Quite frankly, I also am prepared to support this motion as amended, but certainly not on the basis of the arguments made by Gerry as to how to proceed concerning integrity. It will certainly not be on that basis. I am well aware that it is important to study this kind of an issue. I also used the word “crisis” on this file, because it is indeed one. It has that scope.
I will give you some figures. Sometimes, we talk about thousands of lost jobs, and at some point in time we end up wondering what that means. We have the impression that when we are talking about 100,000 jobs, it is more important than when we are talking about 50,000 jobs, etc. In the regions, we understand very well that the job numbers are smaller because the population is smaller. I represent a riding of 84,000 people. Gaspé and the Magdalen Islands have a population of 97,000 people. In the Montreal region, there are 2 million people. I just want to give you some perspective: the thousand jobs that are seriously or less seriously affected, as the case may be, in the Gaspé and Magdalen Islands region would equal 24,000 jobs in Montreal.
Therefore, we can well understand that if 24,000 jobs were suddenly to disappear or be at risk of disappearing in Montreal—or 35,000 jobs in Toronto—there would be some committee somewhere that would study that and there would be a great uproar. In fact, we saw that already with the automobile sector. It seems to me that we should be doing the same thing.
That is why the way in which the motion was originally worded was a problem for me, as I was saying. The way it now reads will allow me to be more open to supporting it. In fact, after having discussed it, Gérard and I will also I believe support it. However, it is also with the intention—and it is important to mention this—of adding something that, if memory serves me well, was requested by the crab fishermen from these regions because of this situation. The crab fishermen asked the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to study the issue of management of the crab resource. The official request is either already being put on the commissioner's desk or will be soon. I have not seen the exact wording, but I am well aware that this is what the crab fishermen intend to do.
However, the problem is much broader in scope than that. Yes, this affects the crab fishermen, and it affects all of the communities. It is a problem that any department, a few days before the opening of the season, coldly announces a 63% reduction without talking about any measures. I know that discussions are currently underway, I'm well aware of that, and thank goodness. On that issue, I can say that the minister is doing a good job: she is trying, along with others, to help with costs and lessen the impacts.
However, those impacts are enormous. This story, compared to others such as the aquaculture or sockeye salmon stories or others, these are quite dramatic from certain perspectives because it affects the communities. I am not trying to suggest that one community is more important than another. We have already had the opportunity of studying various issues, and we will continue to do so.
Given the events and the amendments announced for this motion, we will be in a position to support it. I do not know how we will articulate this study, because it is broad and deals with one subject in particular. That is another kind of challenge, but we are already dealing with so many. We will support this motion, and our support is intended to emphasize the issue, because it is important for our communities.