David Anderson

[Marine Radio Station, March 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the closing of that station has had an extensive airing in the press and in public on the islands.

There are few decisions taken by the government which have had more involvement of the public. I should point, however, that not a single employee is being laid off. They are all being transferred to another coast guard station within the same constituency, I believe, but very close by in any event. It is a question of trying to organize our resources in the most efficient way possible.

[Fisheries, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the policy of the government is to Canadianize to the greatest extent possible our eastern Canadian fisheries. As a result we have moved the foreign take within the 200-mile limit from over 380,000 tonnes down to approximately 2,000 tonnes in the most recent year. In other words it is now half to one per cent of what it previously was.

There is no fishing by any foreign vessel within our 200-mile limit unless Canadians have been offered those fish. Only when they refuse is that fishery opened up to foreign vessels under international agreements. They are the same international agreements that allow us—

[Coast Guard Radio Station, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, before the decision was made some months ago we carried out extensive consultations with all stakeholders. We also did an extensive analysis of the technology involved. In this instance there is no loss of jobs. People will be moved as we consolidate at Rivière-au-Renard.

While I respect the committee's report, in essence it came too late to vary the decision that was made.

[Shipping, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and the other member from the Reform who questioned this simply refuse to understand that in each region the costs are related to the charges made. There is no subsidy from region to region, none whatsoever.

It is entirely in Ontario. It is entirely private sector response organizations that we are talking about. There is no question of taxation.

If we were to risk having a major spill in the fresh waters of Ontario without having adequate response organizations to take care of it we would be totally irresponsible, as is the Reform Party.

[Shipping, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the reason there is much less risk in Ontario compared to the river in the Laurentian region is exactly the same reason that the fees are higher. There is much less oil shipped in that region. That is why there is much less risk.

The hon. member should know that the amount of money in question is approximately one-fifth of a cent a litre for the 300,000 tonnes of fuel which come into Ontario. He should also recognize the impact of a major spill, if it occurred in the fresh water system in Ontario, what that might do to drinking water. He should recognize that and get up in the House an apologize for his—

[Pensions, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the member has raised an extremely important question which is being addressed by a committee of ministers headed up by the minister of human resources.

As the member is well aware, the issue is one that involves a large number of plant workers as well as a smaller number of actual fishermen. We hope we will be able to have that plan in place in good time before the expiry of the existing TAGS program in August of this year.

[Fisheries, March 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, first, we have to start with accurate information. The member states that the west coast salmon species are extinct. This is not so. Last year was a better than average year for the commercial fishing fleet in British Columbia in terms of the number of fish.

We have some serious problems with coho, steelhead and chinook stocks. These are stocks we are doing our very best to protect, but the first thing to do is to get accurate information so we can make decisions thereafter to protect them. The approach that will not work—

[Dredging Of St. Lawrence, March 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the dredging of the St. Lawrence to which the hon. member makes reference was proposed. An exhaustive environmental hearing took place in which the provincial government of the province of Quebec took part.

Recently it sent a communication which appears to be in some respects not entirely on all fours with its previous position. I will look at that closely and we will re-examine this question in the light of their presentation.

[Fisheries, March 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the response assistance for displaced fisheries will be put forward, as has been said many times in this House, in due course once decisions are made by the government.

The issue that we are facing is that the plan will expire in August. We are trying to put in place other measures which we believe will be helpful, first, by removing people from the industry so we do not continually have this problem, but also of course to assist them in the interim.

[Department Of Fisheries And Oceans, March 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, time after time I have to point out to this hon. member that a private contract between companies is not a tax of the Government of Canada. He tends to suggest that we in the government should take over private relationships, smother the system that we have in place and of course substitute our decision.

What I will tell him is that we have in place a regionalized system. The differences in price are related to the different volumes that are carried and the different requirements for the response equipment that is necessary to have on hand. It is an insurance policy. To get the insurance one has to buy in.