Evidence of meeting #27 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was boat.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerald Keddy
Thank you, Mr. Rennehan.
Thank you, Mr. Manning.
Mr. Martell, you can have a final word.
12:50 p.m.
President of Wedgeport Boats and past Chairman of the Nova Scotia Boatbuilders Association, As an Individual
I'd like to add to what George said, and this is one example. If we want to look at it from a Transport Canada perspective--and we're here on account of both DFO and Transport Canada. I've said it in Ottawa, and George said it, regardless of what size you can have, what size you're allowed to have, or what size you should have, if we get to the point that the proposed regulations come in from a Transport Canada perspective and restrict someone in getting a new vessel because of stability, because of fire extinguishers, because of carriage requirement, or whatever, actually--and this is to help what George said--you are going to get a person staying in his existing vessel a lot longer time, to conduct fisheries in a dilapidated boat over time, because he can't afford the brand new one. We're actually being counterproductive to safety at that point.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerald Keddy
Thank you, Mr. Martell.
On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank our presenters very much. This was an extremely important discussion and a discussion we've needed to have.
I thank the members of the audience, and I'd like to make one comment. I'm not really looking for an answer, but if anyone wants to chime in, they can.
There are two issues. There's an issue of boat stability and safety and there's an issue of conservation. It appears the two of them don't necessarily match up, so that's one issue.
Another issue is that in this area, at least in southwest Nova Scotia, because of the icing conditions, Transport Canada rules that 34' 11" or under 15 tonnes wouldn't have to get...stability inspections won't apply. That was the original statement, “wouldn't have to apply”--but will apply here and without question will cause some havoc in the industry.
Every individual at the table, including Mr. Thibault, who is here today but is not a regular member of the committee comes from a fishery riding. They have a real interest in the fishery, and we've worked cooperatively together from all our political backgrounds toward a common goal, to try to improve the fishery. So you have friends on this committee, without question.
But some common sense must apply, whether or not that's grandfathering existing vessels. So if you're building a new boat, you can amortize the cost of your stability test in the cost of a new boat, and if you're building a new boat that costs a couple of hundred thousand dollars, $10,000, $12,000, or $13,000 isn't a lot of money because you're borrowing the money anyway. However, if you have to put that into an old boat, or you don't move out of your old boat when you should for safety reasons because it would cost you for a stability test, which is what you folks have laid on the table, we're really setting the industry back. That's a serious problem, and one that we've grappled with.
Again, thank you for your presentation. Thank you to my colleagues. This wraps up our quick tour of Atlantic Canada, Newfoundland, the Magdalen Islands, and Shelburne today, and we appreciate your coming out. Thank you.