In 2012, a report from Ernst and Young, an independent review that was commissioned a year before by Minister Ashfield, gave a very good history of this. A page and a half in the report deals with this question.
It was well known, without the term “LIFO” being used, that the Mifflin announcement was going to be that priority would be given to the new entrants on the way up, but they would have to shoulder the responsibility on the way down. In fact, we have correspondence from ministers throughout this period that confirm that. The Ernst and Young report talked about it first being discussed at the Northern Shrimp Advisory Committee in 2000, and it first appeared in the 2003 management plan.
I also have a copy here of a letter from the FFAW, the Fish, Food and Allied Workers union, to the Government of Canada in October 10, 1997, which acknowledged, precisely, the LIFO, not as a term but in essence of what it means. So, it was well known and nobody objected. It was a bonanza at the time for the new entrants, and deservedly so, because they had suffered from the collapse of the cod resource, but it was intended as a temporary situation.