The Committee met at 9:00 a.m. in the House of Assembly.

On motion of Mr. Barrett, seconded by Ms Jones, Mr. Mercer was elected Chairman.

CHAIR (Mercer): Thank you.

We have that formality out of the way. There is one more formality dealing with the election of a Vice-Chair. Could we have nominations for a Vice-Chair?

On motion of Mr. Ralph Wiseman, seconded by Mr. Barrett, Mr. Fitzgerald was elected Vice-Chairman.

CHAIR: With that formality out of the way I will ask the members of the Committee to identify themselves. Ray, if you would start.

MR. HUNTER: Ray Hunter, Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. BARRETT: Percy Barrett, Member for Bellevue.

MS JONES: Yvonne Jones, Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Ralph Wiseman, the Member for Topsail, that great district.

MR. FRENCH: Bob French, the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Roger Fitzgerald, the Member for Bonavista South.

CHAIR: Myself, Bob Mercer, I'm the Member for Humber East.

Before we proceed gentlemen and lady, perhaps we could agree upon the procedures that we will follow. In other committees, we have done all of the discussion and debate under the first head, rather than debating each head individually. What is your wish, that we do all the debating under the head 1.01 or we take them individually?

WITNESS: (Inaudible) Mr. Chairman, (inaudible).

CHAIR: Just for clarification, if you do it under one head, 1.01, it gives you freedom to ask questions anywhere within the Estimates any time you are speaking, whereas if you do it head by head it gets a little bit more constricted.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is the way that I would like to see it as well, Mr. Chairman, and that way everybody can ask their questions. At the end of the meeting, if we get the answers that we think should be given, then we can pass it with all the heads combined. If we don't get the answers then we will just delay it for another meeting at another time and keep going as long as (inaudible).

CHAIR: By concurrence then we will do our estimates in this Committee, and in the other five to follow, under head 1.01. Very well.

The procedure that we will follow in this particular Committee, as we will follow in all Committee meetings, is that we will ask the minister to open up discussion with some introductory remarks. We will try and keep him or her, as the case may be, to fifteen minutes. We will then ask the Vice-Chair to give his opening remarks and/or questions. We will then simply alternate between the members from each side until all the questions have been asked or until we have asked everything that we think we should.

That being the case, I would ask the minister to make his introductory remarks and ask him to identify his officials. I would ask the officials, when they are responding to a question, if they would state their names for the purposes of Hansard. Most of the members of the House - Kevin, I am sure, recognizes our melodious voices, but the officials may be a bit of a stumper for him.

Mr. Minister.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate the opportunity to be here. It is my fifth presentation on behalf of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture to the Estimates Committee.

I am going to begin with the people behind me: Brett Wareham, who is responsible in the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture for fishery development and infrastructure; Sonia Glover-Sullivan is a public relations director; Mr. John Bullen, is responsible for finance over in Fisheries and Aquaculture but works in the Department of Natural Resources; Jerry Ward, ADM responsible for Aquaculture; and sitting next to me is Leslie Dean, who is the Deputy Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

I am not going to use up a lot of time in my opening remarks this morning, because as I said, this is my fifth time, as Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, making a presentation to the Estimates Committee. Most people here are quite familiar with the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture and its responsibilities.

I am just going to touch on a couple of issues. The role of the department, as everybody knows, is as follows: the responsibility for promoting ongoing developing in the harvesting, processing, and marketing sectors of the fishing industry and for articulating policies relative to the management of fisheries resources, comprehensive programs relative to technical innovations, resource assessment, resource diversification, aquaculture development, productivity and quality enhancement.

I guess if I were to say one thing it is this. The topic that has been most on all our minds in the last five years is diversification and the quality enhancement program. Over the years in the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador there was very little emphasis put on the need to development a top quality product. The fish seemed to be just a fish, something that you take out of the ocean, no looking to where it was going, the end user, or the deriving of maximum price. It is hard to explain, but nevertheless that was certainly right throughout the industry from the harvesting and the processing sectors.

We made a lot of inroads into promoting quality into the fishing industry. We certainly took people down to the marketplace. We have even some fishermen and industry people to countries like Japan, China and Korea because what we wanted to do is have a good understanding of how competitive the world is in the fishing industry and how small Newfoundland and Labrador is, when you come into the world scheme of the whole industry. I have often referred to it as something like comparing or looking at a pimple on an elephant's back. That is about the size we are in comparison to the worldwide marketplace and the worldwide development of the fishing industry.

If we are going to be competitive and we are going to derive the maximum benefits we can out of the productivity, we have to be conscious of where our role is in the industry, in the world, in the marketplace, and what we need to do to get there.

I can say with a lot of pride that over the last four or five years the industry as a whole in Newfoundland and Labrador has made tremendous gains in being a professional industry. Their knowledge about where they want to go in the future and their confidence in the industry has been very well promoted.

The other thing that I find a major change in the industry as a whole in the harvesting sector is that they are very aware of their role in conservation issues. All of the people out there today are talking about long-term plans for the fishing industry, not to try to maximize their industry economic benefits in any one given season but looking at a long-term conservation plan, and that is the only way it can work. The industry as a whole has to be conservation-minded; the principle of conservation has to be applied. If you have to be forcing it on the industry, it won't work; but the role of the harvesting sector has come a long, long way. That was no more evident than last week when we had a fisheries forum here in St. John's and when scientists made their presentation on the state of the crab stocks. Every person who went to the microphone was supportive of the need to take some measures to support science and to put a plan in place that could protect the stocks. Hopefully we can play a role that will ensure that the stocks will be there for the long term. We cannot second-guess nature but, as far as the harvesting or the pressure on the stocks, they are willing to make some measures and take some short-term pain for some long-term gain.

We all know the state of the groundfish industry, what happened in 1992, the state of the cod stocks today. I just have to make a short sentence on this, that I strongly believe - I am 100 per cent convinced - that until we have the wisdom here in this Province, and DFO has the wisdom, to recognize that as long as we have an over-populated seal herd which is exploding at an alarming rate, not only will the ground stocks not come back but they are going to get worse.

My fear is - the word extinction could be possible, I suppose, but nature will not allow that to happen because she will send some kid of disease into the seal population and that will deplete the population, but that will take a long time and there will be a lot of suffering in a lot of communities around Newfoundland, even more than we have today. God knows, there is enough today.

We still have not convinced DFO to put a plan in place, although they have put an eminent committee in place to study it. That will take months, and hopefully no longer than that. Hopefully, by the year 2001 we will see some kind of a plan. It is quite clear along the Northeast Coast in Labrador, Northern Labrador in particular, as Dr. George Rose pointed out last week at the forum, there is still a lot of concern about the stocks. The only fish that we are aware of along the Northeast Coast is a small amount of fish over in Smith Sound, Trinity Bay. He is suggesting that now should be protected because that is the last significant body of fish around there.

Our shellfish industry has been the main focus of harvesting and processing. It has been the main part of the income over the last four or five years. The crab is about $450 of million export value, and the shrimp adds another $100 million or so to the industry. Our export value last year reached $1 billion, the first time in history.

We bragged about it, I guess, to the point that we wanted to build some confidence in the industry, but you all know the news that has come out over the last two or three days. We certainly are going to have some pain this year, but hopefully we will get through this without a total collapse of the crab industry.

I say it is a wake-up call. If we continued on without knowing that, we would be in the state that Alaska was in. Alaska will have a very small crab fishery this year, if any at all, and next year it will not have any at all. That is because they have fished to the point where it has caused that to happen. Luckily, our scientists found out there is a problem out there in recruitment. Hopefully, the adjustments that will be made will protect the stocks and we will not reach the situation in which Alaska has found themselves.

As I mentioned about the sealing industry, we have a fairly good seal fishery going with the market situation. It was $20 million in 1999. I referenced that if nature does her duty and causes her own measures to be taken to adjust the seal herd, we know what that will do to the $20 million sealing industry that we have today. It is growing, and it should get better year over year with the total utilization. The seal oil is really going, and is being exported worldwide now. It is growing every year, but if nature causes a problem to adjust the overpopulated seal herd we know the damage that will do to the present sealing industry. That will be a terrible thing to happen, but pray to God that we have commonsense enough to make some adjustments before that happens.

We have been promoting fisheries diversification because, in the case of small boat fishermen, if we are going to put plans in place or if small boat fishermen are going to survive in this Province, we had better encourage them to play a major role in working with us and the industry as a whole in developing underutilized species. We have a difficult time doing that because the crab industry has been expanded so that they have all been involved in it. They are making a lucrative income in that from the crab fishery and the lump fishery, and a couple of other species.

I have been saying to them that if you don't cooperate and develop opportunities like, for argument sake, in the whelk, which they say: Oh, we can't afford to go out because we are only getting thirty cents a pound.

I am saying to them that you can't afford not to go out. I can remember when the crab markets were so that they were only getting eight, ten, fifteen cents a pound but those people stuck with it and developed a major industry. I am telling people that species like whelk will be a lucrative fishery in the future. The markets are there. We just need to develop the opportunities here in Newfoundland, the resource here in Newfoundland, and be able to process it to derive a good marketable plan from it.

