David Anderson

[Fisheries, March 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I think, out of deference to the House and its committee on fisheries, I as minister of fisheries should wait until I receive the report of the fisheries committee.

[Fisheries, February 20th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question and the quote from Mr. Efford who has certainly brought this matter to the attention of Canadians.

Yes, the population of harp seals is high and has increased and the grey seals have increased even faster.

I would like to quote the statement from the scientific council of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization: “It is possible that the marine mammal consumption of juvenile cod is impacting their recovery”. In other words, seal predation is impacting recovery.

Essentially the same point was made by the Fisheries Resource Conservation Council of Canada in its November report: “The council believes that their consumption of juvenile cod and other species is a threat to the rebuilding of groundfish stocks”—

[Fisheries, February 20th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, once again I could agree with the hon. member on both counts.

He is correct that the buy back of licences which are not being used does not immediately affect fishing capacity. On the other hand, a licence which is not currently being used could be used in the future. The buy back of even those licences is important.

With respect to the second aspect of his question, the need to have the involvement of fishermen and of the industry, I assure him that is being done and will continue to be done.

I would add that the positive approach he is adopting would mean he also could play a useful role in this activity.

[Fisheries, February 20th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to have once again in two days the support of the Conservative Party for this measure.

I believe licence buy backs are an important tool that we should use. I remind him that on the Atlantic coast we have had a licence buy back programs to the tune of approximately $100 million and on the west coast to the tune of approximately $80 million.

I will note his support for this program. When discussions arise as to what might be done in the future with respect to the east coast fishery, I will bear his views in mind.

[Fisheries, February 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has shown why Conservatives so consistently were unable to manage the fishery. They do not understand that without fish you cannot have fishermen. This critical fact is completely ignored by the member. He does not realize that to have an effective fishery, to have fishermen with decent incomes, and to enable their families to take part in our society like others who have decent incomes, we need to have an adequate supply of fish. He does not understand that, but he comes to this House to try to tell us that somehow or another we should ignore conservation and simply allow allocation for fishermen.

[Fisheries, February 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, there are no foreign fishing vessels fishing within the 200 mile limit and the hon. member knows that. There are seven vessels outside the 200 mile limit and that is a fraction of what it was during Tory times. The total amount in tonnage of fish taken within the 200 mile limit by foreign vessels today is between one-half and one per cent of what it was when his government was in power.

[Fisheries, February 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the hon. member's support for measures taken by this government for licence buy back which on the east coast was over $100 million and on the west coast was approximately $80 million.

I would point out to him that the moratorium on groundfish stocks occurred in 1992 when another government happened to be in place, curiously a Progressive Conservative government. The hon. leader of the Progressive Conservative Party was the Minister of the Environment, the closest minister to the minister of fisheries when advising that government on what to do about environmental disasters which Tory policies brought upon the fishing industry on the east coast.

[Salmon Fishery, February 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct one of the misunderstandings in the preamble to the hon. member's first question.

Yves Fortier was our negotiator on this file for four years. We had full confidence in him, confidence which was repeatedly expressed. When he wrote his letters which were tabled in the House a little more than a week ago, it was clear from his letters that he supported our position and vice versa.

With respect to the issue of binding arbitration, we would be very pleased to have binding arbitration. I welcome the Conservative Party's support for that position. But it takes two people to agree to binding arbitration and we have not had that agreement from our American friends.

Finally, I would add that deputy minister—

[Point Of Order, February 18th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, if the member is going to get up in the House and declare that people happen to be lying, at least he should understand who he is talking about. I feel offended by this hon. member and I find his apology totally inadequate.

[Fisheries, February 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should not inflate himself with indignation beyond the point where he can conveniently contain it.

The fact is that in this instance on the east coast we offered to Canadian fishermen the various quotas of various stocks. Only in situations where they do not wish to fish for some reason or another is it offered to others.

In addition to the mistake he is making, he is also saying in effect that the foreign fleets that operate in that way and that deliver to Canadian plants for Canadian shore workers to get work from would not get that work. What is he trying to do? Is he trying to deny Canadian—