Bill C-555 (Historical)

An Act respecting the Marine Mammal Regulations (seal fishery observation licence)

This enactment requires the Governor in Council to amend the Marine Mammal Regulations to increase the distance that a person must maintain from another person who is fishing for seals, except under the authority of a seal fishery observation licence.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

I call the meeting to order.

I'd like to thank Mr. Dakins and Mr. Thompson for joining us here today. As you're well aware, we're discussing Bill C-555.

Mr. Dakins, we're certainly very anxious to hear your presentation this morning.

I'm sure the clerk has already informed you that we generally allow about 10 minutes for presentations, which are followed by questions and answers. If I cut you off at any time through the question and answer period, please forgive me. Members are constrained by certain time limits and in the interest of fairness, we try to keep as close to those timeframes as possible.

Whenever you're ready, Mr. Dakins, please proceed.

[Jonathan Genest-Jourdain, NDP, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Sylvestre, I've read your statement. As I am the critic for my party for aboriginal affairs, I hope that you will forgive me if I sometimes take shortcuts.

If I've understood correctly, should Bill C-555 be passed and implemented, coercive power would be exerted first and foremost by your organization. For my part, I am a native of Manicouagan, whose shores cover thousands of kilometres. In communities along the lower North Shore, like Ekuanitshit, people still use seals for food.

I see that the situation still opens the door to an interaction. On the ground, we see that people can approach each other on the ice. In Atshuk, it is still relatively easy to reach these locations. Because there is ice, it's possible to get close and see seals with the naked eye.

Your organization would therefore exert power to uphold the parameters of Bill C-555.

You mentioned staff. Remind me of the number.

[Trevor Swerdfager, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ecosystems and Fisheries Management - Operations, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hello everyone.

As you know, I am Trevor Swerdfager, Assistant Deputy Minister of Ecosystems and Fisheries Management—Operations.

On behalf of our minister, the Honourable Gail Shea, I would like to thank the members of the committee for giving me the opportunity to speak today about this private member's bill, which is Bill C-555.

I have the pleasure of being accompanied by three of my fisheries officer colleagues, Mr. Jean-François Sylvestre et Mr. Yves Richard, both from the Quebec region, and Mr. Randy Jenkins, who works at central administration.

As you certainly know, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Conservation and Protection Program is responsible for enforcing the Fisheries Act, the Endangered Species Act, and more generally, federal regulations which apply to natural resources.

Given that our staff includes more than 600 active fisheries officers, they maintain a strong presence nationally. They often represent the department and even the government in many small communities from coast to coast.

As the tragic events that occurred in Moncton last week reminded us, people responsible for upholding the law, be it to ensure our safety or to protect our national heritage, accept tasks and face dangers that are truly remarkable, even if we often forget it.

I am therefore very pleased and proud to be here today with three of our best fisheries officers, not only to talk about this bill, but also to highlight the importance of this aspect of operations and our department's mandate.

Turning to the matter at hand, I'll also take just a very small amount of your time with a further couple of preliminary remarks. Simply put, in the fisheries management domain, particularly in the seal harvest area, the department really has two main preoccupations: the conservation of the resource and the safety of the people who are engaged in it. As my minister has noted elsewhere, our department strongly believes that Bill C-555 will advance us toward both of these goals.

As you know, the bill proposes a change to the marine mammal regulations to alter the minimum distance from 1/2 nautical mile to one nautical mile that an unlicensed observer can approach a person fishing for seals. Although, as you've heard, violations of this particular provision are infrequent, when they do occur and when people are determined to interfere with a lawful harvest activity, they put at risk the life of sealers, enforcement officers like those beside me today, and coast guard vessel crews.

The officers with me today have first-hand experience with these risks and would be happy to describe them to you should your questions for us happen to go there. We've also tabled with the committee a number of pictures that might illustrate some of the operational issues, and if the chairman wished, he could pass those around for people to have a look at.

Turning to the bill itself, we do feel that the changes it proposes, while modest in nature, would better equip us to manage access to the seal fishery and to better enforce or protect the safety not only of seal harvesters but also of our enforcement personnel.

As the committee will know, a vessel can cover half a mile in a matter of minutes, leaving enforcement personnel very little time to react to its movements. The new provision would give officers additional time to respond to incursions within the observation limits and Coast Guard vessels time to better manoeuvre into position. It would also afford us additional time to advise harvesters of the potential for danger and allow them to return to the safety of their vessels or to land, as the case may be. We feel that the safety of the harvesters and the managers of the fishery would be improved as a result.

Make no mistake about it, the department fully supports the right of people to observe the seal harvest. There is no debate, on our part, on that issue at all. Indeed, our regulations clearly allow for observers to be licensed. Applicants for licences are subject to a very stringent screening process to ensure that individuals are not intent on disrupting the harvest activity.

Compliance with this particular regulatory provision is very high. In our view, it is working quite well. We need to ensure that proper regulatory measures are in place to properly control those intent on disrupting lawful seal fishing activities. We feel this bill helps to do so.

