Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's a pleasure to be back at the fisheries committee. I didn't realize how much I missed it.
For Monsieur Blais, I appreciate his comments and I understand that he came in late, but this documentation does deserve to be looked at, and I think it requires further study, actually, from the committee.
I find this case extremely troublesome--I really do. As parliamentarians, we're partisan. We belong to different political parties, and we often go into the trenches against one another in the political forum, but we have absolutely no right to attack individuals for any reason whatsoever or to use undue political influence that hurts and directly affects individuals. And I think, quite honestly, that's what's happened here.
I first spoke to Tim Rhyno when he called me. He was working in Fort McMurray. He tried to explain his case over the phone. It was impossible to do. Eventually we got together, and I can tell you I was shocked at the evidence. I was shocked at the evidence. I was shocked that DFO was refusing to deal with this issue. And I still find it shocking that members would question very clear evidence.
I realize that Monsieur Blais needs to have that evidence translated so he can have a chance to study it, but I would urge members of Parliament to look at this evidence and understand what Mr. Rhyno is asking. First of all, the licence that he has should not be in jeopardy by questions in the House of Commons saying that it's out of order, because it is absolutely not out of order.
There are hundreds of licences in the snow crab fishery. We're talking about one individual licence. And it's my understanding that there were licences granted after Mr. Rhyno's request. Is that correct?