With regard to the Age Well at Home initiative: (a) how many organizations submitted projects between June 8, 2022, and July 29, 2022, in the constituency of Thérèse-De Blainville and, of these project submissions, how many (i) were approved, (ii) were denied, (iii) have not yet received a response; and (b) of the project applications in the constituency of Thérèse-De Blainville that have not yet received a response, (i) what are the estimated timelines for processing these applications, (ii) what are the reasons for these processing delays, (iii) will the amounts approved initially for these applications be adjusted for inflation? With regard to stakeholders that were consulted by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance about what to include in budget 2024: (a) what were the names and titles of all stakeholders consulted; and (b) what are the details, including the date, location, and manner in which each of the stakeholders in (a) were consulted? With regard to lethal and non-lethal military export control permits currently awaiting a governor-in-council decision: what are details of each item, including the (i) vendor, (ii) item description, (iii) dollar value of the export, (iv) date on which the control permit was referred to the governor-in-council for a decision, (v) country for which the item is destined? With regard to the Canada Dental Benefit, to date: how many Canadians have (i) signed up, (ii) been approved, (iii) received dental care paid for through the benefit? With regard to the government's proposed plastics registry: (a) what is the projected cost to establish the registry and maintain it each year; (b) what is the timeline by which the government will implement the registry; and (c) did the government conduct any studies on the impact the registry will have on the price of food and other consumer products, and, if so, what are the details of each such study, including the findings and the website where the study can be found online? With regard to top secret security clearances provided by the government: how many employees or representatives of registered political parties currently have top secret security clearances, in total and broken down by party? With regard to Canada's sanctions against the Russian Federation: (a) on what date was Airbus Canada granted a waiver to import titanium from the VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation; (b) which minister approved the waiver; (c) what was the rationale for the waiver; (d) who was consulted before the waiver was granted; (e) was the Ukrainian government informed before the waiver was granted, and, if so, when; (f) if the answer to (e) is negative, why not; and (g) has any other company in Canada been granted a waiver or waivers to Canada's sanctions regime against the Russian Federation since February 21, 2024, and, if so, what are the details, including the names of the companies?

Madam Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

With regard to asylum claims made by individuals who arrived in Canada on a student visa, since 2018: how many claims (i) were accepted, (ii) were rejected, (iii) are still being processed, in total and broken down by the school in which the claimant was enrolled when the asylum claim was made? With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency's (CRA) response to the Privacy Commissioner of Canada's special report to Parliament on February 15, 2024, indicating that a major privacy breach at the CRA involved "vast amounts of sensitive personal information" and that the CRA needed stronger security safeguards: (a) does the CRA accept the conclusions of the Privacy Commissioner that the current process and procedures that govern the handling of sensitive personal information are inadequate; (b) what steps is the CRA undertaking to rectify this lack of safeguards and due diligence to give Canadians confidence that their personal, sensitive and private information is secure with the CRA; (c) what steps is the CRA taking to limit collection until it can be confident that information can be properly secured; and (d) does the CRA take the position that seeking sensitive information from businesses with no sales or confirmed tax obligations would be a misuse of the Universal Periodic Review provisions, and, if not, why not? With regard to usage of the government's fleet of Challenger aircraft, since October 27, 2023: what are the details of the legs of each flight, including the (i) date, (ii) point of departure, (iii) destination, (iv) number of passengers, (v) names and titles of the passengers, excluding security or Canadian Armed Forces members, (vi) total catering bill related to the flight, (vii) volume of fuel used, or an estimate, (viii) amount spent on fuel? With regard to usage of the government's fleet of Airbus and Polaris aircraft since September 1, 2023: what are the details of the legs of each flight, including the (i) date, (ii) point of departure, (iii) destination, (iv) number of passengers, (v) names and titles of the passengers, excluding security or Canadian Armed Forces members, (vi) total catering bill related to the flight, (vii) volume of fuel used, or an estimate, (viii) amount spent on fuel, (ix) type of aircraft? With regard to the 140 conflict of interest declarations filed in the 2022-23 fiscal year, and the 162 conflict of interest declarations filed in the 2023-24 fiscal year concerning public servants employed in the core public administration who were involved in contractual relationships with the Government of Canada, broken down by fiscal year: (a) what is the breakdown of the declarations by department, agency or other government entity by which the public