As I said, we have plenty of expertise sitting around the table here in terms of past exercises, particularly those who I know may be of some interest with respect to the Farley Mowat and other incidents in the past and going forward.

We'd be very happy to take any questions you might have today.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Pinhorn, thanks very much for being here with us this afternoon. I'm sorry that our time is going to be kept to a minimum.

I was very interested in the history that you were giving. I'm from Ontario, so of course I don't know too much about the seal hunt, for sure, but we know the things that we see, and we know the things we read and the things that we hear, and you seem to support the amendments that were coming forth to the marine mammal regulations under Bill C-555. Is that correct?

[Robert Chisholm, NDP, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Pinhorn, for coming and presenting to us today.

It was an interesting presentation, and I have some questions that relate to the bill and to some of the things you said during your presentation.

We've indicated our support for Bill C-555. There's a health and safety matter. The principle of that is that we want to ensure that the people who are prosecuting the harvest are not endangered as a result of the way the harvest is managed. We've indicated that.

I've been trying to get an answer from the department about why they've extended the regulations, what's happened that they felt the need now to extend the regulations, the distance from half a nautical mile to a full nautical mile. Have there been any incidents, or whatever? They've suggested there haven't but there might be, which is fine.

But I also understand when we began to make some calls and to talk to some folks, on hearing that this bill was coming, what the perspective was from the people in your industry. One of the things we heard was that there was a problem now with enforcement of the regulations as they exist. I think you mentioned it, that if this is going to mean anything, we're going to have to see regular and full enforcement of the rules. I wonder if you could comment on that for a second.

[Frank Pinhorn, Executive Director, Canadian Sealers Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Members of Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Frank Pinhorn. I'm the executive director of the Canadian Sealers Association in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The CSA was formed in 1981 as an advocacy group representing the interests of all of our sealers. Our main goal was to try to redevelop an industry that was crippled in the late sixties and early seventies by animal rights groups. It's a big challenge.

When you look at sealing in Newfoundland and Labrador, there are over 10,000 licensed sealers. For most who earn a living from the ocean and are commercial sealers, about a third of their income originates from sealing. It's a third of their income. That's our setting today.

First of all, I would like to thank you for the invitation to be here today. I would rather have had some of our sealers with me, but the spring of 2014 has just concluded and some boats haven't been able to get out there yet because of heavy ice. From the bottom of White Bay right up to around St. Anthony, there's no access to the ocean yet because of ice. They tell me that the ice there this year was up to 10 and 12 feet thick. That's where that is.

Like I said, I would have liked to have brought some sealers with me to relay to you the importance of the industry to Newfoundland and Labrador.

Regarding Bill C-555, an act respecting the Marine Mammal Regulations, it is proposed that the distance to observe the seal hunt be increased from half of a nautical mile to one nautical mile. The Canadian Sealers Association have been requesting for years that federal Fisheries take a more stringent approach in licensing and monitoring the activities of those who observe the seal hunt. All too often they are there for the sole purpose of interfering and disrupting sealers who are trying to make a living in pursuit of a legitimate industry to support their families and their communities.

The Canadian Sealers Association fully supports the bill of MP Greg Kerr, which will increase the distance between seal observers and harvesting crews. It will offer a greater measure of protection and safety for both. However, this bill only applies to non-licensed observers. It needs to be expanded to also include licensed observers, who presently can venture to within 10 metres of a sealing boat—30-odd feet.

The present regulations put sealers and licensed observers in quarters that are too close, considering the environment, high-powered rifles, and powerful vessels. It is not conducive to any measure of safety or security for either the sealer or the observer.

Also, Bill C-555 is only an empty gesture, unless we take a close look at the bigger picture and focus on the status of the sealing industry today in Newfoundland and Labrador and elsewhere. We can say with certainty that it is only a shadow of its former self and that we are bordering on an economic and ecological disaster that could play havoc with our rural population.

Let's look at what has happened over the last 20 years. From 1995 to 2006, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were taking 100% of the quota. For 11 years, we took 100% of the quota. Prices ranged from $40 to $100. They peaked at $115 in 2006. There was virtually full participation for all commercial sealers who wanted to go sealing. We had up to 2,000 boats out there in a given year. There were five processing establishments in full production, with several hundred employees. A key element to these 11 years was that the sustainable commercial fishing industry kept the seal herd—I'm talking of harp seals when I talk seals—at the 5-million to 5.5-million range. For 11 years they stayed fairly stationary.

Now, what happened after 2006? The world went into an economic recession, and it took two or three years for that to subside. But over the last eight years, we have taken 10% to 15% of available quotas—400,000 seals for the last five years, I believe—and taken, on average, 40,000 to 60,000 seals. One year, which was last year, we got 91,000. That means we have left almost three million seals in the water, unharvested.

Prices have ranged over eight years from $20 to $35. Just look at what happened before that: we were at $40 to $115. Participation levels are at an all-time low. We have one processing plant in partial production.

