apart from a hefty premium for shareholders, the deal will provide access to capital and an international network.

Critics, like former Conservative cabinet minister Peter MacKay, claim that the Canadian government needs to block the takeover of major industries by state-owned Chinese enterprises that don’t operate according to market principles.

The deal was raised in the House of Commons Monday by Green leader Elizabeth May, who asked Justin Trudeau to assure Canadians that it would be given a thorough review before being rubber-stamped.

Trudeau offered the standard response that the government will ensure any deal is in Canada’s best interests and that the country’s security agencies will be consulted.

By definition, the review of foreign acquisitions is an opaque process.

But the Liberals have undermined confidence in their own diligence by granting permission to Chinese communications firm Hytera to acquire Norsat, a British Columbia satellite manufacturer that supplies the U.S. military, without conducting a separate national security review.

The government’s line on both Norsat and Aecon takeovers is that the Investment Canada Act review includes consultations with the Communications Security Establishment, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Department of National Defence and the RCMP.

That may be, but the government’s own website makes clear that a national security review is separate from the net benefit review process.

Both cases would appear to create circumstances potentially “injurious to national security.”

But the government will not comment on whether it is raising the level of security scrutiny.

“We cannot comment on any ongoing review or specific cases,” said Karl Sasseville, a spokesman for innovation minister, Navdeep Bains.

If there are concerns in the House of Commons (the Greens excepted), they have not yet been voiced. Canadians deserve better than that.

The Aecon-CCCI deal raises a myriad of questions that the official Opposition should be asking about in Parliament — even if they receive the same boilerplate answers.

For example, did Tobin talk to ministers or the prime minister about the deal? (Aecon says Tobin has recused himself from any discussions with regulatory bodies or officials).

Did Chinese government officials ask Trudeau or Bains to wave through the acquisition as a gesture of goodwill when they were in Beijing?

Is the government concerned about CCCI’s labour relations and human rights record?

The company has had a checkered history in recent years, including the death of seven workers in Guangzhou in June, when a crane collapsed, and the death of 18 people at a CCCI factory in Dongguan in 2016.

Finally, is the government worried about CCCI’s past ethical infractions? The company was barred from bidding for World Bank road and bridge-building projects between 2009 and this year, after being found guilty of fraudulent practices in the Philippines.

The Liberals have committed to spending $180 billion on infrastructure over the next decade, with the aim of stimulating growth in the economy.

It may be that a stateowned construction company, more focused on market share than the bottom line, will deliver savings for Canadian taxpayers.

But there is also the prospect that Canada could suffer from a slippage in labour, safety and environmental standards, as some critics argue happened in Australia. John Holland, an Australian company bought by CCCI in 2015, found itself in the middle of a scandal when white asbestos was found in the roof panels of a children’s hospital it was building in Perth, Western Australia. Holland had subcontracted the supply of the panels to a Chinese company.

For its part, Aecon says the company will continue to be run by Canadian management and there are no changes planned to its health and safety policies.

Yet legitimate public policy concerns around the deal remain.

A relaxation of investment review rules and thresholds is going to be a key Chinese objective in free trade negotiations.

This self-proclaimed government of openness and transparency should re-assure Canadians that it has not loosened those rules already and, in due course, it should explain how the Aecon-CCCI deal is of net benefit to this country.