Mr. Speaker, my question is for my colleague for West Nova who has been and will continue to be very involved in the fisheries issue, particularly as it now unfolds with the Marshall decision.
We do not need to look too far in the distant future to know that perhaps at some point in time the minister of fisheries will have a position of power. Knowing full well what was going on in the supreme court with respect to Marshall, would my colleague have tried to put into place some planning, some strategy for best case and worst case scenarios? Or, would he simply have done what the government has done and wait until all this unfolded with no strategy and no plan?
If so, how would he have seen this play out as opposed to having the violence that we have seen and the inability of government to negotiate after the fact? What would he have seen as a better resolution to the issue?
That speaks directly to the motion: the lack of management, the inability to be able to put forward plans and to mitigate issues and situations which have happened in the past with respect to fisheries, agriculture, port disputes, lumber disputes, pork disputes and beef disputes. We have had them all. How would my hon. colleague have tried to come up with something better as a strategy or plan than what happened?