I can see, a year down the road, or two or three years down the road, when it could be $1 or $1.25 a pound. Like I told the small boat fishermen a couple of weeks ago down in Bay de Verde, then you will be crying for a licence, so get out there now and work with us and work with all parts of the industry to develop opportunities there for the future.

To conclude, on the aquaculture side of the department, Jerry Ward has played a major role in stabilizing the aquaculture industry in the Province. We took some difficult measures in S.C.B. Fisheries up in Bay d'Espoir but I think it has been for the best and, without going into details, you all know the position of government on that. We have cut off all funding into S.C.B. Fisheries because we believe now - we have highlighted and found out where the problems existed. We took some measures as a department, under Jerry's leadership, to get it on what we call a road where it can grow into a private driven industry.

The mussel industry is similar. Jerry has brought some measures in, and some stability into the mussel industry so that we have what I consider to be a firm position that the mussel industry now is on the road to, I think, doubling - Jerry, is that fair to say, year over year for the future? - not only in the growth of the mussels on the actual farms but into the processing and the marketplace. I think we have positioned ourselves now so that in three or four years down the road we should at least see a 5,000 tonne annual production of mussels. We are doing the primary and the secondary processing here in Newfoundland and Labrador, so we are keeping the jobs and the rewards from that industry here in the Province.

The other thing that Jerry has put a lot of work into from the Aquaculture side is the cod farming. There has been extensive consultation and strategy development in all sectors of the aquaculture industry. Just as early as last Friday, I attended a conference down in Clarenville where there were thirty-nine individual crews of fishermen who participated in those meetings, because last year we only had seven crews. We had expanded opportunities for people to seek applications, permission, licenses, for the cod grow out, and last week we had the largest meeting since I have been around on the cod grow out. I can see, if cod stocks allow the fishermen, that we can see a major expansion in the cod grow out this year and that certainly gives the fishermen the opportunity, with the small quotas they have, to double their annual income.

Mr. Chairman, without repeating things I have said because, as I said, this is our fifth year and we are going over all of the activities in the department. I just wanted to give a highlight of where we are today and the confidence that we have in the industry. We are never going to be without problems. I mean, the fishing industry's nature is to be that way and we cannot control nature. That is what is happening in the crab stocks today. It is not overfishing; it is a nature thing, the recruitment. Hopefully it is not going to be as bad as we expect it to be now, but the thing about it is that we have caught it in time, I think, and we will take the necessary short-term pain - hopefully that will be short term - and the long-term gain benefits will be coming in the future.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Madam Clerk, if you could call the first subhead.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Mr. Vice-Chairman.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, nobody is going to argue much, I don't think, about your opening statement and some of the things that you brought forward there. I suppose all we have to do is look at the paper on a regular basis here for a number of weeks, as it relates to cod farming. Just about every edition of The Telegram, the weekend edition, you saw four, five or six fishermen or fishing enterprises looking for licenses for cod farming. Last year I don't know how many licenses were issued. I think there were twenty something or thirty something and there were seven active licenses that people took part. This year it seems like that is catching on. Maybe it is through the work of your deputy minister or assistant deputy minister in providing people with the information they need, and helping them along.

I see that having to happen as it relates to some of the newer fisheries that you talked about when you referred to diversification, because I am not sure that fishermen can afford, or if they are willing to be able to go out and, with the meager amount of money that most of the small boat fishermen are making today - I think it is the small boat fishermen that you are targeting when you are talking about diversification. I don't think we can expect them - and I don't think it is going to happen, if we see them make a few dollars on catching crab or the small amount of groundfish that they are allowed to catch - to spend that amount of money then in order to go towards a new fishery. I think there has to be some help there, and I think maybe this is one way that we can spend some of the fisheries diversification money in order to help those people go out and get involved in those new industries, those new fisheries, in order to help them along.

In many of the fisheries you are looking at probably two, three, four or five years before you see any return on their money. I think of the mussel fishery, for instance. You don't go out and set your mussel ropes today and realize the same year a profit from it. It is something that has to be done through some kind of funding to help them along until they can go and be able to carry out that particular industry and make some money; because they are not making enough money in order to be able to go out and take some of the money that they made at those other fisheries, put it into a new fishery, and be able to live and support their family and meet their commitments as well.

Quality has certainly come a long way as far as processing quality. When you look at the amount of fish product that was put in the cheapest pack possible, I suppose, would be the word that I should use, last year - and I am talking about cod block. Minister, you talk about 50 per cent. I have been hearing the figure of 70 per cent of the amount of groundfish caught last year that was shipped out of this Province in cod block form, a form that realizes something like $1.80 a pound versus $3.00 to $3.50 a pound they would give if they were able to put out the prime package.

I do not know if the problem was the way it was caught, in gill nets. The old saying was: If you bring crap in the door to be processed, you send crap out the door in order to be marketed. Fish plants do not enhance quality. It can only work with what they get in the door from the holding room in order to go through the processing line. If anything, quality, I suppose, takes another beating inside because of the handling of the fish. It is something that I thought we have learnt. I am not so sure we have. I am not so sure how far we have progressed when it comes to learning a lesson and giving fisherman information.

Since 1992, we have seen the groundfish fishery in this Province, especially on the northeast coast, virtually disappear. Now we are looking at some kind of a come back happening. Last year, I think it was 9,000 metric tonnes on the northeast coast, 30,000 metric tonnes on the South Coast. We are still having a debate on what type of fishing gear we are allowed to use. We are still having a debate of what size of gear we are allowed to use when it comes to gill nets. Should we be allowed to use gill nets or shouldn't we be allowed to use them? I would have thought that with all the forums and all the meetings that fisherman have had and that you have been taking part in since you have been minister that now it would be clearly stated. That: Yes, if this fishery has returned here is what we can use and here is what we cannot use. Fishermen still do not know. I think that information should be made available to them.

Minister, nobody is going to argue against conservation. I think we have learned our lesson many times as it relates to conservation. It is discouraging, I suppose, when you see what is happening in this last couple of weeks. We say that it is all done in the name of conservation. Conservation can be practiced. I think people can be fed the right information as well. Because this information - I am talking about the reduction or the possible reduction in the crab fish quotas - has been on the go for at least three weeks. I am sure the minister, heading up the department in Newfoundland, must have heard it as well. I am sure that it was not news to his ears yesterday. If it is, then I would certainly have a real problem with the transfer of information both federally and provincially. I think we have reached a stage in this Province that we should be given the medicine when we know it. If there is going to be a reduction in the crab quota, then as soon as we know that is going to happen we should let fishermen know it. Because here we are one week before this fishery is supposed to start and we do not know if there is going to be a 20 per cent quota reduction, we do not know if it is going to be 50 per cent, we do not know when the season is going to open.

I think fishermen deserve better than that. They have gone out and in the great messages that you, minister, have been taking forward when you talk about the $1 billion fishing industry and what it is worth to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, I can tell you, you are not wrong when you talk about what it is worth to Newfoundland and Labrador. You are certainly not wrong when you talk about the $1 billion export value of the fishing industry, $500 million - half of it - from the crab fishery. What you have done in saying that is you have generated this great big hope out there. Fishermen have gone out and they have bought new boats and new fishing gear. They have gone in hock to the processors and the banks of this Province. The Premier yesterday talked about: It should not be a surprise to anybody that this new industry, this crab fishery, has a shelf life of five or six years and then it takes a dip down.

I am not so sure if everybody was aware that what they were doing would only be there for five or six years and then they would have to go through two, three or four lean years. I am not so sure that they did. Now all of a sudden -

MR. EFFORD: Where are they living?

MR. FITZGERALD: I beg your pardon?

MR. EFFORD: Where are they living?

MR. FITZGERALD: I am not so sure that they did. I am asking you.

Now all of a sudden, Mr. Chairman, we find people saying: What am I going to do? What is going to happen to me? The minister himself went out and his argument was - and I raised the issue at the time when the minister talked about doubling the number of processing plants in the Province, crab processing licenses - this: This has to be done, because we are now doubling the quota to be caught and we have to have crab plants in geographic areas, placed in areas where it is important that they can access this product and realize the greatest quality that we can achieve. The minister went out and doubled this processing capacity. All he did - I don't care who you point to -

MR. EFFORD: Triton. (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: - all he did was transfer jobs.

You talk to people now, and last year the people in this industry had to struggle to get enough work to qualify for EI. It was a struggle. You talk to people in Bonavista, which has the oldest fish processing plant in the Province. I don't mean the age of the plant but I mean the length of time that it has been involved in the business: 1969. There may have been one other close to that time frame. Last year they had to struggle to get the minimum number of weeks to qualify for EI. This year the minister and the Premier are saying: It is no big deal, it is only 20 per cent to 25 per cent, and the fishermen can take that little bit of reduction. When you talk to the fishermen in the under thirty-five foot boat sectors and you talk to the fish plant workers, minister, I can tell you that a lot of them cannot take a 20 per cent or 25 per cent reduction. What it is going to mean is that you are going to see a lot of those people now having to revert to social services. You are going to see them having to leave the Province altogether. The minister controlled a lot of that, and that was wrong.

We have to base our knowledge on good science and I think the information is not there. We have the scientists but we do not have the information. When you see the amount of money that is being spent on science in this Province today for this particular industry, it is shameful. I heard the figure, and the minister might say it is wrong, of some panel that was on the Fisheries Broadcast some time ago saying last year there was $25,000 spent in shellfish science in the Province.