servant was employed; (b) what are the names of the vendors which have contracts with the government that were the subjects of the declarations; and (c) what are the details of each contract provided to the vendors in (b), including, for each, the (i) department, agency, or other government entity that signed the contract, (ii) vendor, (iii) date, (iv) amount, (v) description of goods or services, (vi) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced, competitive bid)? With regard to human resource complaints submitted by employees of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, since January 1, 2016, broken down by year: (a) what was the total number of complaints broken down by the (i) name of the agency or Crown corporation employing the complainant, (ii) reason for the complaint, (iii) type of resolution or follow-up action that occurred; and (b) what was the average time between a complaint being filed and the matter being settled or otherwise concluded? With regard to tax owed to the government for unpaid excise tax on cannabis: (a) what is the current amount owed, in total and broken down by the province or territory of the entity owing tax; (b) how many separate taxpaying entities have unpaid excise tax on cannabis; and (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by the tax year from which the unpaid tax is owed? With regard to digital marketing firms contracted by the government to conduct digital marketing since 2016: what are the details of all contracts, including the (i) name of the firm contracted, (ii) commission provided to the marketing firm as part of the contract, (iii) total sum provided for marketing purposes, (iv) total amount used for marketing purposes, (v) marketing platforms used to communicate as part of the contract, (vi) policy initiative being communicated? With regard to the event named "Symposium: Building a Safe and Respectful Digital World" hosted at the Governor General's residence on April 11, 2024: (a) what were the costs associated with the event, in total and broken down by type of expenditure; (b) was this event initiated by the Governor General and her staff or officials, or by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General and his staff or officials; (c) on what dates did organizational or planning meetings take place in preparation for the event, and who was in attendance at each meeting; (d) were any government bills or initiatives highlighted during the event, and, if so, which ones; and (e) what specific action, if any, was taken by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to ensure that the event did not put the Governor General in a partisan situation, and to stop any government legislation, initiatives or talking points from being promoted at the event? With regard to government engagement, association, or dealing in any other manner with social media influencers related to budget 2024 or any of the announcements leading up to the budget: (a) what are the names and handles of the influencers who were invited to (i) events on budget presentation day in Ottawa, (ii) government announcements or events in the month leading up to budget 2024; and (b) what are the amounts and details of all expenditures, in total, and broken down by influencer and type of cost the government incurred or expects to incur related to influencers, including, but not limited to, any payments being made to the influencers, travel costs, per diems, hospitality expenses, reimbursements for expenses incurred, honorariums, contracts, grants, monetary and non-monetary gifts, or any other type of incentive, financial or otherwise? With regard to government information about crime, broken down by year since 2016: how many suspects who were charged or deemed chargeable with homicide were on (i) bail or other type of remand, (ii) house arrest, (iii) parole, (iv) another type of community supervision, broken down by type, (v) an arrest warrant for a different crime, at the time they were charged or deemed chargeable? With regard to federal housing investments for Windsor, Toronto and Hamilton, since February 1, 2006, broken down by year and city: (a) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of nonprofit or community housing and how many units were developed; (b) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of cooperative housing and how many units were developed; and (c) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of purpose-built rental housing and how many units were developed? With regard to Rent-Geared-Income (RGI) subsidies and operating subsidies funded by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC): (a) how many housing projects and units are currently receiving RGI subsidies funded by the CMHC, broken down by municipality, province or territory; (b) how many are receiving operating subsidies funded by the CMHC, broken down by municipality, province and territory; (c) is there an end or expiration date for the CMHC-funded RGI subsidies and operating subsidies for these housing projects/units and, if so, (i) what is the end date, (ii) how many units will lose the CMHC RGI subsidies broken down by (iii) municipality, province and territory, (iv) year; (d) what is the CMHC’s annual budget allocation for RGI subsidies, broken down by (i) municipality, province and territory, (ii) year since 1990; and (e) what is the CMHC’s annual budget allocation for operating subsidies, broken down by (i) municipality, province and territory, (ii) year since 1990?

Is it agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker, I believe if you were to seek it, you would find unanimous consent to see the clock at 1:30 p.m. to start Private Member's Business.

