Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the proposed Fisheries Act amendments which would introduce key measures to ensure our fishery resources are available for generations of Canadians yet to come.
Today, through proposed amendments to the act, the government is moving to restore lost measures that would protect fish and their habitat, and to modernize safeguards for the challenges we face in the 21st century. However, more than protecting further loss of these resources, we are also introducing measures that would help restore them. These actions would help maintain biodiversity and would also generate positive economic spinoffs for the fisheries. Such dual benefits reflect the goal of sustainable development, a healthy environment, a prosperous economy, and a vibrant society for current and future generations.
All told, the fisheries sector is valued at $13 billion and employs some 72,000 Canadians. Our fisheries are an economic driver in rural communities on all three coasts, including in many indigenous communities. That is why the Department of Fisheries and Oceans supports an economically prosperous fishery while retaining conservation as its top priority.
The cultural impact of the fisheries may be harder to measure in dollars and cents, but it is no less important. For some families in coastal communities, fishing has been a way of life for generations. Indeed, for many indigenous peoples, fishing traditions extend back millennia.
In developing the Fisheries Act, the government understood that the fisheries contribute to rural and indigenous communities in both tangible and intangible ways. In keeping with the principle of sustainable development, we sought to achieve a balance between environmental, economic, and social imperatives. In this way, we could help preserve the integrity of the fisheries in the years ahead.
There is no single threat to the sustainability and productivity of our fisheries. Damage and loss of habitat, aquatic invasive species, and changes to freshwater flow all contribute to the decline of freshwater and marine fisheries.
Indeed, restoring habitat provides an opportunity to redress past negative impacts. The proposed Fisheries Act identifies four key areas that would require consideration of fish and habitat restoration measures: stock rebuilding; factors to consider when issuing permits and authorizations; ecologically significant areas; and the making of regulations. Let me take them one by one, starting with fish stocks.
The proposed act would support the restoration of degraded fish habitats. Of course, the department already works to repair past impacts and help restore depleted fish stocks; however, these activities are not integrated into key areas of its mandate. The new act would address this gap. Under the proposed amendments, when making decisions that would impact a depleted stock, the minister would need to consider whether measures are in place to rebuild that fish stock. In addition, the minister shall take into account whether there are measures in place to restore degraded fish habitat, where the minister is of the opinion that the loss or degradation of fish habitat has contributed to a stock's decline.
The second area for consideration of fish habitat restoration is the list of factors the minister must review before making decisions about permits, authorizations, or regulations. The proposed amendments add a new factor for the minister to consider: do the planned offsetting activities give priority to the restoration of degraded fish habitat?
The third area for consideration of fish habitat restoration is the creation of ecologically significant areas. These areas are intended to protect sensitive and important fish habitats by prohibiting certain types of activities. The proposed amendments would make provisions for these sensitive areas clearer, stronger, and easier to implement.
I will give an example of how the process might work. Working with partners, including indigenous groups, the department would identify potential ecologically significant areas. Together, they would identify the best way to protect fish habitat and what activities the minister could approve. If the minister believes that habitat restoration is required to meet prescribed objectives for conservation and protection in an ecologically significant area, then a fish habitat restoration plan must be published on the public registry. Not only would this approach go a long way to restoring habitat, but it would also promote greater engagement with partners, as well as greater transparency with Canadians around decision-making.
The fourth area relates to authorities for making regulations for the restoration of fish habitats. This regulation-making authority can be exercised when it supports the conservation and protection of fish.
These amendments help the department pursue the overall policy objective of restoring the ecological integrity of degraded or damaged aquatic habitats. Collectively, they give the department legislative authority to advance restoration planning, regulate harm to aquatic habitats from proposed development projects, guide habitat-offsetting efforts, and to work with multiple partners to achieve these objectives.
Together, these proposed changes to the act would help achieve three important results. First, they would help protect biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems which leads to more stable and resilient biological systems that can better withstand impacts related to development projects. Second, they would help build healthier and more abundant fish stocks. This in turn would make fisheries more resilient and would lead to greater potential long-term economic gains. Third, the proposed changes would contribute to the sustainability of the fish stock and continued economic prosperity in Canada's fishing communities.
I urge all hon. members to join with me in supporting these much needed amendments.
