David Anderson

[The Environment, March 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I should point out to the hon. member that the previous government set up a response organization system involving the private sector. For this to be effective and for there to be proper protection of our environment, naturally those who transport oil over water must pay and must be part of the system.

It is no surprise that the hon. member prefers to have lower prices rather than environmental protection. Environmental protection is one of the weak suits of the NDP.

[Fisheries, March 18th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Huron—Bruce for his interest in this issue.

The government remains committed to protecting the inland fishery resources, particularly of the Great Lakes, and the continuation of the sea lamprey parasite program.

Negotiations are going on between governments. As members will know, there is an international aspect to this. We also had discussions with the Ontario government.

I trust I will be able to give the hon. member the answer he would like before the end of the month.

[Lobster Fishery, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I assure the hon. member that this is an extremely important question and I thank her for giving me the opportunity to say that we will be bringing in new lobster conservation plans within the next four weeks.

These will be based on the individual area, groups of fishermen, lobster fishermen who themselves have been asked by me to provide the best way in each area for conserving our lobster stocks.

Where they fail to come up with adequate plans, I will impose a plan on them. That will be done within the next four weeks.

[Fisheries, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have to congratulate the hon. member on his floundering performance on this issue.

[Fisheries, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the member seems to be carping a little too much about this project and he has clearly found a red herring to pick on in this instance.

The fact is we have funded, for this same organization, project after project to the tune of $14.7 million in the last 18 months to 24 months. In a particular project it was viewed after the assessment as not being of the highest priority. Not that it is not a good project. It is, but we can fund only about one of four of the many excellent projects that come our way from community groups. Therefore we try to assess the best ones, the ones that have the best impact of these three criteria.

One, its impact on improving—

[Fisheries, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, this is a bad day for the opposition on fisheries questions.

The organization that the hon. member is referring to received $14.7 million to assist displaced fishers on 48 separate projects. Yes, my department did fund to the tune of $115,000 in December last year a particular project to which he is referring on the west coast. Later in the evaluation of the next $460,000 that they requested we did not find it possible in conjunction with human resources development to fund that particular project.

But there is a continuing list of projects that we are approving—

[Light Stations, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian most in trouble and in deep water and rough seas appears to be my hon. friend. There is no substance of truth to him.

I have, as I mentioned in the response to his first question, visited many light stations. Light keepers have been of great assistance to many people. I was pleased to have the conversation on information at that time. Never was my vessel in any danger.

Back to the issue of safety, we are bringing in a new hovercraft for the west coast area, double the size of the existing one. We are bringing in 12 new lifeboats of a new design. We have increased the funding for the—

[Light Stations, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have to correct the preamble. No rescue was carried out on me or any boat associated with me by any light station anywhere in British Columbia or, in fact, the world. I have from time to time, in an extensive yachting background, sailed in the south Pacific, the Sea of Japan and many other areas, but never have I required the assistance of a lighthouse keeper. I have, however, talked to them frequently on the phone and often in person and on the radio.

Back to the issue. There is no decision—

[Regional Development, March 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in the area of the allocation of resources we have a number of decisions that will shortly be made which will affect the entire lower shore of the St. Lawrence River.

I should point out, however, that management of the shore plants is essentially a provincial responsibility.

[Fisheries, March 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, this is one of the most curious questions yet in the House. The hon. member asks me to look at the evidence before the committee that the committee itself is meant to evaluate. He wants me to substitute my opinion for that of 17 good members of Parliament whose job it was to examine the evidence.

If he and his party believe that the members of parties on a committee should be ignored, not considered, and that I should go directly to those who speak to them, that is an extraordinary approach for a member of the House.