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

moved: That, in the opinion of the House, the government should designate the first day in October every year as National Canadian Seafood Day in recognition of the significant contributions of Canada’s fish harvesters and their families from coast to coast to coast, all the processors who help deliver world-class products that are enjoyed domestically and internationally, and all those who work in the seafood industry, which is a vital employment and economic driver in so many coastal communities across Canada. He said: Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House today and introduce Motion No. 111, which would establish a national Canadian seafood day on the first day of October each year. National Canadian seafood day would recognize and promote the rich and diverse nature of the safe, high-quality and delicious seafood we produce here in Canada. We are long overdue in having one day a year dedicated to this very important industry. Canada is uniquely defined in its extensive network of lakes, rivers and wetlands, as well as its geographical positioning, bordered by three vast oceans: the Atlantic, the Arctic and the Pacific. We are also home to one of the world's largest and most diverse supply of marine and freshwater fish. We have the world's longest coastline, which is home to many coastal communities in Canada. We are also recognized by and proud of our iconic fish and seafood, which are synonymous with taste, quality and sustainability. If someone is from Quebec, the Atlantic provinces or Northwest Territories, lobster and crab are their most popular product. British Columbia and Nunavut produce salmon and Salmonidae respectively as their number one products. As we move inland, processing takes over. Manitoba and Ontario count frozen fish fillets as their number one seafood product. Even landlocked Saskatchewan last year produced $7.2 million worth of farmed trout. At the heart of Motion No. 111 lies a profound acknowledgement of the significance of fish and seafood to Canada's society and our blue economy, particularly in many rural, coastal communities. In supporting this motion, we would signal to Canadians our deep appreciation of the people involved in the sector and bring attention to an industry that sustains millions across the country and around the globe. Our coastal communities depend on Canadian fisheries for jobs and prosperity. This point was illustrated in 2022 when commercial sea and freshwater fisheries landings alone were valued at an impressive $4.8 billion, with aquaculture production contributing an additional $1.3 billion to our nation's economy. The total contribution to GDP from the Canadian seafood industry was more than $9 billion in 2022, a figure that is growing annually. These figures underscore the substantial economic impact of this industry in providing nutrition and delicious products not only here at home, but also around the world. More than just representing the products we ship abroad, this data represents the bread and butter put on Canadian tables through the hard work of those in this sector. At home, Canada's fish and seafood industry is composed of a vast network of individuals whose livelihoods depend on factors ranging from climate, weather and ice patterns, to the health of fish stocks and the state of global markets. From fish harvesters navigating the icy waters of the Atlantic to processors meticulously preparing seafood products for markets, over 72,000 Canadians are directly employed with this sector. This includes more than 50,000 individuals in commercial fisheries and more than 20,000 in seafood product preparation and packaging. Fish and seafood also play a vital role in the economic livelihoods of many indigenous communities. Commercial fishing, subsistence harvesting and processing provide employment opportunities that generate income for indigenous fish harvesters, processors and entrepreneurs. Across our country, hard-working individuals engage in meaningful employment within the sector, sustaining livelihoods along the supply chain and fostering economic growth in communities from coast to coast to coast, while also playing a critical role in ensuring the quality, sustainability and safety of our seafood products. Beyond those roles, countless others are employed in spin-off industries such as transportation, retail and tourism, all of which are sustained by the demand for sustainable harvested fish and seafood products. The overall economic impact of fish and seafood reverberates far beyond the shores of our coastal communities, extending into urban centres and rural areas alike. These individuals are the backbone of our fish and seafood industry, and their dedication and resilience deserve to be celebrated and honoured. Canada's position as one of the world's largest exporters of fish and seafood on the global stage is a testament to the quality and competitiveness of our products. In 2023, our nation's exports of fish and seafood amounted to an impressive $7.6 billion, showcasing the industry's ability to thrive in international markets. In 2023, we sent a whopping $4.9 billion worth of fish and seafood to our largest trading partner, the United States. Our friends to the south of the border love our fresh or processed lobster, fresh crab, salmon, halibut and scallops. The Chinese market is fond of Canadian lobster, cold-water shrimp, fresh crab and frozen clams. The European Union imports over $400 million worth of tasty Canadian fish and seafood a year, becoming our third biggest importer, and it continues to grow. Rounding out the top Canadian seafood importing jurisdictions last year are Chile, Vietnam, India, Thailand, Norway, Japan, Hong Kong and the United Kingdom. We should be proud of the billions of dollars we export annually in fish and seafood, and we are working to expand those markets even further. This past February, we opened Canada's first-ever agriculture and agri-food office in the Indo-Pacific region in Manila. This office will help us make connections in the region and share knowledge that will make our partnerships in food, including seafood, stronger. With a diverse and delicious array of sustainably harvested products, Canadian seafood is highly sought after in global markets. Canada is proud to be a trusted and reliable trading partner to the world. Canada exports its fish and seafood to 115 countries around the world. These exports not only contribute to Canada's overall economic growth but also strengthen our trade relationships with key partners, and enhance our