Thank you, Peter.
First, I obviously can't speak for Minister Rideout. I'd like to be able to say that I knew where he was coming from. I've been the minister for less than a year now, and from my briefing when I came in, it was clear to me that we were not satisfied with the conventions. This was last Hallowe'en, as a matter of fact—a scary proposition, I know. Basically, when I did my briefings I went to NAFO and I found nothing there that indicated to me that we were happy with the conventions.
With regard to Earle McCurdy, to respond to a previous MP, obviously if he's comfortable with the conventions...I don't agree with him, nor does the province. What you have to understand is that these conventions were brought back and we reviewed them. As a matter of fact, in a letter I wrote to Minister Shea I explored the possibility.... I could not believe—it was incredible—that a minister of the crown could allow our sovereignty to be breached simply on his or her say. I asked whether he would even consider going to a cabinet level. The response I got was no, it would be things as usual.
That again raised big concerns. It was shortly after this that we went back—some of these gentlemen I referred to, these former executives, and I—to the premier and said we wanted to do a review. When we looked back on it, we came to the conclusion that regardless of whether it was cabinet or a minister, if there's any sense of a risk that NAFO will get inside the 200-mile limit and compromise our sovereignty, we're not there. That's the long and short of it.