Well, Mr. Chair, in order to answer that, it's certainly going to take more than the three seconds that are left.
Let me say one thing. By the way, I do sign every letter that goes out, and I make sure that I'm aware of the contents.
When I came into the department, one of the issues in front of us was the integration program on the west coast. Let me make sure the committee is aware of where that came from. It wasn't made up by my department on the west coast or here; it was a program put together by representatives of industry. One of the people who sat on that group, which came in with the final report to the department, was a fellow by the name of Eric Wickham, with whom some of you are familiar. He's a part-time sablefish fisherman on the west coast.
Industry put together this suggested program because every year, because of bycatch, because of the number of species involved, they were ending up having their fisheries closed down, certainly in halibut and others, because they had reached bycatch levels. They devised a plan of moving or sharing resources--and I can get others to explain it a little more thoroughly, if you want--to try to offset the closure of fisheries. We agonized over the report, but it represented practically every group out there, as I say, including Mr. Wickham's.
When the report was tabled for us and discussed, Mr. Wickham didn't say a word against it. He came back afterwards objecting to it. I challenge you to go to the different sectors in British Columbia, or those who are involved in that fishery this year, and ask them what they thought of the plan. Is it perfect? Absolutely not.
We approved it. It was supposed to be a three-year pilot. We didn't agree with a three-year pilot; that's too long. We agreed to do it for one year, because the status quo just wasn't suitable, except for a few who really wanted the status quo. We went ahead with it for one year, to make sure--the very first thing said was that we didn't want to see the little guy.... In fact, the first question I asked was whether people would be hurt, and some said that maybe a few small vessels might be forced out. We said, no way, José. We said that rules had to be put in place, that the costs had to be spread to make sure that didn't happen.
Did it happen? Did somebody get hurt? Not that I'm aware of, specifically. People have complained about some adverse effects. We've done our best to correct them. Most people have said that yes, it's not perfect and that we need further modification, which we are ready and willing to do. But it is a hell of a lot better than what we had, and most of them caught all their fish this year.
Consequently, there are two sides to every story. We do have some people who are against a lot of what we're trying to do in British Columbia, and we have a lot of people who are for it. What we have to do is make the best decisions we can based on the facts we get, not from our officials but from the groups and agencies. I've met with more groups and more individuals in British Columbia and spent more time there than I've spent not only in any other province but in all other provinces put together.
So, Mr. Chair, we do know what we're doing. Is it perfect? It probably is not. Does it satisfy everybody? It probably does not. But I'll tell you one thing. If you talk to the majority of those affected, I am quite confident that they will tell you it's a lot better than it was.