position in a global marketplace. Our fish and seafood products matter, as do the livelihoods of those working in the sector. Supporting Motion No. 111 matters. In Canada, we already have a designated Agriculture Day, which we celebrate in February. We also celebrate the Saturday before the first Monday in August as Food Day. Furthermore, the United States celebrates October as National Seafood Month. By designating a day to celebrate Canada's fish and seafood, we can put a spotlight on this unique and important sector and those who work in it by celebrating their significant role in our economy. As we look forward to potentially celebrating the first annual national Canadian seafood day, let us continue to buy, cook and eat Canadian seafood products. Let us take part in the celebrations, enjoy the catch of the day and try new recipes using Canadian ingredients. Let us seek out exciting products that highlight the diversity of cultures' cuisines that make up our great country. Let us recognize those behind the scenes, our fish harvesters and food entrepreneurs, who are working hard and putting forth their best ideas to solve some of the world's most pressing food security and environmental challenges. Our hard-working Canadian seafood producers and processors are leaders in innovative technologies, and their products meet the highest standards. That is what makes Canada a trusted supplier around the world for seafood that is both high quality and sustainable. It does not hurt that it is really delicious too. In supporting Motion No. 111, we have the opportunity to provide national recognition to an industry that not only sustains livelihoods, but drives our economic growth and prosperity. From the rugged shorelines of Newfoundland to the Canadian Arctic archipelago to the pristine waters of British Columbia, the economic impact of this industry is felt in communities large and small. This motion is not merely about saying we support setting a date on the calendar; it is about marking a moment of national acknowledgement for the resilience, innovation and enduring spirit of an industry that is unquestionably Canadian. By designating the first day of October each year as national Canadian seafood day, we affirm our commitment to honouring the contributions of fish harvesters, processors and all those who labour tirelessly in this industry. In conclusion, the quality of Canadian fish and seafood is unlike anywhere else in the world. Canada's fish and seafood sector is a vital engine to our economic growth. Let us seize this opportunity to foster a brighter and more prosperous future for all Canadians involved in this sector. Let us celebrate the pride, passion, resiliency and hard work of all those who bring fish and seafood onto the plates of consumers here at home and around the world. I am incredibly proud to stand here to introduce this motion. I look forward to seeing members' support to realize the vision of celebrating a national Canadian seafood day in the coming years and for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very important issue and a very touchy issue for the fishermen, even in my riding. Some of my family fish, and I hear all about the seals all the time and the amount of fish they are eating. I did attend one of the committee meetings that the hon. member was attending, and the Maritime Fishermen's Union, I believe, was at the table, and we were having this discussion. It becomes a very tricky situation when we have the Marine Mammal Protection Act in the United States, and that is where the conversation led. We need to do more with the U.S. in regard to the seal, because we all know what happened in the mid-1980s. Our lobster fishery almost collapsed because of the feedback and negativity that surrounded the seal-processing hunt.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech and for having the idea of creating this day, which recognizes those who are truly on the front lines of the fishing industry. Their work is not often recognized. That said, we cannot overlook the lax approach, the inadequate management of the fisheries sector, and the lack of transparency of the department or its ill-timed decisions. Does my colleague think that this day will help make workers and their families a priority for his government?

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are trying to do, to present a day where we can recognize those who perhaps we do not get to see that often, who work so hard and tirelessly in the processing plants across the country to drive our economy and make us prosperous. It is important that we recognize them and give them a day to celebrate what they do.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate that I do not know who would not support a national Canadian seafood day. This is vitally important for Canadians across the country. The question I have for the member is on the importance of having sustainable local seafood. In particular, I am thinking about the promise made by Trudeau to get open-net fish farms out—

Just a reminder to the member that she cannot refer to the name of the Prime Minister or any member of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the reminder. I apologize for that. It was an error. With respect to the Prime Minister's promise to get open-net fish farms out of the west coast waters, I would specifically highlight that Atlantic salmon is being farmed on the west coast of Canada, which is spreading pathogens and diseases to the surrounding marine ecosystems. Does the member agree with the importance of getting those fish farms out of the water for good and looking at land-based systems and other ways so that all those who are impacted can participate in sustainable seafood production?

Mr. Speaker, this is ongoing, obviously. There are consultations taking place as we speak, and I believe there is going to be a decision forthcoming. It is important to hear both sides of the story, and we will continue to monitor it. This is something that the government of the day is digging into. I have heard about this from members from the west coast in our own party as well.

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick question for my colleague, and I also want to congratulate him on taking the initiative to create this day. Fish harvesters, especially those from the Gaspé and the Magdalen Islands, have been feeling extremely frustrated, primarily over the management of quotas and fishing licences. Does my colleague think that a day like this one will raise the government's awareness about the realities of fish harvesters?

