Fisheries Committee on March 7th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you very much.

Monsieur Tremblay.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Thank you.

I wanted to expand on the discussion we had at the last meeting. I would like to know whether you can tell us today if you will follow the recommendations of the Commissioner of Official Languages regarding the reported closing of the Search and Rescue Centre, especially the recommendation not to close the centre until recommendations 1 to 4 have been implemented.

[Jody Thomas]

As the commissioner said on Tuesday, we are taking the recommendations of the Commissioner of Official Languages very seriously as we plan the consolidation of the MRSC Quebec into JRCCs in Halifax and Trenton.

We will not proceed until we are certain that the level of safety provided to mariners now will be unchanged and that we can meet the official language requirements as laid out by both our clients but also as defined by the Commissioner of Official Languages. We haven't closed the MRSC Quebec yet because we're not going to do it precipitously. We are waiting until we are certain that the level of bilingual staff is available. It is now in Halifax, and we continue to staff for Trenton. Trenton is a bit delayed because we also have to build a new joint rescue centre and we're doing that currently.

Plans are under way, but we will not do it until we are confident the level of service will continue.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

In other words, you will follow the recommendations of the Commissioner of Official Languages.

[Jody Thomas]

Yes, we did.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Thank you.

Will you ask that the current language requirements be strengthened?

[Jody Thomas]

The linguistic requirements in Halifax have already been increased to a bilingual level of CBC. They were BBB. So yes, we have raised the levels already in Halifax, and we will do so in Trenton.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Mr. Chisholm.

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

I notice that ocean forecasting is down $5 million, and oceans management is also down from previous expenditures and estimates. I wonder if you could explain the rationale for this decrease.

[Roch Huppé]

The ocean forecasting is down by $4.7 million. The larger part of that decrease is actually due to reallocation within the program activities. Over $3.3 million has been transferred to a new program activity that you would find under the climate change adaptation program. Basically, during the year, we move money around, and this was a new program activity. We received money through budget 2011 for that purpose. Based on what a program activity is, as we follow the guidelines from Treasury Board Secretariat, we created that new program activity because it's really a stand-alone. It was money moved. It's not a money decrease; it is really moved to a different program activity.

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

Okay. The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development in his fall 2012 report raised significant concerns regarding Canada's ability to meet its UN obligation to protect 10% of our coastlines by 2020. I wondered if you would indicate the government's commitment to provide sufficient funding to protect marine and coastal areas.

[David Balfour]

The department is continuing with its work with respect to the establishment of marine protected areas. As you may know, there are eight marine protected areas that are currently in place. There are areas of interest that are under development for seven additional areas.

In addition to that, there is work that is under way with other federal partners and the provinces to establish a network of marine protected areas to look at how, in all the various efforts we're doing, whether they are marine parks or marine protected areas or undertakings by provinces, they contribute towards Canada achieving the goal of 10%. It's not a commitment as much as it's a target to work towards. The environment commissioner noted that the department was on track with its capacity to continue to move forward towards that target with the resources the department has to develop marine protected areas.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. Chisholm.

Mr. Sopuck.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to follow up on the idea of the salmon stamp fee increase that is being requested by anglers in B.C. I gather that's the case.

A comment I'd like to make, however, before I begin my question is that the anglers are about the only user group that actually asks to be taxed to conserve fish. I think it's a tribute to the angling community, and the hunting community as well, that they are constantly asking that their licence fees be increased and that the money be earmarked for the conservation of the fish or wildlife they so cherish.

I hope the department pays that community the respect they deserve, given their track record in conservation. Too many other groups just talk about the environment, but the anglers and hunters of Canada actually deliver real on-the-ground environmental programming.

What would the fee increase the anglers are requesting generate by way of funds?

[David Balfour]

Concerning the Pacific salmon conservation stamp, there is a similar program in place involving commercial harvesters in British Columbia who contribute, I believe, something on the order of $10 per harvester towards either the Pacific Salmon Foundation or, if they so elect, the T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation in British Columbia for the same purposes of conservation and restoration.

The proposals that have come to our minister have involved taking an additional part of the fee currently being paid for the salmon stamp and using it to contribute to the moneys provided to the Pacific Salmon Foundation. It's really a fiscal question of whether the government decides to forgo that revenue and convert it into a contribution to the foundation.

As you noted, there is also the possibility of increasing the price of the stamp, with the proceeds of that increase being provided to the foundation. Right now, the salmon stamp is generating on the order of $350,000 annually. That amount is provided, through a contribution, to the Pacific Salmon Foundation.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Yes, the analogous one is Wildlife Habitat Canada, which receives all of the funds generated by migratory bird stamps. It seems to me that's something we should be looking at.

When I think of the angling groups and the volunteerism they undertake in these projects, their dedication to the resource is truly remarkable.

I'd like to follow up on one of Mr. Swerdfager's comments regarding enforceable conditions of the habitat provisions. I'd like a short answer here.

I assume that the department is able to issue standards and guidelines for certain types of “smaller developments”, such as stream crossings.

[Trevor Swerdfager]

Under the terms of the new provisions of the Fisheries Act, it will be able to do that, yes.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Okay.

Let's say that a road is being built in a municipality and there's a stream. Let's say, where I live, it's a stream that happens to be used by pike, which are the weakest swimming fish, as you know. The guideline could say to design the crossing so that pike will be able to go through a culvert, and of course, the design could be done in a certain way to let that happen.

If that design were not followed, would you then be able to enforce those conditions?

[Trevor Swerdfager]

The key will be that the prohibition remains in place holus-bolus across the country, in section 35.

The guidelines you're talking about will say, “Buddy, if you're planning to build a stream crossing in this case, and you follow these standards, it's extremely likely that you will not violate the prohibition, because you will not cause serious harm, and so on.”

However, if we got to a scenario in which Buddy says he's planning to do that, and it happens, and his neighbours rat him out or something, saying that's not what he actually did, the department will be able to go in. In that case, he will not have an authorization that we would be enforcing; instead, what we'd be doing is saying, “You told the community you were going to behave in such a way that you would not violate the standards and guidelines, but in fact we have...”.

In a scenario such as that, the department would still have the authority to go in and lay a charge with respect to violation of section 35, rather than of the authorization terms, because he wouldn't have them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you very much, Mr. Sopuck.

Mr. MacAulay.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Stringer, it's my understanding that the Experimental Lakes Area costs the Government of Canada approximately $2 million a year. Is that correct?

[Kevin Stringer]

It's approximately correct.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

If you do not get somebody to take it over, what would it cost to completely shut it down?

[Kevin Stringer]

As I said before, we're talking to Ontario about this. It will vary. If we have a new operator, the sense is that we'd need to do some remediation, which we believe would cost about $1 million. If we were to take down all the facilities, return the site to nature, etc., it would be a few more million dollars than that. It would be nowhere near what has been reported in the media, but it would be a few million dollars.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Swerdfager, in response to my question on the sustainable aquaculture program, you talked about market access as one of the programs that would be cut back.

First of all, do you spend money on promoting and marketing salmon?

Do you spend money on promoting and marketing lobster? I'm looking at the Lobster Council of Canada that was put in place a few years ago, and it's my understanding that some funding was put in place. I think you're fully aware that the lobster market is very depressed at the moment. It's a specialty product that is not receiving the return to the fishermen that it should. I'd like you to elaborate on that.