Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It's a pleasure for us to be here with you this morning. We welcome the opportunity to outline the amendments to the 1978 Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in the North Atlantic Fisheries, also known as the NAFO convention.
The amendments to the NAFO convention are important for Canada and for Canada's fishing industry. They will help to ensure the conservation and sustainable management of fish stocks and ecosystems in the North Atlantic, thereby contributing to the economic development and prosperity of coastal communities in Atlantic Canada. Canada's overriding objective has been to curb overfishing and to ensure the sustainability of the fish stocks and the long-term health of the ecosystems in which they live. Given that most of NAFO-managed fish stocks are straddling—they occur both within Canada's exclusive economic zone on the Atlantic side and also beyond the 200-mile limit on the high seas, in the NAFO regulatory area—these concerns also reflect global interest.
Of particular significance for Atlantic provinces, in particular the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, is Canada's membership and leadership in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization. After 30-some years, NAFO members agreed that it was time to modernize the convention in order to bring it in line with the provisions of the 1995 United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement. NAFO members agreed that we had to be forward-looking and to give ourselves the modern decision-making tools required to deal with the modern problems we face.
The amendments to the convention were only one of a number of reforms that NAFO engaged in. First came the enforcement reform in 2006. Changes to NAFO conservation enforcement measures enacted in 2007 have led to encouraging success in enforcing the rules on the high seas in the NAFO regulatory area. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans, acting on behalf of NAFO, has increased enforcement and surveillance to detect and deter illegal fishing activities, and compliance has improved significantly as a result. Serious infringements in the NAFO regulatory area declined from thirteen in 2005 to seven in 2006, one in 2007, and zero in 2008.
We have also seen tangible results of increased cooperation, better management measures consistent with scientific advice, and enforcement vigilance. As a result, important stocks such as yellowtail flounder, 3M cod, and 3LN redfish have recovered, and other stocks such as American plaice are also showing signs of recovery. At the recent NAFO annual meeting, NAFO reopened two stocks—3M cod and 3LN redfish—after a decade of their being under moratorium.
But improved enforcement and conservation and cooperation was only one part of the solution. Canada has consistently worked within NAFO to develop scientific advice and adopt conservation and management measures to effectively manage straddling stocks important to Canada, such as Greenland halibut, yellowtail flounder, 3L shrimp, and others. We recognized that there was a need to reconsider the way NAFO makes decisions on how we govern ourselves as an organization. That's why we as NAFO members negotiated and adopted amendments to the 1978 convention in 2007. Canada supported these amendments because they are important and beneficial for Canada. Provincial governments and industry representatives were there by our side throughout the whole multi-year process and were consulted extensively. All the stakeholders involved agreed with us that the amendments were in the interest of Canada. Senior officials of the Newfoundland and Labrador government were full members of the Canadian delegation that negotiated these amendments and supported us throughout the negotiations.
As I said earlier, NAFO faces very different issues today from those when the original convention was agreed to in 1978. Parties today are committed to applying an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in the northwest Atlantic, which includes protecting the marine environment, preserving marine biodiversity, and reducing the risks of long-term impacts of fishing. The amendments to the NAFO convention are designed to provide the organization with a more modern and forward-looking governance framework that will allow it to meet its ongoing and future commitments under the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and other international instruments.
Mr. Chairman, I will outline the key benefits of the amended convention to try to address some of the concerns that have been raised.
First, under the original 1978 NAFO convention, fish stocks were managed as a single species, and management decisions did not always adhere to the received scientific advice. Over time, this type of management proved to be ineffective for the long-term health of the fish stocks. As a result, more than ten stocks have been under moratorium for many years and are only starting to recover.
The amended convention now shifts NAFO to an ecosystem-based approach to decision-making, an approach that considers the inner relationship between marine species and between these species and their habitats. This includes considering how catches of one fish stock would affect other species as well as identifying and addressing the impacts of particular fishing gear on sensitive ocean habitats.
Second, under the 1978 rules, members could object to any management decision deciding on a unilateral quota and fish it without any constraint even if it ultimately results in overfishing. The old convention also lacked a dispute settlement process, leading to long-standing disagreements.
Under the amended NAFO convention, we will have a controlled system to address objections and disputes, a system that requires a contracting party that objects to a conservation and management measure to set out alternative measures it intends to take for the conservation and management of the fishery, consistent with the objectives of the convention and an active role of the commission in trying to resolve the issues. In this way contracting parties will be held accountable for their actions, so that we avoid these unnecessary and counterproductive situations and reduce overfishing.
