Fisheries committee  Right. Possibly the amendments to WAPPRIITA would prevent new cetaceans from being imported into Canada, but I can allow my colleague to speak there. The other relevant part of the Criminal Code amendments is the ban on the breeding, so that no new cetaceans could be born—

Fisheries committee  —as a result of the Criminal Code amendments.

Fisheries committee  In my experience, I would consider it very unlikely.

Fisheries committee  If there were ever to be a prosecution, yes.

Fisheries committee  It's a sophisticated little problem of criminal law when part of a criminal offence looks like it's taking place in Canada, and another part looks like it might be taking place in another country. The scenario you're describing involves someone in Canada who's paying for promotional material and advertising, but what they're advertising is for an activity that's going to take place in another country where it may be perfectly legal, so there's a combination of sort of domestic and foreign things happening.

Fisheries committee  It's because part of what constitutes the crime might be happening in Canada and another part might be happening abroad.

Fisheries committee  That will be your decision. I can only tell you what the possible legal outcome of such interpretations might be.

Fisheries committee  As a matter of federal criminal law, the criteria is what Parliament, in its wisdom, decides they should be. Scientifically, that might be a question better asked to the scientists, in terms of what level of scientific confidence can we have that being in captivity is sort of inherently harmful to the well-being of particular types of animals.

Fisheries committee  I think from a criminal law point of view, the only answer I can give to that question is that, as drafted, what the legislation seems to do is, in respect of cetaceans, to require that if there is going to be scientific research done, that a licence has to be obtained from the provincial government.

Fisheries committee  Right.

Fisheries committee  I can't other than to say that, in reading through some of the speeches given at second reading, I seem to recall reference being made to some other countries that have bans on keeping cetaceans in captivity, but off the top of my head, I couldn't tell you which they are.

Fisheries committee  No. I'm only able to say that, from a federal criminal law point of view, if Bill S-203 is not enacted, there would not be a requirement under federal law for the aquarium to obtain a licence from the provincial government in order to be able to engage in scientific research, which is something that they would be required to do after this bill, if it is enacted.

Fisheries committee  I can get pretty close to unequivocal on this.

Fisheries committee  Again, from a criminal law point of view, when we have offences that have a series of different action verbs in them, you want to look at all of them in the same context and make sure that any interpretation you're giving to one is consistent with the whole. When I look at the other words, “arranges, conducts, assists in, receives money for”, that tells me that this offence is targeting the individuals who are putting on the display.

Fisheries committee  Beyond possessing the animals already in captivity that would be grandfathered, the other offence that is provided for in the bill is the one we talked about a moment ago, which is a very long description of promoting, arranging, conducting, assisting at exhibitions or displays during which captive cetaceans are used for performance for entertainment.