The harp seal herd now has increased from about 5.5 million to over 8 million. With a winter like we just had...which was probably the worst one we've had, they tell me, in 40, 50, 60 years. Sealers tell me that it's the first time ever in their life they went out to where the seals were and every mature female was carrying a pup; every one. The ice conditions were perfect for the seals. They got out there in the middle of the heavy ice and no one could get at where they were to.

If we total harps and hoods and greys, we have about 10 million seals. The impact on the ecosystem is devastating, and it's in dire need of correction.

For those who commercially harvest seals, about one-third of their income is derived from sealing. The guy in St. Anthony with a 34-11 boat, if he can get sealing in the spring and get anywhere from 900 to 1,200 seals, will gross about $40,000—four men in a boat. That means he can start the season on a positive note as opposed to being, as we say in Newfoundland, “in the hold”. It's so critical that they can pay to get their boat ready to go crabbing and shrimping and different things. They can pay their insurance. They can fuel up. It's a good start to their season.

The other thing that has happened here is that sealers are telling me that the seals they are getting are full of shrimp and full of crab; even young beater seals. We just saw a 10,000-tonne reduction in the shrimp quota, with snow crab quotas over the last five years, especially in parts of 2J and 3K, Labrador and down towards Cape Bonavista. The crab resources there in the last five years have decreased by at least 30% to 40%.

It's so critical to balance that ecosystem and to get the seals landed, get them into the marketplace, so that we can have a sustainable industry, a profitable industry.

We've been sealing in Newfoundland and Labrador for hundreds of years. On June 19, they're going to open the memorial in Elliston. It's about $3 million, and it's in honour of those who died on the SS Newfoundland and the Southern Cross. Sealing is just as important today as it was way back in 1914, and way back in the 1850s. It's a critical part of our livelihoods and our culture, and it needs to be sustained.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

I call this meeting to order.

We're pleased to have Mr. Pinhorn with us here today.

Thank you very much for coming to meet with us. As you're well aware, we're studying Bill C-555. We certainly look forward to your comments on it and our opportunity to question you on the bill.

We generally allow about 10 minutes maximum for comments from our witnesses.

I'll ask if you have any questions before we begin, and, if not, you can proceed with reading your comments.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I will start with the concept of the very strange proposition put forward by my friend. He uses this concept of shifts and believes there is some perverse obligation on the part of the government that, if the opposition wishes to filibuster the production of new laws and delay their production, we somehow have an obligation to match them step for step in extending that process. His comparison is with ordinary Canadians. He said that ordinary Canadians should not produce a product at the end of the day at work; they should take two, three, or four days to get the same thing made. That is his idea of getting things done. That is his idea of how ordinary Canadians can work. I think that says something about the culture of the NDP and the hon. member. I will let members guess what culture that is. It is a culture that does say we should take two or three times longer to get something done or to get to our destination than we possibly can.

We on this side are happy to make decisions to get things done for Canadians. In fact, that is exactly what we have been doing. Since I last rose in response to a Thursday question, the House has accomplished a lot, thanks to our government's plan to work a little overtime this spring.

I know the House leader of the official opposition boasts that the New Democrats are happy to work hard, but let us take a look at what his party's deputy leader had to say on CTV last night. The hon. member for Halifax was asked why the NDP agreed to work until midnight. She confessed, “We didn't agree to do it.” She then lamented, “We are going from topic to topic. We are doing votes. We are at committees. They are really intense days. We're sitting until midnight.”

On that part, I could not agree more with the deputy leader of the NDP, believe it or not, but with much more cheer in my voice when I say those words, because we think it is a good thing. These are intense days. We are actually getting things done. We are actually voting on things. We are actually getting things through committee. For once, we are going from topic to topic in the run of the day.

Let me review for the House just how many topics, votes, and committee accomplishments we have addressed since the government asked the House to roll up its sleeves.

Bill C-24, the strengthening Canadian citizenship act, was passed at second reading and has even been reported back from the citizenship committee.

Bill C-10, the tackling contraband tobacco act, was concurred in at report stage and later passed at third reading.

Bill C-31, the economic action plan 2014 act, no. 1, was reported back from the finance committee.

Bill C-27, the veterans hiring act, was passed at second reading.

Bill C-20, the Canada-Honduras economic growth and prosperity act, was concurred in at report stage.

On the private members' business front we saw:

Bill C-555, from the hon. members for West Nova in support of the seal hunt, was passed at second reading.

Bill C-483, from my hon. colleague, the member for Oxford, cracking down on prisoners' escorted temporary absences was passed at third reading.

Bill C-479, from the hon. member for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, on improving the place of victims in our justice system was passed at third reading last night.

Progress is not limited to Conservative initiatives. The Green Party leader's Bill C-442, respecting a Lyme disease strategy, was reported back from committee yesterday.

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay saw a motion on palliative care pass.

We have also seen countless reports from committees reviewing the government's spending plans, as well as topics of importance to those committees.

