Hon. Michael L. MacDonald: Minister, you mentioned the importance of the process known as comparative fishing. I find that interesting. The Coast Guard just decommissioned the CCGS Alfred Needler in February — five months earlier than scheduled. I’m very familiar with this vessel because my now-retired brother-in-law was the long-time captain of that ship. The CCGS Alfred Needler was expected to bring two vessels into service through the process known as comparative fishing when the new vessels trawl side by side. How do you intend to do that now when the CCGS Alfred Needler has been decommissioned before the new vessels come on stream?

Hon. Leo Housakos (Acting Leader of the Opposition): Minister, last month, your department provided a response to questions on the Senate Order Paper related to the procurement of two Polar-class icebreakers for the Canadian Coast Guard. One of the questions concerned the budget for this project. Your department refused to provide any estimate as to what this project would cost, despite the fact that the Parliamentary Budget Officer provided an estimate of more than $7 billion. The Trudeau government has said that the first ship will be in service in 2030 — seven years from now — yet you don’t even have a budget estimate that you can share with Parliament and the people of Canada.

Minister, you are either unwilling or unable to provide that number, and neither option is acceptable to Canadians. Do you have an estimate as to what that project will cost, and will you share it with us today?

Hon. Joyce Murray, P.C., M.P., Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard: Thank you for that question, senator. First, I want to assure all senators that we make the decisions at Fisheries and Oceans Canada, or DFO, based on the best available science. In the case of the turbot stock, there was a temporary gap in the science due to the fact that the ship that had been doing the assessments, which was provided by Greenland because we have a shared stock, was temporarily not in service.

For that year, we were still able to utilize the data from the time series of assessments over the past 10 years as well as fish harvester data to have an assessment, albeit the trawling had not been done that year. We were slightly more precautionary because of the absence of the trawling data, but this was a temporary issue and Greenland’s vessel that was out of commission has now been replaced.

We made a one-year decision on the tack rather than the normal two-year decision because we knew that we would be able to fill that data gap when Greenland provided the vessel, again, a year later. I’m confident in our ability to manage the stock, and I will continue to make sure that conservation underpins everything we do.