What I would recommend is if the motion were amended to read as follows:
That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans study the snow crab industry
—deleting “shellfish”—
in Atlantic Canada and Quebec,
—deleting all words thereafter until the word “Labrador” and the semi-colon, and continuing—
that the committee report to the House on its findings and conclusions.
I'll just repeat that in complete form:
That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans study the snow crab industry in Atlantic Canada and Quebec, and that the committee report to the House on its findings and conclusions.
To avoid any confusion or uncertainty in regard to the other materials in my original motion, to prevent any committee member from being concerned about that, I would suggest that we delete that wording and allow the committee to study exactly as I propose.
We've already heard from some Conservative members that they didn't have a problem with that as long as we didn't include the name of a specific individual. So with that said, at this point in time, we can now have a study on the snow crab industry. We can support and come to the assistance of those in the Gaspé and the Acadian Peninsula. We can come to the assistance of those in Newfoundland and Labrador, in P.E.I., and in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, and on the eastern side of Nova Scotia, those who are impacted in area 23. We can have a study on crab, we can do our work as a committee, or we can choose not to.