MR. EFFORD: That is unbelievable, Roger, for God's sake.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is what the panel put forward and every time I say that I preface it -

MR. EFFORD: The moon is made of green cheese, too.

MR. FITZGERALD: - by saying that those people said it.

I approached a scientist down at your Fisheries Forum 2000 and he said: While the $25,000 was a correct figure, what they did not consider was the cost of having the boat and the cost of fuel and that kind of thing. It is still a paltry amount of money when you look at the information that is not forthcoming in order to provide us with good scientific knowledge of an industry that means so much to this Province. I am a firm believer, minister, that we should have our own science program here, some kind of an institution here where we can be, if nothing else, a watchdog for the federal government. I know it is going to cost some money, but there is no point in having a good quality program, there is no point in going out and having good markets, unless we can provide the right information as well in order to have this industry move forward.

Seals are continually being talked about and they are a problem. Minister, you have no worry about somebody - although it seems like sometimes you want to carry the whole thing yourself, and when people even try to help you it is always: Where have you been? A lot of people come forward and I am not so sure that you accept any help or you accept anybody else to follow behind you, because it seems like it is something that you want to stand on your box with and carry off yourself.

MR. EFFORD: What did you have for breakfast?

MR. FITZGERALD: I am telling you what I had now because it is the truth.

MR. EFFORD: It couldn't have been food.

MR. FITZGERALD: Minister, I am not so sure how far we have moved ahead in our problem with seals. While we continually talk about the need for a reduction of the herd - there is nobody that is going to disagree with you about that - what have we done with markets? It is obvious that the federal government is not about to provide us with a cull. That is not in the cards; it is not going to happen. What have we done as far as increasing markets as it relates to seal meat? We done very well with the oil. I understand the blubber is now being taken to a further process. That is all good stuff. There is a seal manufacturing plant in my own district doing very well. I still believe, and you believe yourself, I am sure, that if we are going to be able to go out and take anywhere near the number of seals that need to be taken in order to address the problem we are having with seals and cod, then we are going to have to do something different and we are going to have do something more as far as marketing seal meat, and allow of a greater export value.

That is my opening comment, and I will just ask a couple of questions. Last year in the Estimates, I asked you about the sale of the Nain Banker. Can you tell me when that vessel was sold?

MR. EFFORD: It was early in 1999. I cannot tell you the exact month, but it was in 1999.

MR. FITZGERALD: So it was not in June or July?

WITNESS: April.

MR. EFFORD: April.

MR. FITZGERALD: It was in April of 1999? It sold for $1 million?

MR. EFFORD: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: I know you are going to go on and tell us about the need to help the Labrador communities and that kind of thing, but when it was put out on a public tender why didn't you try to get the greatest amount of money that you could get from that vessel? Still, I do not know if it could be tied in; I suppose it could. Once you sell the vessel, the vessel is sold and you have no control over where it lands product or anything else.

If you are going to start making special cases, Minister, there are a lot of special cases in this Province and you better have a lot of tricks in your pocket to pull out, because I think we have to get away from making special cases when the need is just as great in other areas as well. If you are going to put a piece of equipment or something that you control up on tender, then I think the Public Tender Act has to be acknowledged. I do not know if you just want to respond to that.

MR. EFFORD: Yes, I do. Let me respond to that one first and I will make comments on the other points you raised during your remarks.

I make no apologies to the Auditor General, to anybody in this Province, to anybody in this country, for what I did for the Labrador portion of the Province. We made a decision in the best interest of the communities along the Coast of Labrador that the Nain Banker could be best utilized for those people. I could have put it up on public tender call and I am sure some company, maybe one of the companies in the member's district, would have probably paid $1,200,000 or $1,300,000, but I did not intend, I did not even lean towards, I did not even consider, doing that.

I first gave the opportunity for Torngat Fisheries. They could not utilize it to their opportunities. My next decision was the only other company that I saw that could utilize it to the benefits of the people in Labrador was the Labrador Shrimp Company. They paid $1 million for their boat. They spent extensive amounts of money since, putting freezing and the necessary repairs. They do land in Labrador when conditions permit. When the season closes and the ice conditions do not allow them to land in Labrador, they utilize that vessel in harvesting and land it on the Island, where I think some of the product is going in your district.

MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible) about that.

WITNESS: Trinity North.

MR. EFFORD: Trinity North. Anyway, it is being landed to the benefit of the people on the Island, so no apologies to anybody for what I did

MR. FITZGERALD: When you say freezing capacity put on the boat, are you talking about freezing in order to bring it ashore for further processing or are you talking about freezing for industrial (inaudible)?

MR. EFFORD: No, Sir, freezing to take it - when they go up in area zero and fish turbot and they have to bring in a quality product they have a chilled freezing unit on and they can bring it in for further processing.

MR. FITZGERALD: Down in Belleoram last year was a topic again that I had brought forward with the hatchery there. You indicated, at that time, that you were about to disburse the operation as of March,1999, I think your statement was, or that was the indication at that time. You have recently, I think, divested yourself of that particular operation. You talk about research and development. How much money has been spent in that particular hatchery, and how much money has been realized from it? How much in sales have they made?

MR. EFFORD: It has been over $2 million, approximately $2 million; $1.8 million was spent up until March, 1999. How much money has been derived from it? Very little, a minimum amount of money. That is the reason why, I think, the best effort was put in by the people, the research into seeing that the scallop hatchery could work. We have made a decision that we are no longer going to operate that hatchery. We will, at some point in time, and we plan, in the near future, to call - or have we already called proposals?

WITNESS: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Yes, we have that done for public proposals to operate the hatchery, or do whatever they want with it.

MR. FITZGERALD: Is it up for sale now?

MR. EFFORD: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: You are excepting proposals for somebody coming and taking it over.

MR. EFFORD: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: Then you will decide what the value of it is or what the proposals are, at that particular time?

MR. EFFORD: I want to touch on one issue while the hon. member is looking for something he wants to use on the next point he wants to make - about doubling the crab licenses. There are two or three reasons why I did that. First of all, the licenses were held by a small group of people. There was even a lot of public talk around the fact that I did it myself on the cartel. I call it a monopolization of the industry.

The crab quotas went from 16,000 tonne up to, last year, 66,000 tonne. There is no way I was going to condone, first of all, the cartel; and in no way was going to allow such a small group of companies to operate or to process all of the crab stocks. It wasn't fair; it wasn't good for the quality. There was no way you could put it through in those plants, so I expanded the crab license for those reasons. Your friend and colleague next to you was one of the recipients of the expansion in crab processing. My district - I lost because there were two plants in my area and they closed up one and incorporated all in the one operation.

It was for the best interest of the crab industry as a whole and it has worked very, very well. I had no illusions about the crab stocks remaining stable. History shows that since the 1960s, since the crab harvesting took place, even when there were only a few boats, less than fifty boats into the harvesting - one example was in 1985.

WITNESS: In the 1970s and the 1980s.

MR. EFFORD: In the 1970s and the 1980s. With nature's own hands, the stocks just disappeared for a couple of years and then they came back again. In every species - God, if you fished like I fished growing up, I can remember going out in one year and having a boom. We landed 2,000 quintals in 1960, and in 1961 we couldn't get enough to eat in Conception Bay.

If we can try to predict, over the next ten, twenty, thirty or forty years, how all species of fish are going to be season over season, then the hon. member is much smarter than I am.

MR. FITZGERALD: How much creditability do you put into the way that the science was carried out as it relates to doing the survey? I think it was done in November, and at that particular time not only did they do a survey on crab but it was also shrimp and other species as well by an otter net type of trawl that they towed behind the boat, and did their count at that particular time. What type of creditability do you put on that type of a survey to provide us with information?

MR. EFFORD: First of all, there were two types of surveys which went out last year. Dave Taylor is responsible for the harvesting and the information collected from the harvesting methods with observers, fishermen, the log books and the catch rates. Earle Dawe is responsible for the Campelen trawl which was done last fall, October, November and December. I will give all the support of science that I can possibly give. The only thing I would add to that is that I would like to see more emphasis placed on the catch rates. Like I said yesterday, and I have said many times before, every fisherman should at least have one pot on each string with a small mesh to support or confirm the information that science has put forth, and I would like to see more work done on trawl survey.

While I will not depart from my comments and my support to science, I would just like to see more work put into it because we have to increase the confidence level to be absolutely sure what we are saying; but I will err on the side of caution.

MR. FITZGERALD: It is not the way that we fish crab. You would think that the survey would have been carried out in a way that you probably would suggest there.

MR. EFFORD: Just let me explain that.

MR. FITZGERALD: The other part of it is, if you look at what the fishermen's log books tell us and you look at their catch rates, they experience as good catch rates at the end of the season as they did at the beginning. Even areas in 3K where crab is not as abundant as it is in 3L, you talk to some of the fishermen there - I think it was just last night Mark Small was on talking about his catch rates and what he experienced, so we are still getting all this mixed information.

