S Kidman and Co is a significant rural business which controls 1.3% of the Australian land mass and 2.5% of its productive agricultural land. It was initially put up for sale in April 2015. An 80% owned Chinese company put up a bid to purchase the property, but concerns raised in Australia about the property being foreign owned caused the bid to be withdrawn. Some of the issues associated with the sale are mentioned in this article: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-03/chinese-bidder-for-kidman-cattle-empire-withdraws-offer/7380116 A bid headed by Gina Rinehart with a 67% Australian and 33% Chinese investment was approved in December 2016. This decision is discussed here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-09/s-kidman-and-co-sale-to-rinehart-approved/8106694 Should the sale to the highest bidder in 2015, the 80% Chinese owned company, have been allowed to proceed? Or is it appropriate that the offer was encouraged to be withdrawn (as the article discusses)? This is an argument about the FOR and AGAINST arguments of foreign investment in these kinds of assets, and more specifically, this asset. You should be make these arguments, and then come to a conclusion about which is the stronger case and why