David Anderson

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

Mr. Speaker, as I explained yesterday we have a series of regional response organizations in Canada. These are private sector organizations which make contracts with the various shippers of oil. We insist upon having this system so we have the maximum protection of the environment.

What I hear from the official opposition time after time is that they do not care about that protection and they do not care about the private sector relationship.

[Fisheries, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I take a certain satisfaction in having Reform members in British Columbia, goaded of course by earlier questions, demonstrate why we do not need another Reform member from British Columbia.

With respect to the project in question, we have funded 48 projects of that organization, totalling $14.7 million. On this particular one, yes $115,000 came from my department but after consultation with my department and human resources, we did not think it was one of the very top ones we should fund at this time. The reason is that we have four times as many projects come to us as we are able to finance.

[Fisheries, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the hon. member from British Columbia. Thanks to the goading of the Alberta director of that party he was allowed to ask a question. I am glad he was.

I would point out to him that type of question only suggests to the hon. Leader of the Official Opposition that perhaps he should be kept in his seat along with the other B.C. members.

[Fisheries, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly can assure the member of that. The issue of coho protection in northern British Columbia is an extremely important one. It will mean we will have to have extensive negotiations with the Americans on this specific issue. I am quite willing to point out to the member that this is one of the reasons for our concern this year on the catch levels we will have to establish.

[Fisheries, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the issue of the Pacific salmon treaty is a very important one, except apparently to the official opposition.

The issue is structured so there will be one chief negotiator on both the American and Canadian side. They will be supported by a team. British Columbia will have a representative on that high level team. The level of participation of the British Columbia government will depend entirely upon how active it wishes to be and how good and useful its suggestions are.

[The Environment, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, typically the opposition chooses an Alberta member to comment upon a British Columbia or an Ontario issue. Despite the fact that British Columbia has the largest representation in their caucus, they constantly ignore the B.C. members in the official opposition.

As a British Columbian I am simply appalled at the treatment of the majority British Columbian members in their caucus by the Alberta—

[The Environment, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, once again the foundation of the question is simply inaccurate.

We have a double system whereby the coast guard provides standard services across the country. We in addition have response organizations organized by private industry. They must have the capability of dealing with a spill of 10,000 tonnes.

Because of different volumes which are moved in different areas and the different requirements for the equipment to be kept in stock, there are different costs. In some areas, to get the same level of environmental protection one must pay more. Environmental—

[Fisheries, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Reform Party, a party which has had more British Columbia members than any other in the history of the House, has finally discovered that British Columbia exists. I congratulate him. Finally we are getting questions from them. I thank them for their interest.

With respect to the fishery that he talked about, $136 million was put into the revitalization of the west coast fleet. We had retirement of licences. We had programs for displaced fisheries. Last year in terms of fish we had a better than average year.

The hon. member forgets that the price is one-third of what it was nine years ago. In addition we have El Nino.

[Fisheries, March 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, a number of factors are involved in the west coast problem we are facing at the present time.

First is the cyclical nature of salmon in any event and it was predicted that this would be a low cycle year.

Second is El Nino which has played hob with predictions on the west coast and indeed with salmon returns. We have problems with prices which are now one-third of what they were nine years ago.

I appreciate the hon. member's question because this is an historic day. For two days in a row in his first two questions he has asked about British Columbia salmon for the first time in his entire time in the House. I am delighted to see we are at last getting attention, that the byelection is getting the attention of the Reform Party.

[Light Stations, March 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will recall that there is some period of months, in fact years, that this has not come to the decision he would like and in fact has not been made. The byelection he talks about has only been in progress for a few weeks.

It seems to me that the logic of his putting the two things together is totally false. I will be making a decision on that subject in due course at the appropriate time.