Mr. Speaker, it seems to be very difficult for me today to finally get down to work on the fisheries problem, but here we go.
For those members who have just joined us, and for those listening to the television, I repeat that the purpose of Bill C-27 is to implement the United Nations fisheries agreement. This agreement flows from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The purpose of the first two amendments the Bloc Quebecois wishes to move to Bill C-27 is to clarify meaning and to ensure that Canadian legislation is consistent with the international agreement. In my view, there were oversights.
I will begin by looking at Motion No. 2 and then go to Motion No. 1.
The purpose of Motion No. 2, which we wish to introduce concerning Bill C-27, is to provide a basis for interpretation for tribunals that will be called upon to use this Canadian law. It reminds them that interpretation of Bill C-27 shall be in accordance with the fisheries agreement based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982.
This may seem highly technical, but my colleague for Beauharnois—Salaberry has reminded me that all laws and agreements must draw their essence from somewhere. When an act is to be interpreted, when a case goes before a judge, it is important that the basis for interpretation of that act be written down in black and white.
Now, I return to Motion No. 1, still in Group 1. For the benefit of the public and of those who sat on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, the objective of this motion is to add a new clause, 2.1, to Bill C-27, making reference to article 5 of the United Nations fisheries agreement, part 2.
Why do I take the time to make this clarification? Because the purpose of clause 2.1 is to provide a philosophical base for administration of the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act.
When Canada wants to sign an international agreement, when it wants to implement this treaty, we must be assured of having the tools here in Canada to go along with the international law.
I have merely asked the clerk to include, word for word, the contents of article 5 of the UNFA, as I have already explained. I am simply trying to summarize, since it is a fairly long clause, unless the House will give me permission to read it entirely, without shortening my speech. I am summarizing it in order to provide some principles of the philosophy of management.
This clause sets out in subclause ( a ) administrative measures to ensure the long term sustainability of straddling fish stocks.
In subclause ( b ) our intention is to ensure as well that there is a data base containing verifiable and reliable scientific information that serves the interests of all parties concerned for the welfare of the so-called migratory species.
Subclause ( d ) concerns the assessment of the impacts of fishing and other human activities on the marine ecosystem.
Subclause ( e ) concerns the adoption of conservation and management measures. I would remind people that these are general management philosophy principles.
However, I draw members' attention especially to the following. Our reference in subclause ( f ) to minimizing pollution, waste, discards, catch by lost or abandoned gear and such things should be noted. This is why I want this introduced into Bill C-27, so Canada may then set out its future policy on fishing, a statement of policy. For example, what will Canada do with respect to the measures including the development and use of selective environmentally safe and cost effective fishing gear and techniques.
That means we are prepared to be ecological and to give thought to the environment, but always from a cost effective standpoint. I agree with that, but we will have to get into the details one day.
I would draw members' attention to another point, still in this clause 2.1 we are proposing to the House. It is subclause ( i ), which provides that we must take into account the interests of artisanal and subsistence fishers.
This is important for me because I live in a coastal area. My house looks out on Gaspé Bay and the Gulf of St. Lawrence beyond, so there are lots of fish going by. We want to make sure that all those living in maritime areas will have artisanal and subsistence fishing rights because they were born near the sea and it is very much a part of their lives. We want to make sure that this right will always be respected. That is why it is important that this be included in the legislation.
But there is much more and I will try to summarize it in more general terms. When Canada is allowed to ratify and implement an agreement with an international treaty, Bill C-27 tends to Canadianize things. I did not find the management principles that are part of this agreement in the bill. Nor did I find them clearly stated in earlier legislation, unless members opposite can tell me where.
As far as I am concerned—and I would remind members that the auditor general had already asked the government to come up with a national policy—we in the Bloc Quebecois are still interested in helping to define such a policy, not that I intend to stay shackled to the centralist federal system forever, but so that we can have our say.
It is important that we be given an opportunity to provide input. I would like to be able to go into more detail in this clause, but because its only purpose is to implement the fisheries agreement, I would merely remind the House that spring is upon us. On April 1, the fishing season will be opening in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for many fisheries, including shrimp and crab in certain areas.
Every time the fishing season opens, there is always a debate among fishers from the various regions. Since quotas are set by the federal government, there are very few mechanisms, if any, to guarantee to these fishers what quotas they will get. Some would like to have, to the extent that it is possible, historic quotas by province.
I would go even further. We should take into account provincial historic quotas, the proximity of stocks as well as the regions within a province.
This is why I am asking hon. members to think about the French management model, which includes since 1992 the criteria of relative stability; it is designed to put an end to the bickering between fishing regions since people know what their quotas are and can work with them. This would help fishers.
Second, and we often forget this, plant workers should be allowed to know what volumes will be handled by and go through their plant during the year.
I will come back to the other groups later, unless the House consents to my continuing to speak, but I see the other side is in a hurry to talk too.