MR. EFFORD: Yes, but you have to understand the fishery, and the member should understand this. The catch rates have nothing to do with the problem that science has now found. The problem they are having is the recruitment, what is coming behind, and the smaller crab. The size of mesh that has been used on the pots allows the small crab to escape before they come up, so the fishermen would not be able to find that out. That is the reason I said every fisherman should have at least one pot with small shrimp mesh or caplin mesh on the pot's cover to allow the catch and to find out if there are any small crab in the harvesting side of it; can they find any.

The catch rates were good last year because the biomass of commercial size crab is good, but if you continue on with that catch rate of last year, in two or three years we will do exactly what Alaska has done; we will fish it out until there is none there at all.

That is the reason why I think we all have some kind of relief that science has caught it before it got to the position where the crab stocks are completely depleted. There are only two ways we can find out the amount of small crab that is out there. It is in using a smaller mesh on some of the pots, and the Campelen trawl.

MR. FITZGERALD: Do you think we have a problem with high-grading at sea when it comes to the crab fishery?

MR. EFFORD: I have no doubt, and I will make no excuses for some of the fishermen, there is some high-grading taking place. It is like the gill nets. It bothers me and I do not want to be talking about this every day because I try to promote some confidence in the industry in that we are professional and we are trying to get everybody to do things right; but if you order all thirty gill nets and your quota is 10,000 pounds, you know there is discarding taking place. You cannot imagine why people want to do it. Yes, a small percentage of fishermen are doing some high-grading. We have to certainly deal with that issue. You would hope that everybody would be more professional. It is their industry.

It is like I told fishermen the other day: you know, you get angry with me when I say you have to do things differently but no matter how bad or how good you do things, my salary remains the same. The only people you are hurting by not doing things right is yourselves; so, for God's sake, smarten up.

Yes, there is some high-grading taking place. Education - keep talking about doing the right thing and hopefully over time most people will do what is right, but it is like any other profession, no matter what profession you have in the world. Let's look around this building, this room here. You have all the good members on this side and you have all the bad members on that side. That is the nature of the beast.

MR. FITZGERALD: Do you mean today?

MR. EFFORD: No, not today.

MR. FITZGERALD: Well, Minister, I think probably one way of dealing with that - and it is hard to change people's attitudes. That does not happen easily. That does not happen overnight. While we all would like to see people's attitudes change -

MR. EFFORD: We have come a long way in the last five years.

MR. FITZGERALD: We have come a long way, absolutely, but we still have a long way to go, I say to the minister.

MR. EFFORD: I intend to be there to make it happen.

MR. FITZGERALD: I do not know how long you are going to be around. Somebody else will decide that, probably.

I say to the minister that maybe one way of correcting it is dealing with the difference in price, 20 cents I think. What is it? They are allowed to bring in 20 per cent under four inches? I think the price is a 20 cent difference in the price per pound. Maybe that is one way of dealing with it. If we are going to bring it in and if we are going to process it, then why do we not pay the same price? If that brings down the top price, then so be it. Maybe we can bring a balance there somewhere. I do not know what the difficulties are in that but it would probably help solve the problem.

I will let somebody else ask some questions.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Fitzgerald.

Mr. Wiseman, and then we will go to Mr. Hunter.

MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Just one quick comment, Mr. Chairman, to say that I think the minister and his staff are doing a tremendous job in terms of promoting and enhancing the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is always a delicate subject in a sense, of course, when we talk about scientific evidence and how accurate that is; but I think, with the experience the minister has, and his own common sense, and his contact with the fishermen, it will certainly tell you what changes are taking place, if any.

I am also curious, Minister; we have talked a lot about diversification in the fishery. I wonder how much specifically have we done since 1992 in terms of different species development?

MR. EFFORD: I will admit up front - and I think I said something similar yesterday when I met with the editorial board of The Telegram - I do not think we have done enough as an industry. I am not just saying governments, but industry as a whole. I do not think we have done enough in policy planning for the future of the fishery, and I do not think we have done enough in research and development, although my department has certainly taken a major role in leadership in that we have signed an MOU with the federal government where we are now taking over the responsibility of developing opportunities in underutilized species. We still have some difficulty inside DFO to get all the people on side, but I think that is something we have to work on.

There is a number of areas where there are opportunities being developed. The one that comes to the top of my mind is sea urchins. One of the best kept secrets in Newfoundland and Labrador today is the sea urchins opportunities out there. There are a hundred or so crew of fishermen in the wintertime. We have several plants, and one of them is right there on Bell Island where there is a magnificent opportunity, jobs for the people living in that area. We have done some work in other areas, such as seaweed. We have developed opportunities and worked with industry, but the next step has to be industry themselves developing. As a government, we cannot go out and start up a processing plant. We have certainly put money into research and development. The inshore shrimp fishery is another prime example. The other one is we have been promoting the total utilization of all species, all products: crab shells, shrimp shells and fish offal. We have done research and development on it and also the marketing research. The markets are there, the opportunities are there, and now the next step needs to taken by industry itself.

I think over the next four or five years you are going to see major developments in waste products of all species, and underutilized species. Do you know why? It was happening. We put a lot of work, and industry has put a lot of time and effort, into it, but what has come out in the last three or four weeks in the state of the crab stocks I think has made people stop and think: We better do other things. I think it has been a wake up call. Out of every ill wind that blows there is always something good comes out of it.

MR. RALPH WISEMAN: That is it for me, Mr. Chairman, for now.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Wiseman.

We will go to Mr. Hunter and then Ms Jones.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, I am sure you are really sincere in your concerns about the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. I do not know what your reasons were at the time when you allowed a licence for the Triton FPI plant. I hope they were for the right reasons. At the time there may have been some concerns that the reason was to enhance the previous member's chance of getting re-elected. I do not know if it was true or not.

MR. EFFORD: Yes, it was, boy. If that is what you think, yes it was.

MR. HUNTER: I think the person that you are, I think you did it for the right reasons, because I do respect your concern for the fishery. You certainly appear to be a person who is really concerned in doing the right and the best thing.

Having said that, when you refer to the Triton plant from time to time, the Triton plant is certainly an economic generator for all Green Bay South and some areas outside of Green Bay South. That is a very important plant and a very important industry in that area. It creates almost 400 jobs at peak periods. Without that plant there this area would be really devastated when it comes to the number of people wanting to stay in that area. There would be more out-migration. I don't think politics should come into it when it comes to developing a resource. You said it yourself, Mr. Minister. Last week I heard you say that it was for the best interest of all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to develop the industry in the best way possible. I agree with you there, and I think you were sincere when you said that. Even though you do play politics sometimes when you talk about the development of certain things in certain areas, particularly in areas of our holdings with our members. I have heard you say: The reason why you don't get it was because you have a Tory member.

MR. EFFORD: That is right.

MR. HUNTER: I think that is very irresponsible to say to anybody.

MR. EFFORD: It is factual.

MR. HUNTER: If it is factual, then I think you should resign right away. I don't think this is fair to anybody in this Province today, that you could hold something over their heads of such importance as our fishery or any other industry in Newfoundland.

MR. EFFORD: You should have been around in 1985 to 1989 when I was on the Opposition, brother!

MR. HUNTER: Two wrongs don't make a right, Mr. Minister. I would like to tell you today -

MR. EFFORD: Live in the real world, boy. We are political.

MR. HUNTER: If you are political, then do it in a professional manner and not in an irresponsible manner.

A person called me two weeks ago asking about the waterline for the Triton plant and I told him what your members have been telling me, your ministers have been telling me. This guy said: We got it right from the minister's mouth, that the reason why they are not getting the waterline in the Triton plant is because they elected a Tory member. I think that is very irresponsible. Even though I have a great respect for your concern for the industry and a great respect for what you have done in the past, I don't think these kinds of things should be said to anybody in public, in districts, such as where this industry is so important to so many people and their lives depend on it. The economic development in that area depends on it and the well-being of the job situation in that area depends on it. Mr. Minister, I hope you were only joking. I sincerely hope you were joking. I am not sure if you were joking or not, but I think that your concerns for that plant and the people in that area are just as relevant as they are in your district, I hope. I hope that you don't be political to any district when it comes to enhancing and maintaining the jobs in that area.

With respect to the license for the Triton plant, I hope you did it for the right reason and that you continue doing things in my district for the right reason, not because you want to get me out or get one of your own members in. Because I am not in politics for my benefit. I am in politics because I love Newfoundland and Labrador and I love to do something for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I don't care where the people live, what district, what colour they are, I will help everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador who calls on me for help, regardless of what party they support. I think it is our responsibility as politicians to do that, all of us, to help the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Minister, with respect to the seal fishery and declining stocks, I don't know much about the fishery but when you compare it to other species of other animals and wildlife and everything, there is a cycle of population over the generations. I think with the seal population, even though it is out of hand now, some day this cycle will turn and be in the decline. Because we see it in a lot of other species, when the populations increase to a point where we think that the effect of it will be so great that it will not return, like the fish populations and that. I think the cycle of the population of seals will change eventually if we can just maintain the course that we are on, not to overfish, and to have more scientific study into the fish populations, their habitat and stuff like that. We certainly need more scientific research done, but eventually, over a period of time - we may not see it in our day - nature does take care of a lot of problems.

MR. EFFORD: You are saying we should not do anything about it.

