I want to ask two questions, Mr. Chair.
Did you estimate the time required for the study on the Fisheries Act review, given what has happened in the past? Could we get an idea?
What my colleague said is, in fact, true: There are major crises and challenges we need to focus on. That said, that's never going to change. While we're reviewing the Fisheries Act, there will be other crises and challenges. Furthermore, we'll need to use Standing Order 106(4). We're dealing with an extremely serious situation. Alarm bells are ringing everywhere, meaning wherever there's water and fish to harvest.
I'd just like to know how we could have a short, medium and long-term perspective. I'm thinking of recreational fishing and small craft harbours, which are also on our list.
How could we move forward in that respect? How will we do that in our review of the Fisheries Act? Will we react as emergencies arise? Will we find solutions during our legislative review? Sometimes, rapid action is required.
I agree that the reports we table don't get a quick response. What we're hearing on the ground is that it's disastrous. I know because I spent the summer in the field. The shrimp boats are in dry dock, and everyone is in dire straits.
How should the committee proceed to ensure maximum efficiency and to best respond to alerts in Canada and Quebec?
Here's my question: What's our timeline for reviewing the Fisheries Act? How long will it take, considering the emergencies we also want to deal with? Could we reach consensus on an agenda that would allow us to insert some very urgent studies while at the same time moving forward on our study on illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing? I anticipate the use of Standing Orders 106(4) and 108(2), among others.