This morning we even ratified the appointment of an officer of Parliament.

Finally, I do want to reflect on the accomplishment of Bill C-17, the protecting Canadians from unsafe drugs act (Vanessa's law), which members may recall me discussing in last week's Thursday statement. It finally passed at second reading. However, this did not happen until the NDP relented and changed its tune to allow the bill to go to committee. It was the first time ever that we had an expression from the New Democrats when we gave notice of intention to allocate time in which they said, “We don't need that time; we're actually prepared to allow a bill to advance to the next stage”. I think, by reflecting on the fact that those dozens of other times the NDP did not take that step, we could understand that they did not want to see a bill advance; they did not want to see progress made. That lets Canadians understand quite clearly why it is we need to use scheduling and time allocation as a device to get things done in the face of a group that thinks the objective is to fill up all possible time available with words rather than actual votes and getting things done.

It is clear that our approach is working. We are getting things done in the House of Commons and delivering results for Canadians.

Perhaps I might be overly inspired by the example of Vanessa’s Law, but I do want to draw the attention of the House to Bill C-32, the Victims Bill of Rights Act.

So far, we have seen three days of debate on second reading of the bill, but “debate” is actually not accurate. What we have witnessed is speech, after speech, after speech—most of them from New Democrats—offering platitudes of support for the idea of getting that bill to a committee where it could be studied. What I want to know is, why will they not just let it happen? Victims of crime want to see meaningful action, not just kind words.

Suffice it to say that I will need to schedule additional time for discussion of this bill. Perhaps the NDP will let it pass after a fourth day of talk.

This afternoon, we will continue with the report stage debate on Bill C-31, our budget implementation bill. When that concludes, we will turn to Bill C-20, to implement our free trade agreement with Honduras, at third reading. If time permits, we will continue the third reading debate on Bill C-3, the Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act.

Tomorrow morning, we will start the report stage debate on Bill C-24, which makes the first modernization of the Citizenship Act in 35 years. After question period, I will call Bill C-32, the Victims Bill of Rights Act, to see if the NDP is ready to deliver results, not talk.

Monday morning, we will continue the third reading debate on Bill C-20, if more time is needed, and then resume the second reading debate on Bill C-18, the Agricultural Growth Act. After question period, we will get back to the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act.

Tuesday shall be the eighth allotted day when the NDP will have a chance to talk, and talk, about a topic of their own choosing. At the end of the night, we will have a number of important votes on approving the funds required for government programs and services and pass two bills to that end.

On Wednesday, we will debate our budget bill at third reading, and then we will start the second reading debate on Bill C-36, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act, which my seatmate, the Minister of Justice, tabled yesterday.

We will continue the debates on Bill C-36 and Bill C-24, if extra time is needed, on Thursday. After those have finished, and on Friday, we will resume the uncompleted debates on Bill C-3, the Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, at third reading; Bill C-6, the Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, at report stage; Bill C-8, the Combating Counterfeit Products Act, at third reading; Bill C-18, the Agricultural Growth Act, at second reading; Bill C-26, the Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act, at second reading; Bill C-32, the Victims Bill of Rights Act, at second reading; and Bill C-35, the Justice for Animals in Service Act (Quanto's Law), at second reading.

To make a long story short, we have accomplished much in the House over the last week, but we still have much left to do, which inspires me to note that in the week ahead I have to take my automobile in for maintenance. At that time, when I take it to the dealership, I hope one person will work on it for an hour, get the job done, and then return it to me at a reasonable cost. I do hope I am not told, “There are still many more employees who have not had a chance to have a shift working on your car as well, so we are going to keep it here another three days and give everybody a turn to work on your car.” I hope the dealership will do as Conservatives do: get the job done and then deliver me the product.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

I call this meeting to order.

I'd like to thank Mr. Kerr for joining us here today. We appreciate him coming in to discuss his private member's bill, Bill C-555.

Mr. Kerr, as is the practice, you have a few minutes if you want to make some opening comments, and then we'll proceed to questions. All members have a copy of your bill in front of them at this time, so whenever you're ready, Mr. Kerr, please proceed. I know that you're quite familiar with the proceedings of this committee, having been a former member, so proceed any time you want.

The House resumed from May 15 consideration of the motion that Bill C-555, an act respecting the Marine Mammal Regulations (seal fishery observation licence), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Marine Mammal Regulations

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by thanking my colleagues from around the House for understanding the importance of this bill and showing their support for it. We know there are many industries in the world that are perhaps not universally supported, yet we recognize that different areas have different priorities in the different job-creating industries.

The seal hunt in Canada is an extremely important industry for certain parts of the country. That is why it is important we recognize it as a legitimate, long-standing, and now today a very humane and protected industry. It is one that supports a lot of communities and provides a lot of income to very important family circumstances, and it is one on which many people depend. The fact that it is done humanely and that it has got to be done safely is a concern of our government, of course.

