Fisheries Committee on Feb. 14th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

It being 9:03, we're going to start. Somebody advised me to wish everybody a happy Valentine's Day. When I look around the table, I don't want anybody to take that the wrong way.

I want to welcome everybody here this morning. I certainly want to welcome the minister and his officials. We have about an hour, Mr. Minister, so I'm not going to belabour the point but allow you to get right to your opening remarks. Then we're going to open the table up for questions.

The floor is yours, sir.

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Good morning, everybody. My good friend Mr. Byrne just reminded me it's Valentine's Day, so happy Valentine's Day to everybody.

I'm very pleased to join you. With me today are my deputy minister, Michelle d'Auray; my new associate deputy, whom you haven't met before, I don't believe, Claire Dansereau; Canadian Coast Guard Commissioner George Da Pont; DFO's assistant deputy minister of human resources and corporate services, Cal Hegge; and no stranger to you as members of the committee, Mr. David Bevan, my department's ADM of fisheries and aquaculture management.

As always, let me recognize the value of advice the committee provides to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, particularly your recent work on small craft harbours. Thank you for the interim report in December. I look forward to seeing its final version after you return from visiting the east coast harbours.

As I was mentioning to one of your members just a few minutes ago, I sat on this committee for five years and thoroughly enjoyed it. During that time we had an extremely good cohesive relationship with everybody. I credit a lot of what is happening in the field of fisheries—some of the initiatives we have taken, some we continued from previous ministers, some new ones—to the work of the committee. In fact, if you look at some of the key issues with which we're dealing, you will see that the ideas, the reports, and the suggestions and recommendations really came from this committee. So again I thank you for that.

As minister, my top priority has been renewing our fishery for the long-term prosperity of its participants. This means considering the economic viability of the fishery and positioning the industry to provide the right products to the right markets at the right time. This approach is about improving the value, rather than the volume, of the fishery for everybody up and down the seafood chain, to preserve a good livelihood for the many Canadians who fish in our waters. That's why I've gone to great lengths to work with stakeholders on an ocean-to-plate management approach that supports economically viable fisheries, a collaborative approach that I announced last April.

I believe that all players—the provinces, territories, and all facets of industry—must come together for the future of our fishery. We need to share ideas and a common direction to build a sustainable and economically resilient industry. I don't for a moment underestimate the challenges to the fishery or believe this vision of viability and resilience will be achieved easily.

At the same time, I'm proud of the progress we've made in stabilizing the industry and setting the stage for its long-term success. We see elements of this progress in the renewal policies I announced last spring, which have given fish harvesters greater flexibility and opportunity in running their businesses successfully. We see it in the multi-year integrated fishery initiatives that our government has put in place on both coasts. These initiatives are helping stabilize commercial fisheries for all participants and encouraging greater participation in the fishery by first nations under a common set of rules.

We see this progress in our policy to preserve the independence of an inshore fleet in Canada's Atlantic fisheries by phasing out controlling trust agreements. We see it in the new measures we're working on to help fish harvesters more easily secure financing from lenders.

Let me add that moving forward toward a collaborative and transparent management of an economically viable fishery lies at the very heart of Bill C-32, a bill that has had the support of the provinces and many stakeholders. The bill will modernize Canada's Fisheries Act to bring it more in line with today's industry and market realities. It will give participants a greater role and a greater say at the decision table.

After second reading we will look to this committee to help make the legislation the very best it can be for Canada's fishing industry and invite any further input from Canadians as you see fit.

In addition to the viability of related investments and initiatives, we've made progress on other fronts as well, such as enhancing marine safety, providing additional tax relief for retiring fish harvesters, and improving the health of our fishery resources and oceans.

For example, we committed $324 million in the last budget to bolster the Coast Guard fleet, which has been part of the $750 million overall commitment to the agency since February 2006.

We made permanent $20 million in annual funding that would have otherwise expired for the small craft harbours program to maintain safe and accessible harbours.

In 2006, our government introduced the lifetime capital gains exemption of $500,000 on the sale of fishing assets, and we increased that to $750,000. Of course, you know if it's sold within the family, there are no clawbacks whatsoever.

