So, clearly we have to begin to put in a process where people are 

 living by the rules, and where they feel the rules are fair. 



What has happened in Canada in the last couple of days is unac- 

 ceptable under any standard. It is totally unfair, unilateral action, 

 without warning, and against even what the science tells us ought 

 to be enforced. In addition, it is not the way for a friendly nation 

 to behave with a neighbor. 



So, I have urged Secretary Christopher to take the strongest ac- 

 tion on this. Last night I spoke with the Under Secretary of State 

 who has been directly in touch with Ambassador Blanchard on sev- 

 eral occasions. I will personally be talking to Ambassador Blan- 

 chard today, and I would stress to you that the only solution that 

 I believe is acceptable in this situation is for Canada to release 

 those boats, release those men and pay for the catch. There should 

 be no fines, and no penalties, and they should agree that this will 

 not happen again, that we will sit down at a table and understand 

 what the definitions are going to be. Because this is wrong. 



Now, I do not want to spend the whole day today on the Cana- 

 dian situation because, as I said to you just now, this is going to 

 go on unless we learn how to deal with amendment 5 and the other 

 problems that we face. 



Here is how I would like to proceed today. Let us talk about how 

 we can best deal with minimizing the pain. How do you think we 

 can do this in a way that is fair? What is the first best option avail- 

 able to us? The second best option? What should we do to try to 

 guarantee that we have fair enforcement mechanisms? What 

 should we do to guarantee the maximum choice and input to fisher- 

 men and not treat fishermen like criminals or like schoolchildren? 

 How do we do this in a way that balances the great individuality 

 and robust pioneerism of fishing with the need to have enforce- 

 ment? There must be a balance there. 



I want to know from you, the people who work this issue on a 

 daily basis, or who have thought about it at great length, how we 

 can best implement long-term solutions to the challenges we now 

 face. 



So, those are the parameters of this discussion, and without fur- 

 ther ado, I would like to ask each member of the panel to take 2 

 or 3 minutes and give us your quick cut on whatever issues you 

 think you would like to address or how you would like to come at 

 this, and then we'll begin an open dialog. 



And I will try to construct a framework that moves from issue 

 to issue, and see if we can lay out a solid response. 



I am in the process right now of rewriting the Magnuson Act, so 

 this is our chance to put new mechanisms in place. And I promise 

 you we will listen carefully at this hearing. The staff from the Com- 

 merce Committee is here, and we will take your thoughts back as 

 we try to put together the strongest and best possible Magnuson 

 Act reauthorization legislation. 



So, Mr. Golas, why don't you lead off, and we'll move around the 

 table in this direction. 