Bill C-555 is a modest bill. I am sure there will be more adjustments down the road, but the real purpose in providing this larger, kilometre-wide area of protection is simply to ensure the safety of the seal hunters and those who observe the seal industry.

Those who do it legitimately and those who have concerns or questions, as long as they are registered, are fine. They have the right to express their opinion. However, there are those who would disrupt the industry, and it has happened before. What the bill says is not only to protect the sealers but the Coast Guard and the rescue and policing efforts as well. It has to be very clear that anybody who gets closer than that kilometre distance is in fact creating a serious danger to all concerned, and they will be dealt with accordingly.

I will not repeat the many very good points made by several members here. However, we have the obligation to ensure that legitimate industries and businesses and people engaged in legitimate activities deserve our full support and recognition. That is why this bill, in a modest way, moves to add to that protection and ensure the industry stays viable, stays sustainable, and stays an important part of our Canadian landscape and economic activity going forward.

I would like to thank everybody for their participation. I look forward to the bill passing.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, part of being a team is that when one part of the team drops the ball, the other part of the team picks it up and runs into the end zone.

I really want to thank the member for West Nova for picking the ball up on this piece of legislation. I had originally introduced this legislation prior to the last election, before becoming a parliamentary secretary. As members know, parliamentary secretaries cannot introduce private members' legislation.

The member for West Nova, very ably, was able to pick up this legislation and bring it to the House of Commons. Hopefully it will gain the support of all members of the House and go through. It is a very needed piece of legislation.

I do welcome the opportunity to speak in favour of Bill C-555, an act respecting the marine mammal regulations, seal fishery observation licence. The proposed amendments will make the annual seal harvest safer for all concerned. Before highlighting the specifics, however, let me put the safety issues into a larger context.

It is no secret that Canada's seal harvest has drawn the ire of many celebrities over the years. Many B-list and failed actors and actresses have used the seal hunt to try to promote their own careers because they glean some public interest in the issue. I think that is false. I think it is shameful.

They are often the ones who say they support the downtrodden and poor people across the planet. They go on television and say how much they do to support charities. In fact, what they are doing is promoting their own careers at the expense of those who are truly in need, the average sealers and their families who need the seal hunt to provide sustenance and a small amount of money to help make ends meet at the end of the month. Those are the people who are being hurt by these B-list, washed-up actors and actresses who protest the seal hunt.

Members may recall in 2006 when Paul McCartney and his then-wife, Heather Mills, who is a very rich lady now, because she divorced him and took half his money, apparently, appeared on a ice floe in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for a photo op. The seal clearly did not want to play ball with Sir Paul and snapped at the couple. A photograph later appeared in the Sun newspaper in Britain under a headline, “A Hard Day's Bite”.

I wish that seal had had longer teeth, quite frankly. Sir Paul McCartney has not been seen on an ice floe since that unfortunate incident. That photo op gone wrong actually performed a valuable public service. It showed the world that seals are not the cuddly creatures they are often made out to be by the media and by these protestors, but rather wild animals in the same league as beavers and bears.

I am proud that Canada's seal harvest is biologically sustainable, well managed, and carried out humanely. It is an effective marriage of traditional knowledge and modern science, one that we are always ready to improve upon through new techniques and modern methods. Unfortunately, there are those who continue to malign Canada's good name on this issue. I am not only speaking of celebrity activists but also of our trading partners. As we approach the annual seal harvest, it is a good opportunity to remind these partners and our stakeholders that the Government of Canada supports this industry as it engages in this time-honoured tradition.

As members may recall, the European Union has banned the import and sale of seal products since 2010. This was an affront to Canadian sealers and injurious to Canada's coastal, Inuit, and other aboriginal communities, and the Government of Canada quickly challenged the ban through the WTO.

Last November, the dispute panel found that the European Union's import ban did, in fact, violate its international trade obligations. However, at the same time, that panel said the ban on seal products can be justified due to some of the public's concerns regarding the seal harvest, referring to propaganda released by the anti-sealing efforts. These findings show the anti-sealing lobby is having a drastic effect. Through emotionally exploitive images and misinformation about Canada's sealing practices, special interest groups are turning public opinion against the seal harvest, particularly in Europe. That is why the European Union argued that the seal ban was necessary to address so-called public morals.

The acceptance of public morality as a basis for discriminatory bans on seal products is not only of concern to Canada. The panel report undermines a rules-based global trading system that gives consumers the power to make their own purchasing decisions. Indeed, upholding a ban on seal products creates a dangerous precedent for global trade, but they did it anyway.

Of course, this government is appealing the panel's findings through the appellate body of the WTO. We will continue to defend our seal harvest as a humane, sustainable, and well-regulated industry, and confront any contrary views with cold, hard facts. In the short term, however, we recognize that the panel's findings will fuel all those who oppose the seal harvest so zealously.

This brings me back to the current legislation. Many special interest groups, critics, and celebrities are concerned with the management of the seal harvest. Their desire to monitor the harvest up close may involve unnecessary risk, however, and we must not wait for tragedy to occur before we act.