Of course, my vision for an economically viable fishery does not forsake the importance of other imperatives like sustainability of the resource, because without sustainability, there can be no long-term prosperity.

Internationally, our work with other nations in combatting overfishing and in improving Fisheries and Oceans governance is paying dividends. In 2005 there were 13 serious infractions in the NAFO regulatory area. In 2006 there were seven. Last year there was only one.

You may recall that in October we announced a total of $61.5 million over five years toward improving the health of Canada's oceans through a number of initiatives led by DFO and other federal departments.

DFO is also leading a $13 million investment in six research projects on climate change in northern waters as part of Canada's participation in the International Polar Year. We hope this research will provide a broader understanding of the effects of climate change on marine ecosystems in the north and what we might expect in the future further south.

Through last year's federal budget we were able to make substantial new investments in fisheries science and ecosystem-based management to the tune of $39 million over the first two years. This new funding has allowed us to stabilize our key science activities in collaboration with the fishing industry and to augment our ecosystem-based approach to research and fisheries management.

I'm not going to go on through a lot of other things, Mr. Chair, because I know you want to get into questions, and undoubtedly we'll talk about some of these things. But one of the key things that I believe we did over the last couple of years was to work with a number of provinces on what they refer to as fishery summits. In New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec, and P.E.I. to a lesser extent, we held major round table discussions, major summits, involving every single player in the industry, from the towns to the industry representatives, harvesters, processors, marketers, and governments.

The interesting thing was that at the end of each one we had—and this is something I'll put in your heads for a later study, perhaps—a questionnaire asking, what is the biggest problem facing the industry in your region? A lot of us would think it would be wharves, Mr. Blais' area, or too many people chasing too few fish, as we hear. No, it was marketing. Every single area, all four, unanimously, said the biggest problem we have is marketing. If you come down to it, it's the end product that counts. If we don't put a good end product on the market and if we haven't achieved every possible ounce, inch, or cent out of that resource, then we haven't done our job. Somebody has fallen short.

So Mr. Chair and honourable members, I'm proud of what we're doing. I'm proud of the work the committee has done to help us do that work, and I recognize that the achievements alone can't address all the challenges that face Canada's fisheries. Because these challenges didn't manifest themselves overnight, there are no quick-fix solutions. But I believe, on the whole, we are taking the right steps in the right directions.

It will take time and the focused efforts of our government, our provincial and territorial partners, fishery stakeholders, and this committee to secure a brighter future for our coastal citizens. Providing Canada's fish harvesters with a modernized legislative framework would certainly be one way to keep the industry competitive, and it would help ensure that Canada's proud fishing heritage continues for generations to come.

I look forward to the continued guidance of the committee in building an economically viable and environmentally sustainable fishery.

Thank you very much, and certainly I'll be pleased to answer any questions you have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

We'll open the floor for questions now. I just remind every questioner that your allotted time includes the answers. I'm going to be sticking close to the time this morning to ensure that everybody gets at least a solid first round here.

So we have 10 minutes for Mr. Byrne and the Liberal Party. Are you splitting your time with Mr. MacAulay?

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Yes, Mr. Chair, if I could take the opportunity to split my time on the first round with my colleague, Mr. MacAulay, it would be appreciated.

Mr. Minister, colleague and friend, welcome back to the committee. As you've served on this committee for five years, you're always welcome back here. I know you're going to have a lot to say this morning. I hope you took the opportunity to remind yourself of what you said in those five years. It could be very helpful.

One of the reasons this meeting is very helpful to us is that we're engaged in a small craft harbours study. We deliberately took an opportunity to table an interim report on small craft harbours prior to the Christmas break to prepare you and your department for a budget submission on February 26, as we now know the date is.

Minister, you've said on numerous occasions that there's a substantial infrastructure requirement within the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. The Auditor General has reported on the Canadian Coast Guard fleet, and you did say that you will be rectifying that problem. That's a problem in the billions of dollars.

