I feel that our job is precisely to take a stand on issues which may be controversial or contentious but are of concern to our fishing industry. I first wanted to hear ACOA's views to better understand what is happening and be in a position to make a better decision.
We indeed heard the people from ACOA. I do not want to get back to Peter's comments, but I also noted, when questioning these people, that the decision seemed to be final. I think this is the basic argument underlying the initial proposal.
We may have considered amending the initial proposal had the ACOA people shown that they were ready to reconsider the decision or to take other considerations into account. However, this was not the answer that I and others got. I think it was important to give the ACOA people a chance to make their views known before voting on the motion. Now, it is done. We heard them and we can pass judgment.
I thought you had an interesting way of putting things, Mr. Van Kesteren. It was very interesting but given ACOA's position, I feel that we would just be gaining some time without dealing with anything whatsoever.
In my opinion—and you already know that since I said it repeatedly—not enough research and development is being done, and I would like our committee to eventually consider that. There are many things we know about the moon, but we know precious little about our oceans. I find this absurd and abnormal. Climate change is affecting us increasingly almost on a daily basis. We do not know what is going to happen to our marine resources, what to expect or what to be concerned about.
I feel that R&D and knowledge would allow us to make better decisions and have a better vision of the development of marine resources and the industry. Unfortunately, there is an obvious tendency to set aside many issues. I am not only talking about Quebec issues but there are some very recent examples in Quebec of this kind of attitude, which I think is improper.
I thought it would be important to hear part of the initial proposal, which is ACOA's version. I heard it and I am now ready to take a stand. We will see how the government will react to our action. Obviously, we cannot expect the motion to carry unanimously. This is better and will always be.
By the way, I wanted to thank you all for your cooperation regarding my motion on the seal hunt. Getting back to this issue, I think we should take a firm stand given the attitude we have to deal with. I asked questions in my own way. These were the best question I could ask. ACOA's representative likely gave us his best answer but it was not enough. It was not satisfactory because I could not see any glimmer of hope. There was no light at the end of the tunnel that would have helped us get across. This is why I shall vote against the amendment and for the initial motion.