The bill before the House today seeks to reduce that risk. Under proposed attachments and amendments, no person, except under the authority of the seal fishery observation licence issued by Fisheries and Oceans Canada, could approach within one nautical mile of a person fishing for seals.

There would be those who would solve the problem of risk simply by making the seal harvest go away. That is not a practical solution, neither for Canadian sealers nor Canada's coastal, Inuit, or other aboriginal communities that depend on the seal harvest in so many ways. It is a question of respect for culture and a way of life that has continued for generations.

It is also a question of the revenue generated by coastal communities from the seal harvest. For example, each year the sales of meat and skin for garments and arts and crafts generate $1 million for the Nunavut economy.

All that said, we are not debating the continued existence of the seal harvest. Instead, we are looking into how to address the increased risks that are posed by some individuals who observe without a licence. By requiring a few succinct changes to the Marine Mammal Regulations, Bill C-555 proposes an elegant and thoughtful solution to this challenge.

The Canadian sealing industry has evolved over the past several hundred years, or since the early 1700s, when the first organized occurrence of the annual hunt was actually documented. The seal hunt has been going on for well over 500 years and, according to the documented history of our first nations people, well before that.

Over the years, the nature and conditions of the hunt and of the vessels, tools, and methods used by sealers have evolved, and technology has improved. That said, this is not the first change to the Marine Mammal Regulations in recent years. Members may recall, for example, that the regulations were amended in 2009 to ensure more humane harvesting methods. Nor will it likely be the last change to these regulations. New challenges and risks arise that we cannot foresee, and hopefully future governments will act just as responsibly. To be clear, the intention is to preserve the authority and discretion of the Governor in Council to modify the regulations in the future through normal regulatory processes, as opposed to having to do it by legislation.

Currently, the Marine Mammal Regulations permit anyone to observe the seal hunt from outside a half nautical mile of a seal harvester at work. That is about 900 metres or only 3,000 feet. It is not far enough. Should unauthorized observers violate the half nautical mile distance, our enforcement officials are left with relatively little time, usually in difficult environmental conditions in the sea, to react and intervene if necessary. Requiring unlicensed observers to stay farther away from the sealers who are doing their work would allow our enforcement officials additional time to intercept a vessel that breaches the distance and keep it from disrupting the harvest and possibly endangering the safety of the sealers, who are just trying to make an honest living.

That is why Bill C-555 proposes to double the safety barrier to one full nautical mile, which is about 1,800 metres or 6,000 feet. As I mentioned, this change would allow for more effective enforcement of the regulations in situations in which non-licensed observers deliberately set out to disrupt the hunt. The added distance would afford fishery officers the additional time they need to react to breaches of the one nautical mile limit and intervene safely and effectively, to prevent disruption of the hunt and to protect the sealers who may be put at risk, while maintaining the current regime in place for licensed observers who have followed the rules.

This may lead to fewer disruptions like the one that took place in 2008 involving the Farley Mowat, in which a vessel approached sealers engaged in the harvest and caused them to fear for their safety. The increased distance proposed in Bill C-555 would help to prevent these types of incidents and ultimately lead to a more orderly harvest.

In conclusion, the seal harvest remains a fixture of life in the coastal communities of Atlantic Canada, Quebec and the north. It is embedded in our culture and provides much needed income to strengthen the livelihoods in remote communities. This government stands behind all those sealers who are trying to make an honest living and maintain their quality of life.

I invite all hon. members in the House to please join me in supporting this legislation.

The House resumed from March 6 consideration of the motion that Bill C-555, An Act respecting the Marine Mammal Regulations (seal fishery observation licence), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of Bill C-555, an act respecting the Marine Mammal Regulations (seal fishery observation licence), but the bill, like so much other lip service the Conservative government pays to the east coast seal hunt, is a charade, a charade to make it appear that the government is actually doing something for the hunt, for sealing. It is a sham to make it appear that the government is defending the seal hunt, an illusion to make it appear that the government is a champion of the seal hunt. All the bill amounts to is Conservative sleight of hand.

Bill C-555 would increase the distance an unofficial observer, in other words, anyone who is not there to hunt, a seal protester, for example, must keep from the sealing. Right now it is against the law for an unofficial observer to come within a half nautical mile of the hunt. Bill C-555 would increase that buffer zone to a full nautical mile, so it would increase from a half nautical mile to a full nautical mile.

However, the half-mile buffer there now is not enforced, so increasing the distance to a full nautical mile is lip service. That is what I mean by lip service. It basically means nothing.

It is a good concept, and it is one my party supports. How could we not? It is about safety, in theory anyway, but for all intents and purposes, it means nothing. Sealers on the ground in my province of Newfoundland and Labrador say that it is a good idea, but they do not see how it would change anything.