Mr. Speaker, I think a day like this can bring together ideas and communication. We have a lot of things going on in the fishery across the country. Climate change, for example, is one. There are all kinds of regulated issues that we are dealing with. I think it is important to recognize this fishery. It could be a day perhaps where we can put partisan politics aside and bring out the goodness in this industry and this sector, which is so important to our communities.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the member for Malpeque's motion to create national seafood day on the first day of October. I note, it is numbered Motion No. 111, which is a great number for it. I would have been happier if it was Motion No. 1, but Motion No. 111 is a good substitute, because three times, four times or five times, this is the most important industry in our rural coastal communities on all three coasts. We will be supporting this motion, but I would like to make a few comments about it. As I said a little earlier, I represent a very large fishery riding, the riding of South Shore—St. Margarets. There are more than 5,000 commercial fishermen in my community. Every possible species one could think of that is commercially harvested is harvested in the South Shore of Nova Scotia. Of course, the most lucrative one is the best lobster in the world from Lobster Fishing Area 33 and Lobster Fishing Area 34, a winter fishery. Seafood, and lobster in particular, is our number one industry in Nova Scotia. It drives our GDP. There would not be any government jobs in Halifax if it was not for the wealth generated by fishing for the food Canadians eat in the South Shore of Nova Scotia. As much as I support this motion, as much as we support this motion, I believe it is, after nine years, the first time the government has actually done anything positive for the seafood industry. The member for Malpeque went through the numbers financially of what it does, province by province and species by species. I would say that some of those are declining numbers because the government has pursued policies that have actually harmed the industry, when it has pursued any at all. I will start maybe with something I have raised quite frequently over the last year, which is the elver fishery. I know everybody knows what an elver is. It is otherwise known as a glass eel, a baby eel. After being born in the Sargasso Sea, they swim back to the rivers of Maine, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. They go up the rivers to become full-size adult, grown eels that live for about 25 years before they migrate back out to the ocean to reproduce. These are the most expensive fish we harvest in Canada, and arguably in the world, at $5,000 a kilogram. That is the cost of the glass eels, or elvers. This industry has been under attack. Elvers are exported, by the way, live to China, where they are grown into full-size eels for food. This industry has been under attack because of the incompetence of the government. In particular, fisheries minister number four, whom I defeated, closed this fishery in the year 2020 in hopes that the poaching would end, and then, the poaching increased. Fisheries minister number five, last year, closed the industry halfway through the season in hopes that the poaching would stop, and it increased. Fisheries minister number six, this year, did the same thing. The ministers have done the same thing three out of the last four years and have expected a different result. That is the definition of insanity. The best way to enforce the law is to arrest the people on the river who do not have a licence, and 74% of the rivers in the Maritimes, where there are poachers, are not licensed rivers, so it is easy to identify where they are. The government has ignored many great reports. I mentioned the issue of pinnipeds earlier. Those are seals, sea lions and walruses. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans did an excellent unanimous report on that, and I will tell the House what some witnesses said. Trevor Jones, who is a fish harvester, said, “Leadership within DFO, in its wisdom, seems to think that closing a commercial fishery [that being seals] to harvesters will save and help rebuild fish stocks, but the truth is that it does not.” When the fishery was closed 31 years ago, the cod fishery, the groundfishery, there were about three million seals in Newfoundland. Now, there are over eight million seals, with no harvest, and the expectation is that the fish will come back. Even though 97% of the unnatural mortality in the Atlantic Ocean of fish is caused by seals, the government sits on its duff and does nothing. It only just acknowledged, after 31 years, last year, that seals eat fish. That was a revelation to the Liberals that seals eat fish. I guess they were enjoying Alberta beef like the rest of us do. The Liberals have a record of inaction on almost every file. Recently, only a few weeks ago, there was an issue with the endangered right whales. There is a great policy that when a right whale is discovered swimming by Nova Scotia or into the Gulf of St. Lawrence, there is what is called a dynamic closure, a closure for 15 days of the area where the whale is spotted. If the whale is not spotted again, it opens up. Right whales cannot swim in less than 10 fathoms of water. Nonetheless, the minister, only a few weeks ago, closed a fishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence right up to the coast, right up to the sand, to the edge, in less than 10 fathoms of water, throwing crab fishermen and lobster fishermen in that area out of work. Of course the massive protests were so bad that the