MR. HUNTER: I am not saying we should not. I am saying we should continue on the role of scientific research with the cutbacks in quotas of the fishery to maintain a sustainable quota of fishing. I think that is the right role that you are doing there. I don't believe in going out and slaughtering anything just for the sake of saving something else. It is not my way of thinking. I think we are on the right track with watching our resource and being careful on not overfishing. I think that is the right thing to do. Now you may not agree with what I just said about the seals. That is only my opinion and it doesn't matter what you say. It is still my opinion. Mr. Minister -

MR. EFFORD: I'm ashamed. You darn well won't get anything now.

MR. HUNTER: My father, before he died, agreed with what you are agreeing with. He agreed that the seals were the main problem. He agreed that something should be done, there should be a cull on the seals. I had to disagree with him on a total cull. Maybe a partial, maybe in certain areas, but I don't believe in slaughtering anything. That is just my opinion on it.

Mr. Minister, I think -

MR. EFFORD: Make no wonder we have problems in this Province.

MR. HUNTER: We have problems because of people governing the Province, and if you are part of the government of the Province -

MR. EFFORD: God forbid if you ever get over here.

MR. HUNTER: - you are part of the problem, Mr. Minister. If we want to get into the debate on what the problems are, there are more problems in this Province, not only in fisheries but in all the rest of the resource sectors. So when we look at problems we have to look at who is running the Province first and then you can identify the problems and identify the solutions to the problems. So we don't want to get into a debate on that even though you may want to.

MR. EFFORD: I'm ready.

MR. HUNTER: You can if you like, but maybe we can take it up some other time.

With respect to the mussel industry, in my district it is quite a big industry. I think probably 60 per cent of the mussel fishery in Newfoundland is in the Green Bay area. There has been some concern that maybe it is time to have another processing plant in the Green Bay South area. Some people have approached me and asked if they could do further processing there. I know you probably do not agree with it, but where 60 per cent of the resource is coming from that area, then some people that are farming in that area would like to have some way of processing their product there.

I mentioned it to you last year in the Estimates and you said there was no dumping, but there was a lot of dumping of mussels last year in the Green Bay South area. I did not see it, but I was told there was, and that was oversized mussels. Mr. Minister, if you want further information on that I will certainly give you the name of the person that called me and you could talk first hand to him and understand what he is talking about. Because I certainly am not familiar with the fishery. I don't even like water and I don't say I will be on your boat either, Mr. Minister, because I don't like water that much.

MR. EFFORD: You got that right, you won't be.

MR. HUNTER: I do agree that we have to go in the right direction. We have to do the right thing for the resource and for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have to make sure that everything possible is done to enhance it but still be sustainable in our marketing and sustainable in our harvesting. I just encourage you to keep the concerns that you have and encourage you to stay sincere about what you are doing. I think a lot of people in Newfoundland and Labrador today do believe that you are a sincere minister and you are doing what you think should be done for that resource. I don't mean to praise you up for the sake of praising you up. I'm just saying that because I do believe that a lot of people in Newfoundland and Labrador recognize that you are trying to do something for this resource and you are doing it the best way possible. Like I said, Mr. Minister, two wrongs don't make a right. So we just have to make sure that we do not do something wrong for the sake of doing something that you think might have to be done to change peoples' minds about political persuasion. I hope that is not the case. The more I get to know you the more I will understand that, so probably in the future I will understand why you say those things. As for now, Mr. Minister, I just want to leave it at that and hope that my district still benefits from the fishery in the future.

MR. EFFORD: Just a couple of quick comments, because most of what the hon. member said I am not even going to respond to. I will open my remarks first of all by asking: Do you send your contributions to the IFAW on a monthly basis or on a yearly basis? Because for any Newfoundlander or Labradorian to make the comments you have made is nothing short of disgraceful.

MR. HUNTER: About what, Mr. Minister?

MR. EFFORD: About the seal population: you cannot cull the seals or slaughter seals.

MR. HUNTER: I did not say you cannot cull them. I said you cannot slaughter them.

MR. EFFORD: Every single animal population in the world where there is a concern about the impact on other resources or the natural environment, every single county in the world, including Canada, last year killed 5 million Arctic snow geese, culled 5 million Arctic snow geese.

MR. HUNTER: So you want me to get rid of the pine martin so we can have a forest?

MR. EFFORD: Australia, the United States, every single country.

MR. HUNTER: You want to do that too, do you?

MR. EFFORD: Why do we have a problem in Newfoundland? Because the greedy people who overfish, the large foreign freezer trawlers, the large trawlers on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland - not the small inshore fisherman - depleted our resources down here. At the same time we fell prey to the Greenpeace people and we let the population of seals explode up here -

MR. HUNTER: I don't agree with what Greenpeace did any more than you, Mr. Minister.

MR. EFFORD: - and we shouldn't do something about that? Go away, boy, you have lost it!

MR. HUNTER: I never said anything about Greenpeace, I never said anything about supporting -

MR. EFFORD: You have lost it, my son. Go away (inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: Listen, minister, I did not say anything about not having a cull.

MR. EFFORD: So you leave it to nature for the next several decades to take care of it.

MR. HUNTER: I did not say we -

MR. EFFORD: I tell you there will be nobody living on Triton Island.

MR. HUNTER: Do you listen very well? Are you very professional? I thought you were a professional person.

MR. EFFORD: Now let me finish. I let you finish! You have your time after to make your comments.

MR. HUNTER: Just listen. Tell the truth. I did not say not to have a cull

MR. EFFORD: Make no wonder your father said what he said.

MR. HUNTER: Maybe he was wrong. I am starting to believe that he was wrong about you.

MR. EFFORD: Your father was wrong?

MR. HUNTER: Yes.

MR. EFFORD: No! Your father said we should do something about the seals.

MR. HUNTER: I am believing now that he was wrong about you, Mr. Minister.

MR. EFFORD: Look, I let you finish.

MR. HUNTER: Yes.

MR. EFFORD: We can stay here all day if you want to discuss this back and forth.

MR. HUNTER: You just misled these people. I did not say what you just said.

MR. EFFORD: You did so say it.

MR. HUNTER: I did not. I said I wasn't for a total slaughter of the seal population, and I said I was probably in favour of a particular cull in a certain area. I did say that, and I can get the Hansard and show you tomorrow if you want to see it. I wasn't totally against a cull. Some things have to be done I know, but we don't do it for the sake of doing it.

Mr. Minister, tell the truth. How many people in Newfoundland and Labrador support what you are saying about that? Do you have any idea how many people support you on that? If you went out tomorrow and asked for a major cull on the seal population, do you really know how much support you have on that, the percentage of the population? Because I can tell you I have heard almost as many people who spoke out against that as for it.

MR. EFFORD: Will the hon. member just relax for a second?

MR. HUNTER: Do a poll.

MR. EFFORD: You will have full time. Let me ask you a question. Mr. Chairman, I need to get this point across.

MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Point of order.

CHAIR: Mr. Wiseman.

MR. RALPH WISEMAN: I understand the member said for the minister to tell the truth, which would be employing that he is not telling the truth.

MR. HUNTER: He just said that I was against a cull of the seal fishery and I said I wasn't against a cull. You can go back in the Hansard and find out that I said I wasn't against a cull. Some type of cull in a particular area, a certain area, I am not against, but I am against the total slaughter of seals. That is what I said in the beginning.

MR. EFFORD: Who is suggesting a total slaughter of seals?

CHAIR: If I might interject -

MR. HUNTER: I never said anybody did but that is what I said I was against.

CHAIR: If I might just interject, I would remind all members that while the rules of the Committee are somewhat relaxed as compared to those of the House, there are certain rules of decorum and perhaps we should not be calling one another's integrity into question. Let's debate the issues.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible) just a few brief comments to clue up because, as I said, I am not going to respond to most of the things that the member said. I said to a former premier one day: This is not a courtroom, this is a political arena, and you had better get used to living in it.

When it comes to the problem with the cod stocks, the groundfish stocks, this is 2000. The moratorium was brought in in 1992. According to the (inaudible) research, the information given by science, the biomass of northern cod is worse today than it was in 1992. That is very evident. The seal population has exploded, the count is finalized. They have to do a peer review in Ottawa to confirm the count, but we know, using common sense, that the population of harp, hood and grey seals is in excess of 7 million animals. That will all come out in the next couple of months.

If we don't consider that a major problem... When I went to Burgeo on Saturday, I sat down to the table and watched men and women with tears coming down over their face from their eyes about no hope, no future for their community. If we think the crab is going to provide the opportunity for every community in Newfoundland and Labrador, we know that is not right. I am only using Burgeo as an example. I could use Little Bay Islands or Change Islands. To be able to sit here and say that every other country in the world makes an adjustment to a population of whatever it is, whether it is birds or animals, when they have a major impact on the vegetation or the resource in the ocean, they do it, and the only place it is not being done is in Newfoundland and Labrador, when I hear comments like I heard this morning I have got to be angered. Because this is not a political issue on what the thing has caused out there and that things need to be done. It is being promoted by the greed of animal rights' organizations who last year raised $58 million U.S. on the backs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. If we don't speak with the one voice in this Province, yes, nature will take care of it, but she will also take care of every rural community in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Those are all my comments, Mr. Chairman.

