Thank you.
The whole point of creating these areas was so that the fishery was not fished when lobsters were breeding. The result is that we've gone up to about 130,000 metric tons, which is a decline in the last couple of years. To that point, it's why enforcement is so critical but is not happening.
The minister has had lots of opportunity since she became minister to ask her department what is really going on. She's had lots of opportunity to talk to the actual groups, which she has chosen not to do. She has had lots of opportunity to come to Nova Scotia and meet with the groups. If she doesn't have that courage, then at least she should have picked up the phone when these groups were asking for meetings with her on enforcement.
It got so bad this summer that the local head of C and P admitted to the Scotia Fundy Inshore Fishermen's Association after their protest in New Brunswick that they had had zero enforcement in the Bay of Fundy. It's because that group threatened to go on the water within three days and enforce the law that DFO sent in some boats—and as the police say, showed them the doors—for four or five days to try to calm everything down. Those were the only four or five days when there was any enforcement whatsoever on the Bay of Fundy this summer.
For the minister to come here after all of that.... If she didn't hear it directly from the groups, she might have read it in the paper and in the newspaper clips she would have been given by her team, at least to see. It was all over the news. If she wasn't willing to read the newspaper clips, she could have seen the TV clips on it. If she didn't know which channel to look at or which website to look at, she could have looked at her favourite one, CBC, which has been covering this all summer, both on TV and in person. For some reason, the minister was still oblivious to that and came here and claimed that she had started on enforcement consultation with fishing groups.
The evidence is clear. I can table and will table all of these notes from the associations. The process, as I understand it, Mr. Chair, is that the clerk prepares a report on this for you to present to the House and the Speaker, if it is felt that the minister has breached privilege. That requires not only the words of the minister here, which are self-evident, but also the response from the fishing groups, which I can provide to this committee so they and the clerk can take a look at them and even double-check and call those folks. They'd be more than willing, I'm sure, to talk to the research analysts and the clerks as to whether or not they agree with me that the minister misled this committee.
To Mr. Hardie's point, I will leave it there, because I'm sure there are others who want to comment on this. I'll reserve to come back later if I need to add anything further.