Liberals' own member from northern New Brunswick criticized the minister of fisheries for yet again failing to understand the basics of the fishery. The minister had to back down. The simple, basic closure is estimated to have cost the community a considerable amount of money. The cost, apparently, for the minister's mistake was $40 million to the industry and to the people in the community. Martin Mallet of the Maritime Fishermen's Union did say that it is difficult to put a price on the closure cost-wise, but for two weeks, depending on the number of fishermen, it can easily go into a few million dollars' worth of lost revenues. The whales do not go into water less than 10 fathoms deep, yet the minister thought, “Well, let's close that and put people out of work.” Yet again it was another failure by the government. The list goes on. There has been an issue of poaching in the lobster fishery. Some members will remember that it, most famously, was in the news again in St. Marys Bay in the riding of West Nova in 2020. The minister refused to implement and enforce the law. That is the basis of our society: enforcing law. The fishery cannot work unless the law is enforced. It is sort of like saying, “You know what, the Trans-Canada Highway has a speed limit, but there'll never be any police on the road.” Do members think everybody would do the speed limit? That is what is happening. DFO, in large parts of the province of Nova Scotia, between 1 a.m. and 6 a.m. has absolutely nobody on duty. DFO does not meet boats when they come off the wharf, does not monitor the catch as it comes in, and allows illegal fishing. In fact DFO does not even have any idea of the food and ceremonial fishery of first nations with respect to how much is caught. There has been testimony at committee from DFO enforcement officers who said that 90% of that in Nova Scotia is an illegal commercial fishery. DFO does get catch data for the FSC fishery in B.C. but does not get it in Atlantic Canada. There has been failure after failure by the government with respect to the fishery, to the point that I would be surprised, out of the fishing ridings in Atlantic Canada, to see any Liberal survive the next election, given the anger towards the government on fishery management, with its six incompetent fisheries ministers over the last nine years. Again and again, when asked by the committee unanimously for the government to act, the government ignores what it does. We have raised the issues with the parliamentary secretary, who I see is in the House, but still nothing seems to happen on the elver fishery, the lobster fishery enforcement and the many other fisheries that our communities depend on. I would say that while we do celebrate the fishery, one day is not enough. I would like the government to celebrate the commercial fishery every single day and do its job. Its job in the oldest department in the government is to ensure the sustainable growth of a commercial fishery for generation after generation, yet the government is introducing marine-protected areas in areas where nothing needs to be protected, and it cannot even produce the science in those areas that would show that something is endangered and that the cause of endangerment is actually the commercial fishery. I have asked the government questions on that. I have asked it to provide the documents on these things, and it cannot do it, because it is making stuff up as it goes along. As it does so, it harms the day-to-day fishery and the rural communities in our country that depend on the fishery. Therefore while we support the motion, we would ask the government to start doing a better job and pay attention to what fishermen are saying and what needs to be done.

Madam Speaker, our party can think of no reason not to vote in favour of the motion moved by the member for Malpeque, in Prince Edward Island. The Bloc Québécois would especially like to acknowledge the demanding and difficult work that our fish harvesters take on every time they go to sea to serve our communities and provide Quebeckers with products that make us proud. In many ways, these men and women embody the resilience, solidarity, and mutual support at the very core of the fish harvesting trade. We also want to acknowledge the outstanding contribution made by the temporary foreign workers who sustain the commercial activities of many independent fish harvesters and processors in Quebec. Without them, the challenges facing the industry would be all the greater, even to the point of forcing many businesses to close or go bankrupt. As for the commitment of our many communities, the reeves of RCMs and the processing companies in these areas are vital allies and partners in spreading the word about this coastal economic reality. People here confront multiple challenges, including climate disturbances that are dramatically disrupting our marine ecosystems. Historically, the Bloc Québécois has always vigorously defended workers in the primary sectors of our economy, because they are the very first link in the chain, but unfortunately, they are often the last to be recognized. From the boat to the dock, from the factory to our plates, our hard-working local fishers provide us with world-class products. Establishing a national Canadian seafood day would not only be a gesture of recognition, but also an opportunity to bring to the forefront the important issues that affect this industry. I want to discuss a reality that needs to be clarified and that shows why the importance of further decentralizing fisheries management. The reality is that successive governments have always neglected Quebec's marine fisheries. Ottawa constantly uses the division of powers and its exclusive jurisdiction over the protection of stocks as an excuse to impose arbitrary decisions. I could name many other areas where this is the case. This situation is hindering the development of Quebec's fisheries. Let us not forget that the sector faces unique realities dictated by geopolitical events. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans is not being transparent, and that is hurting this sector. The Bloc Québécois will ensure that fishers' concerns are heard in Ottawa and will always be there to stand up for their interests. Whether it is about the wharf in Cap‑aux‑Meules or the wintering yard in Grande‑Rivière, the federal government's conspicuous indifference is getting in the way of the fisheries sector's ability to reach its full regional development potential. I will paraphrase Jean Garon, a former minister of agriculture under the René Lévesque government who summed up the situation like this: no other aspect of Quebec's economic and social life has been or continues to be as mistreated by our belonging to Canada than the fisheries. I can say that nothing has changed since then. Let us talk about the cod and shrimp that are at risk or the way the department sped up their disappearance. These species have many natural predators, such as seals and redfish, not to mention exposure to the warming and oxygenation of the waters. The government does not even know in what proportion each of these factors contributed to the disappearance or mortality of these species. However, we can identify decisions the department made that have harmed these species, starting with its determination to maintain the redfish moratorium that was imposed in 1995. This moratorium was put in place to discourage the use of factory trawlers in the gulf and because redfish was particularly endangered at that time. However, it should have been lifted long before now. It was in place for a long time. The government took far too long to see the obvious. The other reality is the complete lack of a strategy to promote seal products, which are still being boycotted by the United States and the European Union. It is really outdated to support what could be called the “Bardot effect”, but unfortunately, people still have a negative image in their minds. Let us be clear. The killing of baby seals has been banned since 1987, and methods have obviously changed a lot since then. The Bloc Québécois recently organized a seafood event in New Richmond. Our party's participation in the Salon Fourchette bleue trade show and in the working groups held in La Malbaie also shows the Bloc Québécois's firm commitment to fishers and coastal communities. Let us talk about shrimp again for a moment. The federal government is telling shrimp and cod harvesters to transition to redfish, since there is an abundance of them. Just to remind everyone, this is just one small consequence of the poorly managed 1995 moratorium. Fishers will make do with it, but the equipment and processing plants still have to be adapted. The minister, however, is not considering any financial assistance or licence buyouts for the shrimp industry. Daniel Côté, the mayor of Gaspé, and Patrice Element, the director of the Office des pêcheurs de crevettes du Québec, a shrimp non-profit, believe that for this decision to be truly meaningful, shrimp harvesters would have to be able to catch 60,000 tonnes or 80,000 tonnes of redfish or else change their licence. Obviously no one has thought about that. The member has moved a motion to celebrate the fisheries sector, its artisans and processors. That is all well and good. However, his party's mismanagement of the sector is partly responsible for the problems these workers and their families are currently facing. Yes, this government did increase shrimp quotas for redfish by 10%, but what it does not want to talk about is the fact that it granted more than 60% of the quotas to offshore trawlers, those out on the high seas. As the environment critic, I have to talk about this, because their impact on the marine environment is significant. Offshore trawlers are huge vessels that scrape the seabed to catch groundfish, along with many other species, plants and fish that get swept up in their nets. Moreover, this industrial fishing gear creates bycatch, which is a problem. It is good that fishers were offered compensation when the cod fishery closed, but offshore fishers are still allowed to fish cod, in addition to all the bycatch. All other fishers have to return the fish to the water. To show how offshore fishers think and how little they care about bycatch, consider this statistic: Redfish sells for about 35¢ a pound, whereas halibut sells for $5.50. Obviously, bycatch is profitable. These big vessels are masters of bycatch. The government allowed the Atlantic Groundfish Council, which is mostly made up of offshore fishers from eastern Canada, to get a mapping contract. The ship that is being used is 60 metres long and it is sailing in the Canadian zone of the Atlantic Ocean. Given how big the ship is, there is a good chance that it will damage the sea floor and destroy some ecosystems. Why was that contract granted? Let us ask ourselves that question. The Canadian Coast Guard has the experience and expertise. The government could have asked the Coast Guard do that work, but it cannot because the Coast Guard's vessel was built in 1982 and it is undergoing repairs. The Bloc Québécois wants the maritime regions of Quebec to be better developed with a focus on food sovereignty. The Bloc Québécois regularly meets with stakeholders from maritime Quebec, and we will not waver in our support for them.