In our interim report we identified, in terms of the small craft harbour program, upwards of almost $1 billion in requirements. The interesting thing is that the information came directly from your officials. Between the rust-out problem within the small craft harbour portfolio, divestiture, the needs of the north, and other issues, there's close to $1 billion that really needs to be injected into that particular program.

Are we expecting to see big news for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans on February 26?

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you very much for the question. The short answer is, who knows? I make my requests the same as everybody else, and then you fight for your share of the budget along with not only other departments but other needs within your own department. And you do list those things as priorities.

I totally agree with everything you said. In fact, going back to my very first day on this committee, I was appointed at caucus, I guess. The first meeting was in the afternoon, and the first day they were setting the agenda for the coming few months. I happened to suggest that one of the things we should look at--I highlighted three things, actually--was the coast guard. The other was overfishing, and the third was infrastructure.

In fact, the committee, through some travel, but through a lot of spadework by some of us, and even some good pictures, demonstrated the need to immediately move on infrastructure. That fall, in the budget of the former government, they brought in $20 million a year over five years, which expired last year. We made that funding permanent, because we couldn't do without it, and we added, I believe, an extra $11 million to that last year.

At the time, one of the witnesses was the person who looks after small craft harbours, Mr. Bergeron, and if you look at the minutes of that first meeting we had with departmental staff, he mentioned that it would take, I believe, $400 million at that time to bring our infrastructure up to standard, not to say make gains.

Certainly in terms of the work that has been done over the last few years, even though we've increased funding, I don't think we've made any major headway on that. Second, the price of everything has gone up substantially, particularly in recent years, which aggravates the problem.

There are a couple of things. Perhaps I should do your study. I'll try to sum up very quickly.

First, you mentioned divestiture. That is an issue that has not gotten the attention it deserves. In the departmental budget over the last number of years the amount for divestiture has been around $1.5 million. Really, in divesting, if we could just take the wharves and say to the communities or the fishing groups or the marina associations, “Here, take it, it's yours”, it would be great. I believe, David, we could get rid of over 300 wharves across the country that we're not using any more.

In some cases, towns or marina groups or whatever would love to have them. But the deal is, basically, that before we give them to anybody, we have to bring them up to standard, and it's not cheap. However, if we could find some way of offloading a lot of these, then instead of annual maintenance and insurance and whatever, we could put it into the wharves we need. With all this stuff we talk about in the fishery and what we have to do, if you haven't got a wharf to fish from, you're not going to fish. So I recognize the importance of it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

That's your time, Mr. Byrne.

Mr. MacAulay.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome, Mr. Minister, and your great support staff.

Of course, small craft harbours is a major issue in my district, and there are always a lot of problems. Some of the complaints are about the patch-up work done, that if the money had been put toward general maintenance of the wharf, the end result would be a lot better. Sometimes things are done that don't seem to be financially sensible. But whatever--you can't stop that.

I have a question, Mr. Minister. Last year DFO transferred two licences from the large purse seiners to two boats, one of which was 125 feet long and capable of seining and towing a mid-water trawler the size of a football field and a quarter of a mile long. This caused great concern in the fishing industry. The large vessel also carried the two types of gear and was capable of changing quickly at sea.

I'm aware that the owners decided to not exercise their option, but there's a great concern in my province, and in the maritime provinces for sure, about this type of licence being issued.

I think PEIFA has been in contact with you. They've been in contact with me. Do you plan to issue those licences to the two mid-water trawlers this year to fish herring in the gulf region? It's an important issue for stock that's in jeopardy in the gulf.

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you very much for the question, Mr. MacAulay, and thank you for your comments about my officials. We have a very good group, as a lot of you know. You've dealt with them for a number of years. When we've lost some, we've picked up people who can certainly do the job. We're very pleased to have such a group around us. We like to talk about them as our team, throwing in our political staff as well. It's the only way you get things done.

On the trawlers, there are a couple of things. Number one, there are two distinct categories in relation to fishing. You have your inshore fishery and the allocation that's set for the seiners--not mid-water trawlers. This was a new experiment a couple of them were going to try.

