Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
The point is that the complaints were voiced before the bill was passed or signed.
I don't know about you, but if some of the richest and most powerful countries in my country had a concern about a bill I was going to sign, I'd probably be sitting down and explaining stuff to them and listening to what they have to say before I sign a bill.
|
You're still not getting the point of the hearing. You keep talking about an unrelated issue, which is consultation with the business sector about the impact of the bill, which is something I agree should happen as a means of gauging the overall strategy. I don't think you should have to sit down and explain things to them and hope they're happy, most bills piss off a good portion of the business sector, they're never fond of regulation and having to actually comply with things.
However, this hearing isn't about that. It's about a communication to shareholders indicating that the bill will have a negative economic impact and whether or not that communication can be substantiated by factual information.