Mr. Speaker, before dealing with the issues raised in the motion, I will comment on a few remarks made by my two hon. colleagues.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans stated that side of the House believed in action, that it needed to put out publications and spend money. He is absolutely right. That is the action the government has taken. Government members talk about conservation and continually about a sustainable fishery, but when the actions of the government—and I will give specific examples in the few minutes—are not coming through.
We have applauded the government on the conservation side with respect to the coho in British Columbia. When we really look at it, though, the government spends more money putting out publications to prop up the image of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans than it does actually looking at that resource.
I acknowledge and commend the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore who brought the motion forward. Maybe I do not entirely agree with his motion, but I do agree with what he is trying to achieve and for that I could support it.
Like the member from the other side I believe we need more than a symbolic week or gesture. Those were the words he used. He really means that he wants action. He is not just suggesting that we honour the fishermen, that we recognize them and make this a symbolic week. He recognizes the need for action.
The motion is “that, in the opinion of this House, the government should declare an international week of awareness about the benefits of small-scale fishing for the environment and for the sustainability of communities”. He is talking about small-scale fishing which is more important than his concern about a dedicated week. That is the issue.
I put this to the minister in committee last week. I told him that it had been brought to my attention by those in both sectors on all coasts that the voluntary retirement program is squeezing out the little guy. It is squeezing out the guy who cannot afford it. The only ones left are the big companies, the people with deep pockets who can afford to ride out the storm.
The government is in the process of reducing capacity. Its second attempt under the Mifflin plan did not work. It reduced the size of the fleet and then allowed people to buy multiple licences. Our capacity remained the same although there was a lower number of boats. These are very real concerns on both coasts.
The minister has brought forward a voluntary licence buy back. It will reduce the size of the fleet and hopefully the capacity. I support that. By making it strictly voluntary, the person in a small fishing community who is struggling, the individual boat owner, the guy who has a family operation and who employs three or four people will have no option but to take this voluntary buyout. He does not know how he is going to feed his family. They are struggling up in northern Vancouver Island.
I agree the fishery can be rebuilt. I believe there is a fishery out there. If we do things right we can have a fantastic fishery in three or four years. The only people who are going to be left to fish this resource are those with the deep pockets, Seafreez and all the big fish companies of this world that have big factory freezer vessels. They can afford to ride out the storm.
I put that to the minister. The minister flatly denied it in his response. He said “Second, on voluntary retirement you said flatly that you do not think it should be voluntary, that we should not help the persons who want to get out”. That is absolutely wrong. That is not what I am saying. We must have a system in which we can help these people. Forcing them to retire their licences, forcing them to retire generations of family traditions and livelihood is not the way. We must be able to help these people ride out the storm as the people with the deep pockets can do on their own.
The government has to come up with a plan that will force a reduction in capacity equally among all sectors. That includes the big vessels, the gill netters, the trawlers, the seiners. It should be done proportionately and equally. The little guys, the trollers on the west coast of Vancouver Island did not get one fish allocated to them this year, yet the seine fleet was out there fishing. The little guys are being squeezed out.
It applies to the other sectors as well. The member across from me would probably agree that the sports sector needs its capacity reduced equally. These are all sectors within the fishing industry that need reductions applied in a fair and equitable manner so the small boat fleet does not take the hit alone.
The junior minister of fisheries and oceans said that the ultimate object is a sustainable fishery. I totally and wholeheartedly agree with him. I have worked with him on committee and privately. We have discussed this issue seriously. We have had some fruitful discussions. The problem is we have not seen any action by the minister and he knows it too. From my experience at least, if he were the minister of fisheries we would get a lot more action out of him than we would out of the current minister.
I have some specific examples. Only last week the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans again gave hundreds of tonnes of Canadian fish in Canadian waters to foreigners. He relaxed the Canadianization policy. This was done to Seafreez, a large company in Nova Scotia that said it could not keep its plant open unless it had an exemption to allow foreign vessels to go out and catch 40% of the remaining quota. This is in turbot.
No attempt was made to get Canadian vessels out on the water. Why was that not done? We know no attempt was made. I have spoken to fishermen throughout Newfoundland and Atlantic Canada. They are asking for access to this resource. The minister took the easy way out and allocated, under pressure from the big companies.
The member opposite knows the recommendation. He is a member of the committee and agreed to the east coast report. Recommendation two of the east coast report, also known as the Baker report, reads:
The committee recommends that Canada cease giving permission to Canadian companies to hire foreign vessels and foreign crews to catch fish in Canadian waters as long as Canadian fishermen and Canadian vessels are available to do the same.
Canadian fishermen are available. We need action and not action just by putting out publications. The action we are looking for is not spending $5 million in British Columbia to prop up the minister's image which was done. We need action to make sure that all these cuts that reduce capacity are done in a fair and equitable manner among all sectors, the sports sector and all sectors within the commercial sector, within the sport lodges. We cannot single anyone out.
Although this policy does not single anyone out explicitly, the net effect is it is wiping out completely the small boat fleet on both coasts, the guy or woman who employs three or four people.
I applaud the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore for bringing this issue before the House. I do not believe that having a declared international week of awareness is necessary. We need action from the government, and not to keep hearing the walk and talk of conservation. We have seen it in a few areas but a lot more needs to be done. There are 21 fish companies that want access to this resource but they have been denied. They are not given access.
The voluntary licence program is destroying the small boat fleet. I would ask the junior minister of fisheries and oceans, which is how he likes to be referred to, to talk to the minister about restructuring the voluntary licence buy back so that it will be done in an equitable manner and that we will not destroy the small—