Madam Speaker, I am happy to rise today on a topic that very much impacts all of us across Canada. I am happy to be the NDP critic for fisheries and oceans, to participate as a member of the fisheries and oceans committee and to reinforce the importance of us taking the time to acknowledge the important work of fishers across Canada. For those reasons and many others, I am more than happy to support a motion for us to move forward with declaring that the government should designate October 1 as national Canadian seafood day. Who can disagree with that? We will be supporting the motion. We know that fishers, harvesters, processors and other sector workers across the country deserve to have the recognition of a national Canadian seafood day. It is an industry that supports communities, contributes to food security, and generates economic opportunities and well-being for Canadians. I have mentioned this before in the House, but I think it is particularly applicable to what we are talking about today. I am originally from St. John's, Newfoundland. I am now honoured to live in Nanaimo, British Columbia, on the west coast. They are two coastal communities very much impacted by what is happening in the fisheries. The reason my family ended up moving from St. John's, Newfoundland to the west coast, where our home is now, was because of the cod moratorium. Although my family were not fishers, we were very much impacted economically by the implications of the cod collapse. I wanted to reinforce that because I know that my story, and with it the reasons why my family packed up our car, sold everything and drove from one side of Canada to the other, is not an individual one. I have heard from so many across the country who are deeply impacted by what is happening along our coasts and who want to have the ability to participate in a highly sustainable food source for Canadians across the country. Fishers across the country do so much to support us in providing us with sustainable food choices. We need to be doing all we can to support them. We know that our fisheries are particularly hard hit right now with the climate crisis and with waters warming. There are so many species around Canada that are impacted. We need to be ensuring that we are doing all that we can to not be adding more barriers and challenges for these species that need to be protected. Days fly by quickly in these roles, so I cannot remember exactly when this was, but within the last two years, I met with a group called Fishing for Communities in Victoria, British Columbia. It is a network of “Indigenous and non-Indigenous fish harvesters, small businesses, fishmongers, chefs, restaurateurs, fishing families, and community organization” who are deeply concerned about the future of the seafood system and fisheries-dependent communities on the west coast of Canada. I will pull a piece right off of the website because I feel that it has a really good way of summarizing what is going on on the west coast of Canada, specifically. It says, “Decades ago, fisheries policy changed on the West Coast [when DFO] privatized fishing access rights making fishing licenses and quota available to the highest bidder on the open market.” Since then, B.C. fish harvesters, first nations and coastal communities have struggled to continue their way of life. Unable to compete with corporate and global interests in the fishery, fishing and processing jobs have declined and disappeared. One particular example of this occurring is highlighted in an article in The Northern View. One community that has been particularly hard hit is Prince Rupert. I spoke directly with commercial fisherman Joel Collier and his wife, the co-owner in their harvesting business, Melissa Collier. This is what was talked about in a story dated July 2022. The article came out a while ago, but it is still so applicable to what we are seeing today. It states: Commercial fisherman Joel Collier was shocked when he docked in Prince Rupert this past summer, seeking a shower and shops to restock on supplies, only to find that many of the services and businesses he expected had disappeared. “Prince Rupert being a huge fishing hub in the past, it was a pretty alarming change,” Melissa Collier, Joel’s wife, a fellow fisherman and co-owner of their harvest business, said. The article talks about the fact that when Joel, who is a fisher, and his then partner stopped at Prince Rupert to shower and to be able to access the basic necessities, it had all suddenly shut down. It also talks about how they were looking for a part for their board, which they would normally be able to access in a business in this town. I believe it was a marine antenna. They were unable to access this particular piece of necessary equipment in order to continue on with the fishing. They went to another dock and, again, similar problems occurred. This is the story we are hearing from many in these coastal communities and from the fishers who rely on them; because of the fact that we are seeing so many local fishers being hard hit right now, there is an impact on coastal communities. It impacts not just the people who are out on the water but also the communities themselves that rely on the fishing industry to thrive, to bring income into the community, which is how we see vibrant communities that are flourishing. The issue here around the particular ownership model on the west coast actually came up in the fisheries committee prior to my being a member of Parliament. I was elected in 2021. In 2019, the fisheries committee put together a report called “West Coast Fisheries: Sharing Risks and Benefits”. The committee had a list of clear recommendations for the government as to how to best move forward to address the following issue: Currently, there is a system set up on the west coast that disproportionately benefits large corporations and negatively impacts local fishers. The report is asking for the benefits to be provided to those who have boots on the boats, as they like to refer to them. It states that those who are actually out and fishing should be accessing the benefits of the fishing industry. Instead, on the west coast, we see an overabundance of profits going into large corporations that are not only seeping the benefits out of coastal communities but also sending the investment elsewhere. We have a tremendous amount of resources here along the coasts of Canada as well as in the Great Lakes and rivers. The fishery is an industry that needs to be benefiting Canadians here at home. Unfortunately, that is not what we are seeing on the west coast. We need to see the government taking the actions required to move forward with addressing this. To make matters worse, approximately 85% of Canadian-caught seafood is exported while we import 63% of our seafood. It makes no sense. We have a system that contributes to more greenhouse gas emissions, disempowers small-scale fish harvesters and may affect the future of our fisheries and oceans. There is the Fisheries for Communities group and, as I mentioned before, there are many different people who are part of this work. They are asking for the government to give fishing access back to fish harvesters, first nations and coastal communities. They go on to say that only first nations and people who work on fishing boats should be able to own a licence and quota, as I was talking about with respect to the boots on the boats, and that there should be policies in place that phase out big business, investors and non-domestic ownership. With that, I would like to say I am happy to see that we have the motion coming forward, and I hope the government will implement real policies to support fishers here in Canada.