Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Salmon, and thank you for your opening remarks. A few things struck me about your opening remarks. Number one, you mentioned that Canadian seafood products account for 0.2% of global aquaculture production, which is interesting, and that companies will obviously look to expand with this Canada-EU free trade deal. The lowering of tariffs is seen as a great thing for our seafood markets, and we can do nothing but expand.
The third thing I found interesting about your opening remarks was that you spoke about the principal challenge confronting Canada's aquaculture sector as being a complicated set of regulations that restrict growth and limit investment. Now, some people say that our aquaculture regulations and rules aren't strict enough, but let me come to my question.
It was uncovered by the local media in my province of Newfoundland and Labrador just a few months ago that $33 million had been paid in compensation to Gray aquaculture for five outbreaks of infectious salmon anemia on the south coast of the province. Again, that was a total of $33 million. The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans stated that the Gray aquaculture company needed to be compensated a high amount so that there's an incentive to report disease outbreaks in the water.
For me, if that's actually the case, that's a reflection of the fact that it's that clear that federal regulations are lacking.
Moving on to my question, what are your thoughts on Canada's regulations for open net-pen aquaculture, and how does the reality of ISA and culls impact trade with the European Union? You can't effectively trade if you don't have a stable, reliable product. Would you say that's the case?