Frank Pinhorn, executive director of the Canadian Sealers Association, says it is frustrating, because as it stands, regulations are not enforced with the half nautical mile zone. Now the Conservatives would increase the buffer zone to a full mile. Who are they trying to fool? It is nobody on this side of the House, nobody back home in Newfoundland and Labrador. They are not fooling us, so what is the purpose of the bill? There is no purpose. It is a nuisance bill.

The Conservatives are trying to divide the New Democratic caucus on the seal hunt, only there is no divide. New Democrats fully support a humane and sustainable hunt. It is our policy, period, end of discussion.

The 1985 report of the Royal Commission on Seals and the Sealing Industry in Canada quoted a sealer/fisherman, which are one and the same, who described himself back then, 29 years ago, as an endangered species. Let me quote that fisherman/sealer:

I am endangered but I still fight back. I will survive. I will not let animal rights become more important than human rights. I will not let people give souls to animals while they rob me of my human dignity and right to earn a livelihood.

Today's sealer/fisherman is more endangered than ever. Outport Newfoundland and Labrador is more endangered than ever. The commercial fisheries are more endangered than ever. Sealers and fishermen are one and the same. Sealers are fishermen. Fishermen are sealers. Their livelihoods are in jeopardy. Their numbers dwindle every year.

According to the news back home this week, the fishermen's union is raising red flags about the possibility of significant cuts to the total allowable catch for the northern shrimp fishery. Shrimp has been one of the most lucrative fisheries since the collapse of the groundfish stocks, such as cod, in the early 1990s.

Just today the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies released a report on the east coast fishery, a report that slams the Conservative government for failing to reform fisheries management, two decades after the cod moratorium.The northern cod fishery was shut down in 1992, 22 years ago, and there is still no recovery plan. How shocking is that?

Sealers are fishermen. They are one and the same. What does the Conservative government have to offer? It increases the buffer zone for seal hunt observers to one nautical mile from a half nautical mile. It is a charade, a sham, an illusion, a joke.

I attended Seal Day on the Hill back in February, a day when government reaffirmed its support for the seal hunt, but the proof of the government's commitment to the seal hunt is not in the pâté, but in the policy, in the action. The east coast seal hunt has seen the biggest collapse of seal markets in its history under the Conservative government. That is a fact.

Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Taiwan, the European Union and all of its member countries have banned the importation of Canadian seal products while the Conservative government has sat idly by touting its undying support. What happened to China and to the markets there that the Conservative government was poised to tap into? What happened to those markets? Silence.

The Conservative government is on the verge of a free trade deal with the European Union, but if the government were so solidly behind the seal hunt, like it says it is, why did it not make the seal ban a make or break issue during those trade talks? Instead the Conservative government agreed to have the EU ban decided by the World Trade Organization, which upheld the ban last fall. The Conservative government is appealing the WTO's decision, but again, if the government were serious it would have made the EU ban a make or break consideration in trade talks. It did not.

Instead we see empty action, or nuisance bills like this one, to increase the buffer zone around the hunt from half a nautical mile to a full nautical mile when the government cannot even enforce the half nautical mile zone. The sealer today is as endangered as the fishermen. They are one and the same. There is no vision for the fishery or the seal hunt, no blueprint for rebirth.

The Conservative government's latest move regarding the Newfoundland and Labrador fishery is to eliminate minimum processing requirements as part of the EU trade deal. Now the trade deal is a good one. The elimination of seafood tariffs is a fabulous thing. It is being lauded in all quarters of the fishery, but the question must be asked, what will be the impact on our fisheries, on our processing sector, of the lifting of those minimum processing requirements?

The Conservative government does not give up $280 million in compensation for nothing, especially when it has done nothing for our fisheries for decades, other than to cut the guts out of science, cut the guts out of fisheries management, and cut the guts out of enforcement.

To conclude, sealers and fishermen are one and the same. As I mentioned before, we support this bill for what it is worth, but it does not address the underlying problems of our seal hunt or of our fishers. Make no mistake, the fight in us is vicious yet. The seal hunt is a part of Newfoundland and Labrador culture. It is woven in our history. It is who we are. More so than any other slight, Newfie on down, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians take any criticism of the seal hunt as a direct personal attack, not just against us, who we are as a people, but against our forefathers and our very outport souls.

To attack the seal hunt is to attack Newfoundland and Labrador. To attack the seal hunt is to poke the bear that is the fighting Newfoundlander. But the government's trying to pull off a charade, a sham, an illusion that it is a defender of the hunt when it is not must also be pointed out. So if they increase the buffer zone around the hunt, fill your boots, Mr. Speaker.

Stand in the House and blow and sputter about all the Conservatives are doing in defence of the hunt, but the proof is in the action and there is none.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to participate in this debate and to share our government's perspective on Bill C-555. Let me begin by congratulating the member for West Nova, who represents his constituents so well and is leading the charge to protect the safety of all those involved with the seal hunt.

It is clear that our government is committed to developing regulations that are fair and enforceable. This bill, which proposes amendments to the marine mammal regulations, is of great importance, as it concerns the safety of everyone involved in the seal harvest. That is why our government is supporting this bill.