It doesn't matter what they use, as I've said before. Whether it's a dory or the Queen Mary, there is the same amount of fish; they can only catch it in certain areas, and what they use doesn't matter as long as they stick to the rules.

The seiners have been pushed from pillar to post by everybody. Is it even going to last? I don't know. Will there be an application? I don't know because they seem to be very frustrated. They're not allowed to fish near P.E.I. any more, as you know. Parts of the gulf have been shut off to them. Herring is migrating.

We are concerned about the herring fishery because there are so many things happening to what was once a lucrative fishery. We had a bait fishery and a roe fishery, but we also had a very good fishery that provided a lot of jobs, particularly in New Brunswick, when a quality product was landed. A quality, fresh product that could be consumed by humans was landed by the seiners. All of that is gone.

If your question is on whether I will issue a licence, I will only issue licences to boats that will fish in the areas where they have quotas--not beyond that--not to do any more destruction than anybody else would, because they only have their own quotas. I will not in any way jeopardize the stock by issuing licences to anybody.

Will I be fair and give people their just desserts? The FRCC is now looking at this whole issue. If changes are recommended, we'll certainly go along with that. But I know about the concerns you've raised.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

The concern is that this net is a quarter of a mile long and approximately a football field wide, and it'll catch herring. The fact is, it'll catch everything else in the sea too, and there will be massive destruction to the fishery in the area.

That's the concern the fishermen have brought to me, and that's the concern I want to bring to you, Mr. Minister. We're very concerned in Prince Edward Island that this boat will be allowed to fish next year. We hope you will stop that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Sorry, Mr. Minister, you'll have to answer later. We're going to Mr. Blais now.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

First of all, I want to emphasize that I am disappointed we can only have you for an hour. Apparently you were only available for one hour. You'll readily understand that the subject to be covered requires more time.

I'm going to ask my questions quite quickly. I know that you will cooperate by answering them quickly as well.

First, I would like you to give us the 2007-2008 financial data in the small craft harbours file, by area. I'd like to know how the money was distributed and the area distribution. I imagine you'll cooperate in that regard. As you can imagine, quite easily and without surprise, the small craft harbours file is the first one I'll be addressing with you.

Unfortunately, we have to revisit this subject, and you know very well why. We're starting to feel the very serious effects of a lack of action in this matter, not only on infrastructure, but also on volunteers. Last year, they repeated to us that they were frustrated, tired and fed up with the situation. They are indeed the first people to receive the message from users who feel the present situation makes no sense and are suffering from it.

In the riding that I represent, for example, the L'Étang-du-Nord port authority is preparing the way for a mass resignation. Unfortunately, this could well occur elsewhere.

I'm going to side with Mr. Byrne in that regard. Has a request been made to the Department of Finance for a substantial amount of money in the February 26 budget?

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

We're obviously looking for substantially increased funding in all areas. We have a lot of needs in the department, and we hope we will do very well, but in the meantime we'll use what we have and use it properly.

I think Mr. MacAulay made a very good point when he said we spend a lot of money and if we did the job right we'd save. However, the problem is—I think Mr. Blais put his finger on it—there are so many needs. Sometimes you have to just bring it up to an acceptable standard to operate from--do the minor repairs and so on--to keep it going, in light of the fact that you hope to have more money down the line to do a permanent job.

We try to identify priorities in regions. Our field staff will come and say, “Look, if this wharf is not fixed this year you can't operate”. We saw some emergency work done this past year after floods, ice damage, and whatever. We try to correct those things as quickly as we can, but that sometimes cuts into the priorities we have for the next year. The percentages haven't changed. We haven't fooled around. The same standard is there.

Mr. Hegge may want to refer quickly to the percentages. We have a set percentage across the country and it hasn't changed. Quebec still gets the same share it always got. How it's used within the region is the important thing.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

It's only a matter of time. I asked you to provide me with the area distribution in the next few hours or, at most, in the next few days.

