Fisheries committee  If you're looking at what was traditionally done back in the nineties, that is the case. We're not looking at going in and asking for hundreds of millions of dollars to resolve the problem. We have scoped that out, and it is a very large investment. It's something that won't come online for the crisis that could be experienced by this industry in the next two months.

Fisheries committee  We are looking at trying to help lobster fishing areas seek ways to do the adjustments and have enterprises come together. We are looking at that, whether it's through policy change or whether it's through other mechanisms. You're asking about the community adjustment fund. There are still discussions under way, as I understand it, about the conditions that apply, so I can't answer that clearly at this point.

Fisheries committee  It's about $1 billion. It is Canada's largest single species fishery. It is the most important fishery in Atlantic Canada and Canada in general.

Fisheries committee  Thank you. We did put in place with the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food a program under the CAFI program of $500,000 for the month of March, with a view to trying to promote lobster sales, trying to deal with existing inventories, and trying to move ahead with setting the stage for the 2009 fishery.

Fisheries committee  Thank you. The delegation here today is as follows: Sylvain Paradis and David Gillis, from our science division; the ADM of science, Wendy Watson-Wright, who will be making the introductory remarks; and Robert Elliott, from our policy group, which looks after the economic statistics for the lobster fishery, among others.

Fisheries committee  Yes. There's a report made by the scientific council in June of each year. Then the chairman of the scientific council provides that report officially to the fisheries commission in NAFO. The fisheries commission in NAFO then considers that advice in setting TACs, and so on. Sometimes it's followed to the letter; sometimes, like this year, we had decisions made to set the TAC lower, or to not have a fishery.

Fisheries committee  The establishment of a precautionary approach has set what's called conservation limits for stocks. For example, we've seen growth in American plaice, but we have not seen it across the threshold of the conservation limit. Therefore there's no talk about having directed fisheries.

Fisheries committee  I think we should proceed with ratification. There'll be an obligation to take it to the House. The decision on that rests with the minister, but I would recommend that we proceed.

Fisheries committee  I would point out that currently the dispute settlement is not there, and therefore objection procedures, unilateral action, are certainly allowed under the current convention. Under the new convention, there is recourse to deal with objections through the dispute settlement process and leading to UNFA.

Fisheries committee  No negotiations have taken place relevant to the new convention to get it ratified. That is the case.

Fisheries committee  We're not working under the new convention; therefore unilateral action is still permitted under the old convention. If stocks open up, there's going to be definite interest. We're convinced that we'll be able to maintain it, because we have provisions to help guard our share in the NAFO conservation enforcement measures.

Fisheries committee  Well, for sure UNCLOS does not anticipate that. These regional fish management organizations are, however, in international law. So there is no unilateral opportunity for Canada to say you're fishing on the Flemish Cap and we think you should have the following quota, and you should use the following gear, and so on.

Fisheries committee  If it's with the agreement of NAFO, it will be reflected in a NAFO decision. So those decisions would apply. However, for Canada to unilaterally impose its will on the high seas, whether it's in NAFO or in the middle of the north Atlantic, that doesn't exist.

Fisheries committee  They have a legal obligation. They've ratified UNFA, and that requires their obligation to maintain control over the vessels they flag. And if they are part of NAFO through the European Union, they have a legal obligation there to enforce the rules.

Fisheries committee  Then they are failing to meet their obligations, and that will certainly be a significant problem for all parties. That's perhaps why they haven't done that and they aren't complying.