Third, under the original convention rules, NAFO's decisions were made by a simple majority vote, leaving an impression that we're only winners and losers. In some cases, particularly in the late 1980s and early 1990s, this led to defiance of the rules, unilateral quotas and overfishing. The amended convention emphasizes consensus. A two-thirds majority voting system has been introduced for those situations where consensus cannot be reached. Any NAFO member that wishes to change the way NAFO allocates fish must obtain support from eight of the twelve NAFO members instead of the seven needed before. As a result of this change, Canada's fish quotas in NAFO will be better protected, thus addressing a key preoccupation of the Canadian industry.
I would like to comment on the criticisms of the amended convention. In summary, the concerns are as follows: one, the government failed to protect Canada's sovereignty to make decisions for fisheries management enforcement within Canadian waters; two, the changes in the rules on decision-making from the requirement of the simple majority to a two-thirds majority will weaken Canada's ability to obtain support for more restrictive conservation-based management proposals in NAFO; three, the amendments with respect to the objection procedure are not robust enough to limit objections and unilateral decisions; and four, the dispute settlement procedure in the amended convention is useless as it does not provide for binding decisions.
Briefly, these criticisms are unfounded. I will respond to each of these respectively.
First with respect to sovereignty, the amended convention is quite clear. Canada maintains control over its waters, and NAFO measures will not be applied in Canadian waters unless Canada requests that they apply and votes in favour of such a measure.
The amended NAFO convention explicitly maintains Canada's sovereign right to take management decisions on fisheries within its 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone. It is clear that NAFO has no mandate to take management decisions within Canadian waters, nor does it give foreign vessels rights to fish in Canadian waters. I would also note that this provision applies to all coastal states, Denmark for Greenland, France for St. Pierre and Miquelon, and the U.S.A. None of these parties seem to be troubled by this article.
Second, with respect to the change to a two-thirds requirement as previously noted, this will better provide protection for Canadian quota shares in the NAFO stocks. This reflects the priority of Canadian industry in Canada to protect quota shares.
Third, with respect to the objection procedure, the amended convention provides for constraints on the use of the objection procedure, limiting the grounds for objecting, placing the onus on the party wishing to object to demonstrate grounds for its objection and to adopt equivalent conservation measures while the objection procedure operates.
Fourth, the amended convention strengthens decision-making by including, for the first time, timely mechanisms to resolve disputes, and contracting parties can invoke dispute settlement procedures that ultimately provide for binding decisions.
Canada's interests are better protected with the amendments to the NAFO convention. The reforms are in Canada's best interests and the interests of fish stocks in the northwest Atlantic. They provide clear benefits important to Canada for Canada's fishing industry. They will help to ensure the conservation and sustainable management of fish stocks and ecosystems in the northwest Atlantic.
Mr. Chairman, before I close, I would like to briefly report on the recent NAFO meeting held from September 21 to 25.
Canada succeeded in persuading NAFO to adopt conservation-oriented outcomes that are important to Canada to protect fish stocks and their ecosystems in the NAFO regulatory area. The decisions included the setting of the total allowable catches and quotas for 2010, which include a rollover of the TAC of 16,000 tonnes of Greenland halibut for one year.
As I noted previously, we reached agreement to reopen two stocks that have been closed to fishing for 10 years, and Canadian quota shares of these stocks were maintained at pre-moratorium levels. These stocks have now sufficiently recovered to allow targeted fisheries.
There was also a commitment to redouble efforts to reduce the bycatch of southern Grand Banks for 3NO cod and additional measures to protect vulnerable marine ecosystems, such as corals and sponges.
Canada takes scientific advice seriously. In fact, the TAC decisions made at NAFO clearly reflect the scientific advice that we're within the safe scientific parameters. The NAFO decisions on the reopened stocks also incorporated additional conservation measures to ensure the continued recovery of these stocks. In addition, incorporated into a number of the decisions were commitments to undertake additional research to improve the scientific advice and to improve the reliability of the catch statistics to improve future decision-making.
The NAFO decisions took account of the views of Canadian industry and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Canadian industry representatives on the Canadian delegation expressed to me their satisfaction with the NAFO outcomes, which will provide significant economic benefits to the economy and people of Newfoundland and Labrador. By Canadian industry estimates, the maintenance of the TAC for Greenland halibut means over $25 million, primarily for the Newfoundland and Labrador economy.
With respect to 3L shrimp, Canada's quota next year will remain at almost 25,000 tonnes, with a harvest value of $29.7 million.
The total allowable catch of yellowtail flounder was maintained at 17,000 tonnes for 2010, and Canada's share of 16,575 tonnes has an estimated harvest value of over $6 million.
The reopening of 3LN redfish stocks will provide 1,500 tonnes, with an estimated harvest value of about $1 million.
These outcomes will provide benefits primarily to the economy and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I'd like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to say this.