MR. HUNTER: You misunderstood what I said. I never said that I was totally against killing seals, if you do it for the right reason, as a resource, and utilize 100 per cent of that resource when you do it, not for the sake of culling. That is what I was against. I told you that I am not against killing seals. I am not against a cull to a certain degree, but I don't agree with slaughtering seals for the sake of slaughtering seals.

MR. EFFORD: Who is saying that?

MR. HUNTER: I never said you said it. I told you that was my opinion on it.

If you come to the people and say: Look, we have a seal industry here that could create hundreds of jobs, we will utilize 100 per cent and we are going to kill this many seals, just the same as catching cod or utilizing any other resource, then I am not against that. What I said was that I was against slaughtering seals for the sake of slaughtering seals to get the population down, and there is nothing wrong with that. If you misunderstood me, I am sorry.

CHAIR: Any further questions Mr. Hunter?

MR. HUNTER: No, that is it.

CHAIR: Ms Jones.

I see some members are absent, so then back to the Vice-Chair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a couple of comments that I want to make first of all. I think some points that have been highlighted here this morning, I am sure, are certainly out of general frustration because, as you know, the fishery is the backbone of the economy in this Province. It is the industry that sustains the rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador, and I am sure there is no dispute about that.

There are a couple of things I want to speak to. One is in terms of the politics in the industry. I think that if you want to look at politics in the fishery you don't have to look back too many years when there were fish plants built on every corner of this Province, and a lot of them were done to appease political interests. They were done to buy votes or they were done to the satisfaction of members who were in office back in those days.

I would like to think that we have come certainly a long ways from those days. I think that we have reached a point in this Province right now where our fishery is definitely based on economics, it is based on sustainability, and it is based on making tough decisions. A number of the tough decisions I have certainly seen this minister make over my few years in office, and some of them were not always welcomed with applause. A lot of them were, but I think that what was done was done in the best interest of people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I want to speak to a couple of incidents in my district, because in 1992 I was an employment counselor who sat on the other side of a desk when fisherpeople walked in and out of my district: people and families who were devastated, communities that did not know where their next dollar was coming from or if they would even have an industry to rebuild.

Mr. Chairman, today that same district is a thriving fishing district in this Province comprised of seventeen rural communities, and a lot of them are isolated. They have built an industry on crab, shrimp, turbot, caplin and cod; what little cod stock was there for them to utilize. In order to do that, they have needed a lot of help and assistance from this government. In many cases they had to be looked at in special circumstances and in light of policy and decisions that were being made. I think if you are going to ensure the survival of any communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, you are going to have to allow for special circumstances in some cases. Not every policy can be applied blanket-like to any province, I don't think, or any country. If you are going to govern and maximize benefits for people, you have to be willing to be flexible, you have to be willing to listen and make provisions wherever provisions have to be made. I think such was the case with the Nain Banker in my district.

When the department and the minister made a decision to do that, I can honestly say, as the member, that it meant the employment and sustainability of communities in my district or the non-sustainability and non-employment of people. Because of the decision - and that was not a gift. It was paid for, and there was a hefty price tag attached to it, but the people were willing to do that because they knew that this was one of the few answers they had to sustaining a plant that employed 200 to 300 people in a small area. I think that if you are not willing to be flexible with rural communities in this Province, and you are not willing to look at special cases, we are certainly going to have a lot more difficult situations on our hands than we have today.

There are a couple of things I want to highlight, I guess. One is with regard to the government guaranteed loans program for vessels. I think the minister would know that there is a lot of investment being made in vessels by the under 35 fleet in this Province over the last couple of years. I know that in my area a lot of those boats were bought and investment was made because of the crab stock, and the availability of that stock to the inshore fishery. Today I am concerned about the recent announcement on crab stocks. I do realize that we have to practice conservation and, if there are problems there, we have to deal with them. If it means biting the bullet for a couple of years in order to ensure the long-term sustainability of it, I guess that is the way it is.

I would only ask him, as minister, and others who are going to undertake to review this situation, that whatever cuts would have to be implemented be done with the least effect and impact on fisherpeople, especially those on the inshore, because I think it has taken a lot of them the last eight years just to really rebuild to where they are today.

The only question that I really have is on the marine mammal act. I know that the minister and the Intergovernmental Affairs Minister were having some conversations with Ottawa on the act and how we could, I guess, make the amendments to include the Aboriginal people in our Province in terms of a full-scale sealing industry. I am just wondering if he can report any progress that has been made, or what direction it will take.

MR. EFFORD: One of the most difficult things to do when it comes to the fishing industry or the sealing industry is to try to change the mold or the thinking of people in Ottawa, because every time you mention seals in Ottawa they go into a shell. It is quite evident why: because they do not want the animal rights organizations to be out there in the public talking and protesting, and the negative impact on trade relations with every other province in Canada. We have suffered greatly because of that.

There have been some inroads made in discussions in Ottawa over the Marine Mammal Protection Act over the last number of months. The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and his staff and my staff have been in Ottawa in several meetings. I hope that over the coming months there will be major changes being made to benefit all sectors of the population, and in particular the Aboriginal native policies. I do not have a full report as to where are today with that, but I know discussions are ongoing and those people are sitting at the table. I think when we reach a situation where we can change that act - where we can have some major inroads into the United States, I think, is where we are going to see the most significant gains.

I was in Scotland a week ago on a responsible fisheries conference and there were several skippers from the United States and from the New England States who attended that conference. The industry in the United States is trying to play a major role in changing the act but, I tell you, the powers of organizations like the Sierra Group, the Greenpeace Foundation, the World Wildlife Fund animal organizations, and in particular the IFAW, the amounts of monies that they put out in promotional campaigns against the sealing industry is having a major impediment in making any gains in changing that act.

I guess the member from Green Bay probably raised my confrontational mode this morning because - here in Newfoundland and Labrador, I think, if any problem is going to get solved, it has to begin right here at home. Until we recognize here at home the major changes that need to be made in our thinking, how do we expect people in other parts of Canada, the United States, and other parts of the world, to come on side? Because they do not see it as we see it.

One of the regulations is - my deputy reminded me when you were making the comments - that you cannot kill a blueback seal until it reaches the age of fourteen months. The stupidity of that regulation - but it was put their by the animal rights' organizations and the politicians in Ottawa. It makes no sense. You can kill beater seal when it is four weeks but you cannot kill a blueback until it is fourteen weeks. That is the type of thinking we have to try and change in order for native people of Newfoundland and Labrador to benefit from a sealing industry.

How do you overcome that kind of thinking? Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have to be united on a change in policy, and we have to speak with a stronger voice in this Province in order to start changing the mentality and the thinking of organizations and the central government of Canada.

I hope it is going to happen, I hope it is going to happen in the short-term, but my fear is it is going to be the long-term and not the short-term before we are going to see the changes. It should be the Aboriginal, the native people, the people as a whole in our Province and in Canada. I think we are coming together in Ottawa. I think the meetings that have been happening over the last number of months is bringing together a strongly united front, but still, we have a major wall to break down before we get that Marine Mammal Protection Act changed to where we want to see it changed.

MS JONES: (Inaudible) where we want it, yes. I am glad to hear you are making some progress, and I agree that maybe people at home are not always as vocal and supportive as we should be. I think that for the most part people do support the role that you have played in certainly bringing changes in that part of the industry.

The only other comment I want to make, Mr. Chairman, is that I guess sometimes I would have to say that I understand the job of the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture in this Province is a very difficult one, especially when you have to deal with a federal government, joint jurisdictions in a lot of cases, and overlapping policy that sometimes does not always fit. Maybe the Marine Mammal Protection Act is certainly evidence of where we have had some difficulties, but nevertheless, I think this Province has certainly been one of the most progressive in development and diversification in the industry in Canada today. I think a lot of that has to be attributed to the minister and the government. I would certainly offer them my support in continuing with their efforts.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Jones.

I will ask Mr. Fitzgerald, and then we will pass along to Mr. Barrett, whom I understand has just come back in unless you would like him to go before, Roger.

MR. EFFORD: I thought we were going to call all the heads now.

MR. FITZGERALD: We have no answers yet.

CHAIR: Mr. Barrett.

MR. BARRETT: I have no questions.

CHAIR: No questions.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Just a couple of comments first as it relates to the discussion that was bantering back and forth between the minister and my colleague regarding seals. Minister, the thing that I think we should be moving on in seals is that some of the little things that can be done are not being done. If somebody saw, and I think you saw, what I saw down in my area just last year when we went down and saw the devastation that was caused down in Deer Island Tickle by seals coming into the harbor there, and seeing the fish that was destroyed and that kind of thing, you do not have to worry about where I am on seals.

One of the problems I have is with this personal seal hunt thing. That has not changed and it is brought up all the time, where we go. I think I am allowed to take six seals if I have a licence. Why in heck do I need a licence? If I am going out to take six seals and I am going to use them for my own consumption, and if I am capable of skinning a seal and making a pelt that is saleable, then why can't I sell it? Why do I have to take a seal and allow the pelt to be floating around the beach? I live right on the beach out in my hometown of Musgravetown. It is not uncommon for my little dog to go out there, and every time the dog gets off the leash he is gone out there and rolls himself four or five times in this bloody old seal pelt that drifted in the night before. It is three days trying to get him cleaned up again.

