Evidence of meeting #15 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was wto.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:20 a.m.
Professor, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
Yes, they do have that in Europe. That's probably why the European Union is not for the draft as much as, say, New Zealand and so on.
One thing we find in our study is that the infrastructure subsidies in developing countries can be quite high. Most of it is actually development aid, the idea being to help developing countries to increase their capacity to get food, fish to feed the people, and so on.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Okay, so it's from other sources, then, external. I see.
Can I say that in the European Union, in Brussels, and in the individual legislatures of Europe--and I pick on them specifically--they're going to have greater problems with what you're saying than we would?
10:20 a.m.
Professor, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
At least I expect that they would have more problems than we do, because we have fewer of these bad subsidies than they do.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
10:20 a.m.
Professor, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
We are two months away.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
So what have they said thus far? You've basically caused a stir here in the last two days over this issue; there's no doubt about it. Over there, they're probably climbing the walls.
10:20 a.m.
Professor, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
They probably are. I don't know exactly what's happening in the EU now, but they will be debating the consequences of this.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
I do, if you wouldn't mind, if you have room.
This is all fast-tracked for ratification, proposed for sometime this year. It's probably not going to get there. But if Canada doesn't act swiftly and effectively to remove these contentious issues from the draft agreement, basically prior to agreement in principle, what happens then?
If we can't clearly remove the reference that EI subsidies are red-flagged, if we can't make that a green flag, what happens then?
10:20 a.m.
Professor, Université du Québec à Rimouski, As an Individual
What happens is that you have 150 countries negotiating. If in two months there is no change, things are finished.
10:20 a.m.
Professor, Université du Québec à Rimouski, As an Individual
After April, for example, once the principle of adopting the text is agreed upon, all the work that will be done after April is just writing the text. The substance will not be modified.
10:20 a.m.
Professor, Université du Québec à Rimouski, As an Individual
After April.
February 28th, 2008 / 10:20 a.m.
Bloc
Yvon Lévesque Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
I would like to raise the issue of small craft harbours. In my region, for example, a number of aboriginal nations live in coastal areas. The ports are the only means they have for travelling from one community to the next. The ports are used for fishing, but they are also a means of travelling from one village to the next. I imagine this is also an issue on the Pacific Coast.
When a port is used for both fishing and transport, does government support for renovations fall into the red box or the green box?
Furthermore, an increasing number of ports are being divested to the communities. Is restoration work carried out before divesting the port to a community considered as a subsidy to the fishing industry?
10:20 a.m.
Professor, Université du Québec à Rimouski, As an Individual
The text clearly stipulates that any construction work carried out on ports that is directly related to fishing falls into the red box. If, however, the work is more general, and is not directly related to fishing, it is not prohibited. It would not be in the red box.
10:20 a.m.
Bloc
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Université du Québec à Rimouski, As an Individual
Absolutely.
10:25 a.m.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Let us take the example of a wharf: from a fisherman's perspective, it is directly related to fishing, but a wharf may also be used by other people. Would renovation work on a wharf be allowed?
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Université du Québec à Rimouski, As an Individual
It is my understanding that it will be allowed as long as the wharf is not used exclusively and directly for fishing.
As you pointed out, word choice is very important. Let us take, for example, the paragraph on infrastructure. It is an important one.
10:25 a.m.
Bloc
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Université du Québec à Rimouski, As an Individual
Exactly: exclusively or predominantly. The language is very strong. There really has to be a direct intention to support the fishing industry. If it is not exclusively or predominantly related to fishing, it will be difficult to run afoul of the provision.
