Mr. Speaker, first of all, I wish to congratulate my colleague from Charlevoix for his presentation. I have a question for him that concerns the environment.
If I may, I would first like to respond to the parliamentary secretary's question and set the record straight for the members who are here tonight-I am concerned about fisheries while my colleague was more interested in the environmental aspects-as well as the people watching us on television.
The question of my hon. colleague from B.C. is as follows: Do you want us to pass this bill because it is the only way to protect our marine environment, our waters from the whole world?
I simply want to inform this House and the parliamentary secretary that part I of this bill canadianizes the terminology used in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. How can we provide a little more protection for our waters? Do we want international recognition?
We simply grab a pen, go to the UN and sign the Convention on the Law of the Sea. That is how it will be done, not by signing this here in Ottawa. Even fisheries and oceans officials said that part I of the bill was not needed. This goes without saying.
Having said that, I took notes during my colleague from Charlevoix's speech, and I noticed that, as assistant to the official opposition critic on the environment, he paid attention to the measures the government is about to take.
My colleague pointed out the communications links provided between some government departments like justice or the solicitor general and fisheries and oceans for enforcing certain regulations.
My hon. colleague surely noticed that Bill C-26 makes no mention of the relationship between Environment Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and I should remind this House that, when this bill was drafted, the two ministers responsible were the current Deputy Prime Minister and Brian Tobin. Mr. Tobin himself told a committee that these two departments or individuals were the yin and the yang.
So here is my question, which I think he also mentioned: In the absence of duly written rights, does my colleague expect some duplication-as I understood from his speech-between the two federal ministers?