Evidence of meeting #52 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 fishery.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
First of all, I apologize for not knowing this, but I wonder if I could get some clarification on something. Does Larocque address agreements going forward, or does it reach back to current agreements that are in place?
12:20 p.m.
Member, Executive Director, Association des crabiers acadiens, Nova Scotia, Canadian Fisheries Working Group
It deals with one case—one case that happened in 2003.
Another judgment, the APPFA judgment from Federal Court, also has jurisprudence that deals with a situation in 2005.
There are specific cases of using resources to finance government activities, but there are an awful lot of other situations like Larocque, like APPFA, that do exist.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Mr. Cue, would DFO not be in contravention of that ruling in the set-up they have with your organization? Or are you going to court to determine that?
12:20 p.m.
Senior Director of Fishing Operations, Canadian Fishing Company; B.C. Seafood Alliance
At this stage, we've elected not to go to court. DFO has elected not to appeal Larocque.
Everybody agreed unanimously to raise some money to assist us in our fishery. Once Larocque came out, we found out that we couldn't spend that money, because if somebody challenged us, we'd be responsible for it personally.
So we won't be spending that money until we get a legal ruling. Where that comes from, I'm not sure, but it does hamper us in our herring assessments as well.
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
May 3rd, 2007 / 12:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Sablefish Association; Chair, Canadian Fisheries Working Group
Mr. Cuzner, it's the wild west out there.
DFO gave a briefing to this committee, I think in January, as a follow-up note to a presentation they made in December. They clearly indicated—I'm not going to look for it now, but it's in my documents here—that once Larocque came out, they had stopped doing what the court said they did not have the authority to do.
But they continued to do it. In the case of sablefish, they went and funded a survey with $1 million on September 1 of last year.
They deny that this is in contravention of the court ruling. We have a letter in to the minister. I have waited two and a half months for a response, and I haven't even had an acknowledgement that the letter is in.
We do not want to sue the federal government. That is not my business. What we want to do is say, “You cannot be in breach of a court order; you cannot potentially be in violation of the Financial Administration Act.” And to the department we want to say, “You cannot mislead a parliamentary committee by saying things that aren't true.”
I'm not looking for money. Maybe I will be tomorrow, but today I'm just looking for the department to recognize that they got caught without the options on the table, and they need to have this responded to by policy. In the interim, because there's a lack of policy, all of the fisheries all over Canada are seeing uncertainty about where the science funding is coming from. That is going to jeopardize those fisheries.
12:25 p.m.
Executive Director, B.C. Seafood Alliance
I think part of the problem is that the lawyers don't really agree on what Larocque actually says. That complicates matters, and has made for all kinds of problems.
For instance, in B.C. we could have a situation where the representative association voluntarily, even happily, agreed to the arrangement to use fish to fund science and management. They can't do it now. And they have no other mechanism to fund that science and research, even if they're willing to pay for it 100% themselves.
So that's part of the problem.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Both of your groups agree that if the minister were to intervene and interpret Larocque, there is a solution for this, in this case, rather than going back to court.
12:25 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Sablefish Association; Chair, Canadian Fisheries Working Group
Yes.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Both groups agree with that. Okay.
On a different tilt, you had mentioned some of the arbitrary measures that have taken place on the east coast. You're saying that in the absence of a framework, arbitrary measures have been taken on the east coast with regard to science.
Mrs. Burridge, that was part of your comments.
12:25 p.m.
Executive Director, B.C. Seafood Alliance
When you read the Larocque decision and the APPFA decision, it's hard to see how DFO could have justified what it did. In the case of the west coast, I think it's a little bit different, because we did voluntarily enter into those arrangements. Representative associations entered into them. We may not be entirely happy with them, but they're not arbitrary in the way that they were on the east coast.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
All I'm saying is that this has been very worthwhile. The presentation has been very worthwhile.
Mr. Stoffer was saying that there is no portion of crops, or dairy-producing cows that are allocated for research through Agriculture Canada. What I see is that once you've entered into these agreements, with good intent and for the right reasons, and once you've set a precedent in being involved and paying for the science, then they start chipping away, and it grows and grows and becomes commonplace. Unfortunately, it's drifted to that. Hopefully we're looking at Larocque to pull that back.
