Mr. Chairman, I read the transcripts of Professor McDorman and Mr. Saunders before this committee. Mr. Saunders spoke at length on custodial management, and I may have misread the transcripts, but I think his understanding of custodial management in the way that we have defined it was flawed.
He basically indicated that Canada would assert management rights over the resources beyond 200 miles, the straddling stocks, and that essentially what this would amount to--and I'm paraphrasing--would be a resource grab for Canada. In fact, I think his words were that it would be a huge one for Newfoundland and Labrador.
That is totally wrong. The only benefits that would accrue to Newfoundland and other provinces that have fished on the nose and tail of the Grand Banks through the concept of custodial management as we have defined it would be resources that would become available as a result of stock rebuilding. The historic shares of all countries that have fished there would be respected. So it's not that we would assert custodial management under the definition that we enunciated; it's simply that there would be a far more effective management regime and a management regime that would fully recognize the historical shares of those countries that have historically fished in that area.