Ann: Redflow AGM - Further Update, page-24

This should in my opinion attract FIRB attention.
https://firb.gov.au/investment/business

"On 29 March 2020, the Treasurer announced that due to the impacts of the coronavirus outbreak, all monetary thresholds will be temporarily reduced to $0"

In general, proposals to acquire an interest of 20 per cent or more in any business valued at over $275 million [threshold is now $0] (or the higher threshold of $1,192 million for agreement country or region investors from the United States of America, New Zealand, Chile, Japan, the republic of Korea, China, Singapore, Peru, a country (other than Australia) for which the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans‑Pacific Partnership, done at Santiago on 8 March 2018, is in force (CPTPP) (as at 1 January 2020, the CPTPP is in force for: Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam), and the region of Hong Kong, China require prior approval.

All foreign government investors also require approval to acquire a direct interest in an Australian entity or an Australian business or to start a new Australian business, regardless of the value of the investment ($0 threshold).The Treasurer can prohibit foreign investment proposals found to be contrary to the national interest, or can impose conditions on an investment to address national interest concerns.

Now...can Redflow shareholders demonstrate to the Federal Govt that keeping Redflow in Australian control and keeping Redflow technology in Australia is in Australia's national interest?
BTW: My thoughts on this isn't because the resolution is from a Chinese national/ or Chinese company. My thoughts on this would apply no matter which country the proposal was coming from. Redflow IP/technology and control should in my opinion stay in Australia and not go toANY other country.