The dog is only part of it. The other thing is the cameras are around. What a place for the IFAW. You know the kind of leeches they are. They come out and take the pictures of the seal pelts, the seal flippers and all this kind of stuff floating around the beaches. Why can't we sell the pelts? Why do we need to have a licence? For God's sake, let's go buy some ammunition and start handing it out on the beach rather than restricting people from going out and taking part in a hunt that can help us sustain cod stocks. We have not moved on that and that has been an argument, even if it is a little one. It has been an argument that has been on the go for quite some time.

Burgeo, Ramea and Gaultois, with the changes now that have been inflicted upon us by what might happen in the crab fishery, where does that leave those three plants as far as being able to have crab directed towards the South Coast, and directed specifically to those three plants?

MR. EFFORD: Let's go back to the personal seal hunt first. I have a commercial licence. I was grandfathered in on the commercial licence. If I wanted to go out and take my six seals and sell them, I could. If I did not have a commercial licence and I had a personal licence, what I have done - in fact, I do it with the seals I kill, because I do kill a few seals - I give them to a fisherman and he sells them. I do not want the money. I do not know why a person who has a personal licence, and wants to take it for food, why he or she would not give someone the pelts. Why would you be so careless as to throw them overboard? That is not even an argument.

MR. FITZGERALD: It happens. It is there.

MR. EFFORD: Yes, but I mean, give them to a fisherman and let him take them over (inaudible). All I want is to get a bit of meat for the pleasure of canning it or bottling it and eating it, and the pleasure of killing a few seals, because that is a pleasure.

As far as Burgeo and Ramea, going out there this year, I attended a meeting in Burgeo last week. We were honest with them. With no increase in crab this year we have to take a look at how much if any crab can go in there. I think the realization has set in with the state of the stocks that there is very little hope left there as I described earlier. Then we have to look at Little Bay Islands, Twillingate, Codroy, Englee, all of those plants that did not operate last year. What are you going to do this year? We have to make a decision in the near future with industry and with the communities on what is going to happen. This is not just going to impact on the present crab plants. It is going to impact on those that expected to be operating this year. I do not know if there are going to be any increase at all outside the 200-mile limit this year. It is too early to say yet.

We sure would like to be able to do something for the South Coast. When you go to a meeting like I did on Saturday and see the devastation in those communities being expressed by individuals, it is pretty difficult to be able to sit in those meetings and not to be able to say: Give them some hope.

We just have to wait and see over the next two or three weeks, hopefully sooner rather than later, when the industry discussions are concluded and the recommendation goes to Ottawa, and what comes out of it. We would like to be able to say we will be able to (inaudible) as little pain as possible, but only the next two or three weeks will be able to tell us. Then we will have to make some tough decisions.

MR. FITZGERALD: How about in Black Tickle where people's hopes have been built up and dashed and built up again?

MR. EFFORD: It is a little different in Black Tickle because that is crab that is caught in Labrador, 2J, and there was agreement made between the communities of Labrador last year that there would be a sharing of those crab stocks. How much is the cut going to be? Again, we will have to wait and see, but what the Falcon group agreed to last year is that they would return that crab that they were taking from Labrador and processing on the Island, and share it on a pro rata basis between the three or four fish plants. Again, how much of a cut is going to be taken in 2J, and how will that impact on the other communities? Again, it is a wait and see.

MR. FITZGERALD: Is Black Tickle geared up now for crab processing? The equipment is there, they are ready to go?

MR. EFFORD: Well, yes. They are getting ready, yes. They have been getting ready, actually, as much as they possibly could all the winter.

MR. FITZGERALD: Is it in Cartwright where they are planning on building the new shrimp (inaudible) there?

MR. EFFORD: Charlottetown.

MR. FITZGERALD: Charlottetown, that is the shrimp plant where they are putting a new waterline into their plant there. They are not going to be processing crab there?

MR. EFFORD: No, not in Charlottetown.

MR. FITZGERALD: You talked about crab shells. I feel, in the limited knowledge that I have about it, when you see people interested and people wanting or talking about building plants, there must be some opportunity there. Has anybody come to you with a sound proposal, looking for funding through the Fisheries Diversification Program, or money that has been made available through other programs, to seriously look at doing something with crab shells?

MR. EFFORD: First of all, we know that the markets are there for chitosin. We know that the resource - the shells - are certainly there. We had a conference out in Gander a few weeks ago where there was a lot of interest shown by the private industry here in Newfoundland, and some outside interest, but if the crab shells and shrimp shells are going to be utilized it has to be industry driven. This is not something new. It is happening in other parts of the world and we need the interest of companies here, major investments from the companies here in Newfoundland and Labrador. There are monies available from ACOA to get into value-added secondary processing of products and (inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: Grants or loans?

MR. EFFORD: What?

MR. FITZGERALD: Grants or loans?

MR. EFFORD: Loans.

Until Seafreez, until FPI, until some major - it is a lot of money to get into those products, but the returns are good also. As soon as private industry is willing to express an interest to get into it then I am willing to bring in a no dumping policy on any species, whether it is shrimp/crab shells or the fish offal. It depends on the interest driven. I think you are going to see it happen this year. We are now in the position to call for drafting the proposals on the chitosin processing.

MR. FITZGERALD: I understand, from talking with some of the people in the industry as well, that it is an opportunity but apparently the initial outlay of money is tremendous. It is a very heavy chemical operation.

MR. EFFORD: But the returns are good also.

MR. FITZGERALD: It is a very heavy chemical operation. They have some fears of that. My understanding is that there is probably enough waste, crab shells and shrimp shells, that you could probably see two operations somewhere here in the Province.

MR. EFFORD: That is correct.

MR. FITZGERALD: As well, probably one particularly reputable company might be looking at doing something not to the extent of full utilization or full processing of crab shells and shrimp shells but maybe into the fertilizer part of it, and getting into drying shells, pulverizing them and shipping them out in that kind of way; but anything is better than what we are doing now.

MR. EFFORD: It is happening now, by the way. There is a lot of work being done. Every shell from crab and shrimp is not being dumped. There is quite an extensive amount in the last two or three years, and it is increased activity each year, but what we want to see is the full processing, chitosin.

MR. FITZGERALD: What do they do with the people who use them now? What is happening to them?

MR. EFFORD: Some is dried, crushed, and shipped over to Asia for further processing. Some is used for pharmaceuticals. Some is used, as you said, for fertilizing. We won't be satisfied until we see the full end processing take place here in this Province. In the meantime, as long as some utilization is taking place and it is increasing year over year, that is where we want to go; but when we will be totally satisfied is when we see all of the processing take place here in Newfoundland.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is what we would like to see within the crab processing industry as well; but, as you know now, most of your crab processing consists of sections. I suppose the marketplace - or that is what we are led to believe - only needs sections, and the amount of meat that is shipped out is very minimal. As a result of that it reflects back on the employment levels in the plants. Is there some change that might happen there?

MR. EFFORD: That can only be market driven.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.

MR. EFFORD: When the market demands more sections than meat, that is the result. If the market changes around and you get more meat being required by the market then you will see that happening, but we cannot tell a processor: You must process a certain amount of sections and you must process a certain amount of meat. What would happen to the meat if they cannot sell it? It has to be market driven.

MR. FITZGERALD: Your people who have gone forward and attended those shows, and have gone to other countries and looked at what is happening in the marketplace, how is this stuff being marketed? Is it marketed in sections or is it marketed as meat?

MR. EFFORD: Seventy-five percent of it is marketed in sections.

MR. FITZGERALD: It does go to the marketplace as we ship it from here? It is not further processed somewhere else?

MR. EFFORD: In some cases. In Japan, they will ship some of it over to China to be processed in meat, but we cannot do anything about that, if the Japanese buy our sections and find the labor cheaper. Like I said, about 75 per cent is going into sections.

One of the companies, Beothic Fish Processors, do a fair amount of meat. Daley Brothers in Port de Grave does a fair amount of meat. They will supply their customers with what the customer asks for.

We have a number of companies as a result of discussions I had with two or three companies in Boston this year who are now going to actually do the consumer pack of sections, claws and different things here in Newfoundland. Where they have been taking it down in Seattle and doing it for the retail trade, now it is going to be done here in Newfoundland this year. One of them is going to be done in St. Mary's, and there are a couple of other companies. There is more and more being done by FPI, Quinlan's and those people; they are packing more and more the consumer pack. Whatever their customers are asking to have done, they will do. It depends on what the market is asking for.

As a government, we cannot get out there dictating to companies. It has to be market driven.

MR. FITZGERALD: No, but it would be nice to see if what was leaving the Province was ready for the supermarket shelves -

MR. EFFORD: Exactly.

MR. FITZGERALD: - especially when you go out and see people - there is in excess of 18 per cent or 19 per cent unemployment in rural Newfoundland and Labrador - trained people willing to go to work.

MR. EFFORD: Absolutely.

MR. FITZGERALD: Under subhead 1.2.01, Executive Support, page 115 in the Estimates, in Transportation and Communications there was a budgeted figure there of $85,800. It went to $126,300, and this year it is back to the figure that was budgeted back in 1999. Why the big increase there in the revised amount?

MR. EFFORD: Usually what happens there is, those costs are being driven by international meetings between governments and agencies out there in the world marketplace.

