moved that Bill C-2, an act to establish the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and to amend the Canada pension plan and the Old Age Security Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts, be read the third time and passed.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.
Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act December 4th, 1997
moved that Bill C-2, an act to establish the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and to amend the Canada pension plan and the Old Age Security Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts, be read the third time and passed.
Questions On The Order Paper December 4th, 1997
Without compromising safety, eight lightstations in the Pacific region of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans were approved for destaffing during 1996-97: Active Pass, Ballenas Island, Discovery Island, Point Atkinson, Porlier Pass, Race Rocks, Saturna Island, and Sisters Islets.
Summary of Costs ($000s)
1994/95—1995/96—1996/97—1997/98 to Oct. 27th Capital Cost—Nil—467—426—Nil Servicing Cost—1,329—1,329—600—50
The above capital figures reflect one time start-up costs.
The projected savings from the modernizing and automating project for these eight lightstations is $1,243,000 annually.
Coastal Fisheries Protection Act December 4th, 1997
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-27, an act to amend the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act and the Canada Shipping Act to enable Canada to implement the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and other international fisheries treaties or arrangements.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Fisheries December 2nd, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's reference to illegal theft is interesting. The overkill that he uses in this issue is demonstrated by that comment.
I would point out to him that we are doing whatever we can to get an agreement with the Americans, both Alaskans and those in Washington state, to make sure that the Pacific salmon fishery is managed in the interests of the fishermen of both nations.
With reference to the specific case of the fishermen who took part in the blockade in Prince Rupert, that comes under the normal process of the Canadian courts, under Canadian judges, under Canadian law—
Fisheries December 2nd, 1997
Mr. Speaker, we have an active habitat policy in British Columbia. One of the problems, however, is the provincial government is responsible for agriculture, mining, forestry, urban development and highway construction.
In the last 6 years we have had 13 charges and 7 cases against the provincial government.
I hope the hon. member will talk to his friends in the provincial Government of British Columbia so that we can truly have co-operation to protect the habitat of Pacific salmon in British Columbia.
Seal Hunt November 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I do not have the exact number of charges right now, but I can obtain it for the hon. member. I would add that the seal hunt is very important to the economy of the maritime provinces and also to the province of Quebec, especially the Magdalen Islands.
Islanders and others in these areas need accurate information from the media, particularly the media in Ontario and in the major cities in Quebec. There is really a campaign based on misinformation—
Questions On The Order Paper November 26th, 1997
(a) The charter vessel Hook Line 3 made a verbal request of the King Salmon Resort on July 29, 1995. The King Salmon Resort refused to provide information. The Hook Line 3 made no verbal requests of the M.V. Marabell .
(b) The charter vessel Francis Mr. made no verbal requests of the King Salmon Resort or the M.V. Marabell .
(c) The first boarding of the M.V. Marabell by fishery officers to request catch data was on August 1, 1995. The operators refused to provide the requested information.
(d) The letter to the M.V. Marabell requesting catch information was first served on August 1, 1995. There was no specific response to this request.
(e) The deadline in the letter was that requested catch information was to be provided by August 6, 1995. This deadline was not met.
(f) The second boarding was on August 9, 1995. The captain of the M.V. Marabell had been advised in writing by his empoyer not to provide the catch data. However, catch information was subsequently provided to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans through the Sport Fishing Institute by the end of November 1995.
(g) The first boarding of the King Salmon Resort by fishery officers to request catch data was on August 2, 1995. The operators refused to provide the requested information.
(h) The letter to the King Salmon Resort requesting catch information was first served on August 2, 1995. There was no specific response to this request.
(i) The deadline in the letter was that the information be provided by August 6, 1995. This deadlime was not met.
(j) The second boarding of the King Salmon Resort was August 7, 1995. The captain of the vessel had been advised by his employer not to supply the department with catch data. However, catch information was subsequently provided to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans through the Sport Fishing Institute by the end of November 1995.
Questions On The Order Paper November 26th, 1997
(a) All sport fishing charter operators, which includes sport fishing lodges, except the two indicated in part (b) below, supplied the requested catch information to Department of Fisheries and Oceans, DFO, either directly or through the Sports Fish Institute.
(b) There were two sport fish charter operations which did not provide the requested information to DFO either directly or through the Sports Fish Institute. They were: Mr. George Ardley, owner/operator of River Lodge, Rivers Inlet, B.C.; Oak Bay Marina Ltd. which operates various sport fishing enterprises including the King Salmon Lodge and the M.V. Marabell in the Rivers Inlet area, B.C.
(c) Both sport fishing charter operations indicated above were subsequently charged.
(d) The charges filed against Oak Bay Marina Ltd. were stayed. These charges were for failure to provide DFO with information requested by a fishery officer pursuant to section 61(4) of the Fisheries Act, thereby committing an offence contrary to section 78(a) of the Fisheries Act.
The Department of Justice stayed the proceedings on the grounds that evidence had come to the attention of the crown counsel handling the case, after the charges were laid and before the trial, that provided the company with a clear defence of officially induced error to the charges.
Specifically, DFO had arranged that fishing lodges could provide catch records to the Sport Fishing Institute of British Columbia. This arrangement was made to allow lodges to provide the information to DFO if they preferred not to do so directly.
However, due to an administrative oversight in Oak Bay Marina Ltd., two of their lodges were not informed of the arrangement and they consequently refused to provide the data to fishery officers. Furthermore, local fishery officers had not been informed by DFO management about the arrangements which had been put in place. In crown counsel's opinion the confusion provided a defence of officially induced error.
After weighing all factors, Department of Justice officials in Vancouver determined that it would not be appropriate to take up needless court time in the circumstances. The circumstances were discussed with Department of Fisheries and Oceans officials who agreed with the course of action.
(e) Yes, on unrelated issues.
Fisheries November 17th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is obviously unaware that the 22 fish that he is talking about were in fact male hatchery grilse that had been at sea for one winter only.
They were turned over to the aboriginal community which is appropriate because the aboriginal community's quota for ceremonial and food purposes had not been met. These were hatchery fish and it is important for genetic reasons, to protect genetic stocks of salmon to make sure that the number of hatchery fish are reduced.
In addition, in that very river the number of male fish was double the number of female and that is an imbalance that we wanted to correct.
Fisheries November 17th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member wished, he could look at the decisions for the fisheries department since I became minister. They are in full conformity with the fisheries research board. We have followed science in all the decisions made.
In a large department with many scientists there will inevitably be divisions between scientists but the practice of using science to guide management decisions is well established. It is there and the hon. member has only to look at it to find out that it is—