Thank you, everyone, for your general support for the motion. I really appreciate it.
Maybe I could start with Mr. Hardie's last point. I believe that the IUU study is finished. We're supposed to do drafting instructions today; that's on the agenda.
To the main issue, there's no question in my mind that the thing of primary concern is enforcement on the rivers, and I think we're all agreed on enforcement. That involves DFO C and P, and, if called in, the RCMP to back them up on the river, but also the RCMP enforcing trespassing laws. That's the on-river portion.
We have had a bit of testimony already in some of my questions in the IUU study, and the deputy minister already answered and said that there is a coordination committee on the planning for the elver stuff that involves all three agencies, including the CBSA. Unofficially, I'm told by the elver licence-holders that they've been told they're shifting resources away from river enforcement towards the purchasing part of this, the land-based purchasing, where it's being purchased, and the airports and CBSA enforcement.
We need to have CBSA here in order to ask whether that's really what they're doing, because I think that's a problem. It's obviously safer, but it's like whack-a-mole on this thing, because there are way more people doing this than there are enforcement officers. I think that's the whole picture.
I think it's hard to do that along with the minister, in one meeting. That would be one hour for one and one hour for another, which I do not think would do enough justice to the depth of the discussion. To me, it would have to be at least one meeting, if it were a two-hour meeting, with C and P, RCMP and CBSA together, if they're working together on this. Then, at least on the second one, it would be another one with the minister and officials. Whether that's in two two-hour meetings or added on as bits and pieces to a couple of other meetings, we could leave to the clerk to sort out.