I pointed out to you that the members of the port authority at L'Étang-du-Nord, in the Magdalen Islands, are simply threatening to resign en masse because they're fed up. This same situation is occurring elsewhere at other port authorities. Will we have to get to the point where resignation is the only option for these port authorities and these volunteers, who already cooperate to a large extent, as you know? This attests to the situation.

The other subject I would like to address with you unfortunately reoccurs every year, as you know very well, since we've previously had occasion to talk about it. What do you intend to do this year, in 2008, to avoid the shrimp crisis in Quebec or at least to try to resolve this deadlock?

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I'll reply very quickly.

By the way, you mentioned having only an hour. If any of you, members of the committee or not, have specific questions and want some time, contact my office and we will arrange to meet with you. Whether it's from myself or the staff that you're looking for the information, we can arrange that. That's not a problem. If you want me back again, I'll come every second week, if I'm free. So that's not a problem either. It's finding time. As some of you know who've been here before, we don't have a lot of it.

First, the total amount of money, we've already determined, is somewhere between $400 million and $1 billion to really bring all our facilities up to par. Am I going to get that kind of money? Of course I'm not. So is everybody going to be happy? Of course not. But if you work with us, we'll try to make sure the job is done. That's the same in other sectors, not just the fishery and not just wharves.

In relation to shrimp, that again has been a concern for all of us, last year in particular. We have some plans for this year. However, first of all, we want to see what the industry is going to do. If you remember, last year there was a crisis in Quebec, and New Brunswick to some extent, but New Brunswick and Newfoundland depend on the same fish, fish the same product the same way, process it the same way, and send it to the same markets. The plants in some areas, particularly in Newfoundland and Labrador paid significantly more to the fishermen than they did in Quebec. So it wasn't a government problem or the fishermen's problem. The problem was that the processors were not paying the price to the fishermen. When they did pay the price, we didn't have a problem. If the processors think government is going to come out front and say, “We'll subsidize you—your fuel, your price, or whatever,” they'll have a field day. So let the market determine the price, but if fishermen need help, we'll be there to help them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Blais.

Thank you, Mr. Hearn.

Ms. Bell.

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for making time to come to the committee today. If I were your scheduler, I'd be a little worried that we might have to be changing that every two weeks for you to come here.

But I appreciate the openness you have extended to us. Also, I want to thank your department for taking leadership on an issue that caused great concern in my riding, which is the sinking of a barge in Robson Bight. Unfortunately, it took a little bit of time to get DFO on board to go down and do the investigation that was so necessary, but we're really happy that you did that, and now the video has been released of what is down there, and we hope this can be brought up as soon as the weather gets better.

The people of the west coast are very concerned about issues like that because of the sensitive waters. We have a lot of issues with disappearing salmon, the whales that create a huge economy in tourism, and things like that, so people are very concerned about keeping the area clean and healthy for the fish and the economy.

I know DFO has introduced the Pacific north coast integrated management area plan, or PNCIMA, on which you'll be working with provinces and aboriginal groups. But there's a concern that fishermen, stakeholders, industry, and the communities will not be part of that process. Also, there doesn't seem to be any movement on that front at this time, so people are concerned that the process is stalled.

We'd like to know where that process is, what's happening there, and if you will be engaging communities, stakeholders, and those kinds of people to make sure you hear all those voices so that we don't have another accident such as we had in Robson Bight. So I'm wondering, what are the plans to implement the PNCIMA?

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you very much for the question and comments.

As you mentioned, Robson Bight came together because we worked closely with the provincial government, and departments of fisheries and environment in particular. I should say to you that we probably have a closer and better working relationship with the Province of British Columbia than with any others. We work very closely with all of them and their ministers, but British Columbia has really come to the table and taken a leadership role in a lot of ways, particularly in relation to environmental issues as they affect the oceans and the fisheries.

You were asking if we are going to involve people in the area you're talking about. No project of that magnitude--no setting up of a marine protected area, for instance--will be a success if you don't involve all the players. We have had examples in the past of governments coming in from Ottawa and saying they were going to protect the fish and create a marine protected area, and it didn't work. It didn't work because the people didn't understand, weren't involved, and didn't support it. Within a few years of the original failure, these people, after asking about and learning about and realizing the importance of such areas, were coming and asking for such an area. So we'll be involved.