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
The Vice-Chair Bloc Raynald Blais
Well done, Rodger, you managed to get a little more time, despite what I said at the start.
Would you care to continue, Mr. Asselin?
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Gérard Asselin Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I have a letter here that states that $39 million was set aside for the next two years, and this seems to be inadequate.
Based on your experience and your needs, how much should the minister have set aside for fisheries research at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans? The $39 million mentioned in the letter I have here, which was signed by Michelle James, seems to be inadequate for the next two years.
It becomes a little difficult for us, as members of Parliament, to pass the budget—and you are well aware of this—because we have the department's version, but we do not necessarily have all the information. However, at an upcoming meeting with senior officials, the deputy minister or the minister, we can certainly tell him h could get some more funding, because the needs do exist.
12:25 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Sablefish Association; Chair, Canadian Fisheries Working Group
These estimates get more complicated to read, but you've got to be able to separate it down into its component parts. What we do know is that the department indicates that $25 million to $28 million worth of work was done last year pre-Larocque through an allocation of fish. We know that of that $39 million, there is less than $11 million—Is that right, Christina?—to mitigate against that.
12:30 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Sablefish Association; Chair, Canadian Fisheries Working Group
As Christina had indicated earlier, even that was way too little.
In actual fact, if this year we did just the science that was done pre-Larocque and paid for by the government, there'd be a shortfall of probably $20 million. Two-thirds of the activities will go unfunded. I think Christina, from a B.C. perspective, can give you more on what that means.
Christina.
12:30 p.m.
Executive Director, B.C. Seafood Alliance
In B.C. the department's estimates for the the Pacific region itself are $10 million for the low estimate and $15 million for the high estimate. They told me before I came here that they have $3.5 million. That is before we start looking at things like a stock assessment for dogfish. It's before we start looking at things like meeting the conditions for marine stewardship and cancelling certification of salmon. The science for that is going to run into several million dollars.
We actually need a new approach to science, and we hope this committee will encourage the department to do that, because we have to position our fisheries to be successful in the 21st century, and we're living in a backwards world. If we want Canada to maintain its position as a significant seafood exporter, and if we want coastal communities, businesses, and individuals to be able to benefit from the wealth of our seafood resources, we have to find the money for science.
12:30 p.m.
Bloc
Gérard Asselin Bloc Manicouagan, QC
It is great that you have come to meet with the committee members to make us aware of the issue. However, have you expressed your needs in a written document? Is the minister or the Department of Fisheries and Oceans aware of your needs?
I know that coming here involved travel and was very costly. We are pleased to meet with you and to find out about what you are experiencing. We can certainly try to talk to the minister and to the officials, but the organization representing fishers in that region must have a substantial written document so that the officials preparing the estimates are fully aware of your needs.
12:30 p.m.
Executive Director, Area A Crab Association; Chair, Canadian Fisheries Working Group
I would say yes, Mr. Asselin, the paper trail is large. It really helps our forest sector, because we keep using their paper to try to explain to the government what we need.
The problem is not really within DFO, and therein is the problem. The problem is beyond DFO. It's inside the cabinet, it's inside Treasury Board, where all of these various “want lists” get vetted before a budget.
So when I deal with senior people--and I'm sure for Christine it's the same--they may have to say to us, “No, you can't have it”, but privately they're saying “Please, we hope you're successful. We cannot manage these fisheries with the resources we've got.” They understand the precautionary principle; they understand the international pressures. So we're almost preaching to the converted inside DFO, at least in the regions that we represent. The problem is, they are told, “This is what you've got--go manage.” And it's at a point at which they know they cannot manage to the high principles they would want to.
12:30 p.m.
Bloc
The Vice-Chair Bloc Raynald Blais
Thank you very much.
Before giving the floor to Mr. Stoffer, I would like to take the time to ask just one question about a document we received from the department. These are some briefing notes we received in response to a request by the committee. These notes contradict one of the points you mentioned. So I would like to allow you to react to this so that we know what is true and what is not.
It states that the Federal Court decisions in the Larocque case have no bearing—this is the department speaking—on the scientific projects carried out by the industry when the industry pays for them and when quotas are not used to fund these activities directly or indirectly.
I would like to hear your comments on this statement by the department.