Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister, for coming.
I'd like to follow up on my question to you in the House yesterday about the the expropriation of the crab and elver quota that you recently announced. It's important, obviously. I appreciate that reconciliation occurs and that fisheries play an important part in it. You mentioned that the department was working with industry to find solutions. Those two industries have told me that the DFO approach has been to tell them what was going to happen, not actually to consult.
On January 5, you wrote to me regarding entrance to the elver fishery. I quote from that letter, which said, "Access to the elver fishery can currently be obtained through a private arrangement". You rejected the idea of opening up new licences for the elver fishery.
Again, on February 24, in response to another letter to me dealing with the elver reallocation of the 14% or more shift of the quota, the department wrote that “this reallocation would occur without the provision of any financial assistance to licence holders.”
Expropriation of quota now has all fishers of all species worried, and their investors worried, that you are going to continue to take this arbitrary approach to reallocating quota. Hundreds of millions of dollars of debt and businesses are at stake.
I'd like to know why you, as minister, have abandoned—which your letters confirm to me—the long-held policy as established under the Marshall response that the approach of the department is that indigenous acquisition of quota and effort will be done through a willing buyer/willing seller process only.
Why have you abandoned that?