Marine mammal regulations regulate matters with respect to the management and control of fishing for marine mammals and related activities in Canada or in Canadian waters. The proposed bill would require the Governor in Council to amend the marine mammal regulations to increase the distance that a person must maintain from another person who is fishing for seals, except under the authority of a seal fishery observation licence. To be clear, the intention is to preserve the authority and discretion of the Governor in Council to modify the regulations in the future through the normal regulatory process, as opposed to having to do it by legislation. The proposed change to the regulations would increase from one-half nautical mile to one nautical mile the distance that an unlicensed observer must keep from a person who is fishing for seals. It is a pretty simple bill.

Every year, the Canadian seal harvest attracts observers. Seal fishery observation licences are provided to people wishing to observe the hunt where the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans determines that issuing the licence will not disrupt the seal fishery. Licensed observers have been and will continue to be able to monitor Canada's commercial seal harvest in accordance with the existing regulations and related licence conditions. Our government strives to ensure that there is a balance between the rights of observers and those of sealers, as well as overall safety for everyone.

What this bill would do is to help address the ongoing concerns about unlicensed observers who may pose a threat to the safety of everyone involved in the seal harvest. Let me be clear that Canadian sealers have nothing to hide from the public. However, in order to respond more quickly to the actions of dangerous activists, like those who have a stated purpose of disrupting the seal hunt and who act accordingly, this bill proposes amendments to the marine mammal regulations to increase the distance that individuals must stay away from sealers engaged in sealing activities. These changes would be made to ensure the safety of everyone involved in the seal hunt: hunters, observers, fisheries officers, and others.

Our government respects the rights of organizations and individuals to voice their opposition to the seal harvest. We will not, however, tolerate reckless activities that risk the safety of sealers, observers, and everyone else involved in the hunt. The proposed amendment is aimed at strengthening the management of the seal hunt to ensure that it can continue in a safe, humane, and orderly manner while further improving the safety of everyone involved. This important change would strengthen enforcement activities and assist in improving the management of the seal fishery observation licensing regime. This bill would afford enforcement officials who are operating in dangerous conditions more time to react when there is an incident such as occurred in 2008.

The Canadian seal harvest is humane, sustainable, and conducted in an open and transparent manner. Our government remains unwavering in its commitment to defend our sealing businesses and to preserve our rural coastal communities. Communities in Atlantic Canada, eastern Quebec, and the north have relied on the seal hunt as a way of life for centuries. Whether it is opening new markets or protecting traditional ones, Canadian sealers know our government is there to fight for them.

The proposed amendments to the regulations come at a time when the communities that rely on our traditional industries, like the seal harvest, need a government that is willing to fight for their rights. Canada's seal hunt has the highest standards of practice for any animal hunt in the world. Yet the European Union has placed a discriminatory ban against our seal products. Our government will continue to fight for the Canadian seal hunt in whatever arena possible, including the World Trade Organization. We are proud to protect a traditional, sustainable, and historic way of life for Canadian sealers across this great country.

The measures taken by the European Union have struck a blow to sealers in the north, in Quebec, and Atlantic Canada, to their families, and to Canada as a whole. Our government has taken decisive action to defend Canadian sealers in light of the European Union's very discouraging ban on seal products.

Our government has made repeated and unrelenting efforts to show the European Union and its member states the value of the seal hunt to Canadians and has challenged the European Union's ban in the World Trade Organization. We were very disappointed in the findings of the World Trade Organization panel last November that the ban could be justified on the basis of public moral concerns, and we have filed an appeal with the World Trade Organization appellate body.

One of the main concerns provoking the debate in Europe and the movement to ban seal products has to do with considerations related to the well-being of the animals. Our government is committed to applying the strictest standards in this area. That is why we have sought the best scientific advice on humane harvesting methods and adapted our regulations and licensing criteria based on that advice.

There has been an ongoing campaign put forth against Canadian sealers for a number of decades now, loaded with inaccurate and misleading allegations. It has been alleged that the seal harvest provides few economic benefits. That is false. It has been alleged that Canadians paid millions in subsidies and administrative costs for a seal harvest that is uneconomic. That is also false.

As important as the regulations are, it is also important to note that Fisheries and Oceans Canada also carries out effective monitoring, control, and surveillance programs on the sealing grounds and in coastal communities. Fisheries and Oceans is continually making improvements to its monitoring program to ensure compliance with regulations, which result in a humane and sustainable hunt. These actions should dispel the notion that the hunt is impossible to regulate and manage effectively. The Canadian Coast Guard, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the Quebec Provincial Police work in collaboration with Fisheries and Oceans enforcement staff to monitor compliance and to enforce the regulations.

We are standing up in defence of the Canadians sealers' right to earn a living, and we will continue to do so. It is about protecting everyone involved in the seal harvest, and it is the right thing to do. I thus invite all members to join me in supporting Bill C-555.