WITNESS: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Yes. That is not just the minister's office. That is right throughout the department.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is the evaluation of polices and objectives. That shouldn't have anything to do with people traveling the world to seafood shows, or to look at other things. It is policies of your department.

MR. EFFORD: No, not necessarily.

MR. FITZGERALD: Executive Support, "Appropriations provide for the senior planning and direction of the Department, including the establishment and evaluation of policies and objectives."

MR. EFFORD: For argument sake, last week I was in Scotland and that was on responsible fishing. That is where agencies of government get together, federally, provincially, internationally, and talk about responsible fishing methods. It is not internal planning within the department.

There are conferences held nationally and internationally on fishing practices, fishing methods, fishing planning, markets, NAFO meetings, Canada/France.... It is national, international framework of fisheries planning for the future, all worldwide.

MR. FITZGERALD: Under 1.3.01., page 116, Revenue - Provincial.

MR. EFFORD: I am sorry?

MR. FITZGERALD: Under 1.3.01.

MR. EFFORD: Revenue - Provincial?

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.

There was $10,000 there, and it is another $10,000 this year. Where did this money come from? Where would that revenue have been derived from?

MR. EFFORD: Mostly from the cost-shared agreements, federal-provincial.

MR. FITZGERALD: Ten thousand dollars?

WITNESS: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Do you want to deal with it John?

MR. BULLEN: Mainly, that revenue is derived from deposits on plans and specs and also some miscellaneous revenue from the refund of interest from previous years.

MR. FITZGERALD: Going on to the next page, Revenue - Provincial again. There was $175,000 budgeted and it was revised to the same thing. This year it is $100,000. Where does that money come from? It is government-owned marine facilities in the Provinces. Is that rent from marine facilities that the government owns now?

MR. WAREHAM: That is in relation to revenue from the lease of marine service centers. Also, when government operated these sites there was a quantity of inventory and we consigned that to the lessee. That is where that revenue comes from.

MR. FITZGERALD: How many marine centers does government own today here in the Province?

MR. WAREHAM: In total, we had twenty-five. The stat on that would be: we have seventeen sold right now, three sales are pending, one has been decommissioned, and we have four right now that are currently leased to the private sector.

MR. FITZGERALD: Still owned by government?

MR. WAREHAM: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: Would that be a reflection of the Grants and Subsidies above that, where there was $250,000 budgeted last year, it was revised to $300,000, and this year it is $350,000? Subhead 2.1.01., item 10?

MR. WAREHAM: Those grants were small community grants for the repair of slipways and wharfs and so on. It has no real reflection on marine service centers.

MR. FITZGERALD: So those are the grants that I have been finding it very difficult to access, I guess?

MR. WAREHAM: Those are the community grants, yes, Sir.

MR. FITZGERALD: For slipways and other facilities. I understand that the provincial government has dispersed a lot of those as well, a lot of the slipways and small fishing stages that have been around the coast, and have encouraged fisheries organizations, committees, to take them over and assume responsibility. When they did that, Minister, they did it with the thoughts of still being allowed and able to access the $3,000. It was almost an understood thing at one time, where you could get $3,000 if you put forward a proposal that in any way made sense in order to maintain infrastructure. It was a good thing because fishermen themselves provided the labor, and $3,000 could provide a fair amount of material. It is something that should be kept up but now seems to be very hard to access.

MR. EFFORD: Not really.

MR. FITZGERALD: Just before I finish, I realize the wharf in my district this year, in Melrose, a place where they had no place to land, there is something like twelve fishermen there still today. After I got $3,000 from that particular item there, I went to HRDC and got another $15,000. As a result, we have a wharf that can be used - and a good wharf - in Melrose today that can look after twelve or fourteen fishermen. That is what I was able to access last year, $3,000. I would suggest that I probably represent as big as, if not bigger than, 95 per cent of other fishing communities in this Province. Still, we are finding it very difficult to access the paltry amount of $3,000 to help repair a slipway or to help repair some fishing facility that is dotted along the coast and help fishermen.

Minister, I think you should be a little bit more kind to some of those communities that are out there and allow them to access this money so they might be able to maintain some infrastructure in their communities.

MR. EFFORD: Just let me deal with that, because there are a couple of areas that we have to be concerned about. First of all, I still very strongly believe that the federal government should be looking after, as much as possible, the wharves and harbours in Newfoundland and Labrador. The more we do provincially the more we are giving an open door to the federal government to get away from that responsibility.

The other thing is there has been significant amounts of money provincially and federally, through the job creation grants in the fall - and the hon. member has been doing very well with those, and what I have been doing in my district is working with HRD to do that.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is what I just said (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: We want to make sure, first of all, that the federal government maintains as much responsibility as possible and that we utilize the provincial grants under the job creation programs and the HRD monies. In my department we have a very small amount of money and we do that, wherever we can, to help out communities where the need is greatest.

MR. FITZGERALD: There is $350,000 there, minister.

MR. EFFORD: Oh, that is this year. There has not been that much in the past.

MR. FITZGERALD: There was $300,000 last year.

WITNESS: Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

MR. EFFORD: Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

MR. FITZGERALD: Three hundred thousand dollars. Well, your budget is wrong.

WITNESS: Revised.

MR. FITZGERALD: It was $250,000 and it was revised to $300,000.

MR. EFFORD: Take advantage of the job creation programs and HRD wherever it is possible and our federal representatives in Ottawa. We have to keep pressing on small crafts and harbours, Transport Canada, ports and harbours, that their responsibility should be maintained in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. If we take over that responsibility then the federal government will never do anything else again.

MR. FITZGERALD: I realize that, but whenever we get funding through Municipal and Provincial Affairs, as you know it, it is usually in November or December, it is towards the end of the year. A community like Newmans Cove has a slipway there they cannot use and it is wide open to the elements. They look across and see Ireland. Their slipway is more important to them than the wharf that they have there.

MR. EFFORD: Send me in a letter.

MR. FITZGERALD: You know, if they had $3,000 now, sort of thing, when the weather is a little kinder and they are willing to put the time and effort into it, they can realize maintenance on their slipway and have a facility there that is going to last them another ten years. I do not think that is wrong to be doing those kinds of things, and I think it is very helpful. So I just ask you to maybe be a little bit kinder.

MR. EFFORD: Send me in a letter.

MR. FITZGERALD: It is already on file at your office down in Grand Bank, I say to -

MR. EFFORD: Where is that (inaudible)?

MR. FITZGERALD: - the minister.

Administration and Support Services, Purchased Services, 2.2.01.06, under Resource Development. I will quote what it says there: "Appropriations provide for planning and implementation of resource development initiatives for the harvesting sector of the fishing industry." It says $180,200 was budgeted and there was $193,200 spent. This year it is down to $30,200. What was that money used for, and why is there no need to continue it this year?

MR. EFFORD: What subhead did you say?

MR. FITZGERALD: 2.2.01.06, page 118.

MR. WAREHAM: If I can respond to that?

MR. EFFORD: Yes.

MR. WAREHAM: Last year we had departmental funding there to do this work and under the Fisheries Diversification Program we now have the means to access the funding from that program. Consequently, there was a subsequent reduction in funding internally and we now access the funding from the fisheries development program which this year will total in the vicinity of around $3.5 million.

MR. FITZGERALD: The provincial government is responsible for licensing processing plants and there is a fee for that. How much money does the Province receive from licensing (inaudible)?

MR. EFFORD: Approximately $800,000.

MR. DEAN: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: I have been reminded by my deputy that that is twice as much as any other province.

MR. FITZGERALD: What do you mean? You realize twice as much from any other province?

MR. EFFORD: Than any other province. By charging that licencing fee structure here for the processing sector, we realized from that amount of money twice as much as any other province in Atlantic Canada.

MR. FITZGERALD: Maybe we are charging them too much.

MR. EFFORD: We had the greatest export value of any other province in Atlantic Canada last year of $1 billion, and we surpassed anybody else too.

MR. FITZGERALD: I think you have changed your approach. In the beginning there were some growing pains with that, if I can recall. I just do not recall exactly what they were, but I think the process of how you derive the amount that a processor pays now is a little bit different from what was brought in in the beginning. It certainly was not helpful to a lot of the small processors there that were doing small amounts in different (inaudible). I think that has changed.

MR. EFFORD: The fee structure is based on the type of species that is being processed. For argument's sake, we charge more for the crab licenses than we do for the pelagic or the groundfish.

MR. FITZGERALD: Because of the value?

MR. EFFORD: Yes, because of the value.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Fitzgerald.

Are there any other questions from members of the Committee?

There being no other questions, I ask for a motion to approve heads 1.1.01 to through to 3.2.02.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 3.2.02 carried.

On motion, Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: I remind the members of the Committee that our next hearing is at 7:00 p.m. tomorrow, in which case we will look at the Estimates of Forest Resources and Agrifoods. With that, I thank the minister and his delegation for their forthrightness in their answers to the questions.

MR. EFFORD: I thank my hon. colleagues and members opposite, and especially the Chairman for doing such a magnificent job.

CHAIR: I am sure my eel plant in Deer Lake will be forthcoming.

MR. EFFORD: It will be forthcoming.

CHAIR: Thank you kindly.

The Committee adjourned.