It's moving ahead. My deputy might want to add a little bit more on it, but it is moving ahead, and we'll be involving all the players--absolutely, we will.

[Michelle d'Auray, Deputy Minister, Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec]

Minister, you've laid out that we are working with all the stakeholders. What we are working on at the moment is a governance structure for the PNCIMA that includes and involves everyone. Until all the stakeholders are comfortable with the governance structure, we won't be moving ahead; that's what we're working on at the moment.

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Thank you.

I've asked this question in the House of Commons a couple of times. It's about--

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Ms. Bell, we have about 20 seconds for your question and your answer.

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

--money for habitat restoration, management, protection, and enhancement. There are a lot of pressures on the fishery. When I go home, I talk to fishermen, hatchery operators, and stakeholders; they tell me they don't see evidence of the money flowing to their communities, and I don't see evidence. When will the money get to them, and how will you make that happen?

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

You'll be answering that when you clew up, Mr. Minister.

Go ahead, Mr. Kamp.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

A very good question it was too.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Minister--and your officials--for coming. We all have questions on this side. I'll lead off, and hopefully we'll get some others as well. I'll try to be brief.

I think there's always been a sense of a disconnect in Atlantic Canada between our policies--for example, our fleet separation and our owner-operator policies--and what actually happens on the ground.

In your comments you referred to an initiative to preserve the independence of the inshore fleet. Can you give us a bit more detail? I think it's been a year or so since you announced that. Can you tell us where we're going with that and how it's being received? Also, can you tell us what you hope to achieve by it, apart from just getting these policy objectives implemented? What are your main goals for it?

As a follow-up question, do you have any intention of seeing a policy like that implemented in the Pacific region?

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you very much for the question.

Let me say to you, since you are a west coast member, that we have put a lot of money into fisheries on the west coast, into the health of the oceans in particular, which is of great interest there, but also into the whole initiative of trying to bring together a unified fishery in British Columbia. This has been worked out with all the partners, bringing everybody to the table.

We have had peace on the rivers, we'd say, these last couple of years. We've added a number of habitat people in the region. We have added enforcement officers. The enforcement officers are doing work where they should be doing work, and habitat people are doing work where they should be doing work, and working with the groups, and agencies and councils, etc.

I think the major achievement was bringing the first nations around the table where they became part of what we're doing rather than being excluded. They have made major contributions. Consequently, we've been able to solve a lot of problems in tricky situations, so it is all coming together.

I should also mention Mr. Kamp, my parliamentary secretary, who is representing the west coast and doing a great job, as he is on the committee. If some of you have a concern and you want to talk to the minister or that type of thing or you want to make it political, don't hesitate to run it by Mr. Kamp, because we talk every day, and we can deal with that for the sake of the committee.

In relation to the independence of the inshore fleet, a number of you were around this table with me over the years. We were on the committee. Every time the representatives from the east coast--I'm thinking of people like Earl McCurdy and those--would come to the committee, they would talk about the fact that big business and people with money were starting to control the fishery. They were starting to buy up licences. Instead of the fisherman being able to go out, get his quota, fish it, and benefit from every cent he could derive from it, he was really only fishing, receiving a set wage from somebody who really owned the licence under the table through a trust agreement.

We talked about it a lot. We did nothing about it. We did when we came into power, again, mainly because of stuff we picked up here at the committee. We said we would clean it up. We have brought in a program that will eliminate trust agreements, that will put the licences back into the hands of people who depend on the fishery for a living. It will put the benefits derived from the fishery into the pockets of those who make a living. We've given them a relatively short time to get all of this and put their act in gear, as we would say.

Consequently, the whole initiative is to make sure those who operate in the fishery are the ones who benefit from it. That doesn't mean we're going to try to shove people out and destroy business--not at all--but it does mean that on the harvesting side, the people who will harvest the product will be those who will get the licences and will be operating their boats or businesses.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

I think I'll pass it over to Mr. Allen.