Finance Committee on Sept. 28th, 2009

[Farah Mohamed]

I'm glad you asked that question. It's absolutely one of the keys to this program. We're saying that of the $5 million, we'd like 50% to come from profit and not-for-profit and the other 50% to come from government. To this date I'm thrilled to tell you that we have commitments of $1.8 million from private and not-for-profit, and the—

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

My time's limited, so how much are you looking for from the provincial and federal governments, and where would it come from in the federal government?

[Farah Mohamed]

We're looking at $833,000 per year for three years from the federal government for on-reserve populations. We have met with the Ontario government and they've expressed an interest, but again we come down to that provincial-territorial-federal relationship. That's why we say we need a maximum of $833,000 per year from the federal government for three years.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Great.

Mr. Lockyer, you're based here in Vancouver, but how do you coordinate your activities across Canada?

[Dr. Nigel Lockyer]

We're owned and operated as a joint venture of Canadian universities, so we have a board of management that runs the lab I report to.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

So the main lab is here in Vancouver.

[Dr. Nigel Lockyer]

Correct. It's on the UBC campus.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Then logistically how do you work with the other universities?

[Dr. Nigel Lockyer]

TRIUMF has what I would call world-class infrastructure for doing experiments with isotopes. Canadian universities and the international scientific community come here to do their research.

Does that answer your question?

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Yes, that's fine.

So you're looking at getting a large facility.

[Dr. Nigel Lockyer]

We have the existing infrastructure--12 acres on the campus. We're asking in our five-year plan to build a new accelerator that would generate many isotopes for research, but also isotopes that are needed for the medical crisis now.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Okay. I didn't realize you had 12 acres.

Thank you.

Mr. Silvester, a lot of money has already been given for the Pacific gateway. It's challenging because of the number of requests the committee gets. There's also the fact that we represent different regions. I'm from Montreal and we have a very vibrant port. It hasn't had the growth that the ports in B.C. have had.

How do we say that more money should be allocated out east versus out west, or out west versus out east? Doesn't the port already take in revenue? Shouldn't some type of calculation be made in terms of distribution? Wouldn't you be able to finance most of your infrastructure? Can you clarify that for me?

[Robin Silvester]

Certainly.

As you're probably aware, the port doesn't receive funding for operational activities. It's mandated under the Canada Marine Act to be a self-sustaining entity to operate the port for trade. Through our financing ability we typically operate and ensure the activity of all of the terminals. We have a continual program to invest in terminals and infrastructure throughout the port jurisdiction.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

So if you do more business you would actually suffer, because you would have the same amount of money or....

[Robin Silvester]

No. The money is not directly linked to volume, because a lot of our rents tend to be fixed. But generally, as volume increases, the revenues of the port increase.

On the importance of these specific infrastructure projects, as with the rest of the Asia-Pacific gateway projects in Vancouver, this infrastructure is outside the typical jurisdiction of the port. It is road-rail interface infrastructure, or, in the case of the training walls, they're federal assets that have never had an alternative method of funding other than federal funding.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

I understand there's an economic development part, but is there a specific calculation for volume, so you would say, “We're entitled to x number of dollars for additional investment for infrastructure”? Is there a magic number? That's what I'm looking for.

[Robin Silvester]

I don't believe there has been a specific calculation that x volume gets y dollars. But I know that Transport Canada has had significant discussions with stakeholders about where benefit accrues from the investments and how investments should best be funded. So typically the private sector is bringing 50% or more to the table in the gateway investments that are taking place.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Pacetti.

We'll go to Monsieur Laforest.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Mr. Otway. You made some recommendations, having so much experience in fisheries and the management of fish and salmon stocks. You are asking the government to spend $200 million over the next 6 years on revitalization.

Are you fairly sure that this will have a positive impact? You even mentioned potentially doubling salmon stocks. Is that realistic?

[William Otway]

There are two aspects. First, if we fail to do this we will lose what we currently have. Our natural production is disappearing. I'm not talking about upgrading what we have; we need to look at new options and new facilities.

I'll give you an example. We have about 850 to 900 steelhead coming back to the Thompson River this year. The Salmon River and the Clearwater River in Idaho have already passed 350,000. Last year we had zero angler days at $100 minimum per angler day on the Thompson River. From their hatchery production they had almost 300,000 angler days on those two rivers. That generates $19 million to $20 million minimum in economic activity. If we don't do this, we won't maintain what we have. If we do it, we'll have an excellent opportunity to expand and sustain our fisheries.

As we develop a plan, we may find that we want to switch or have to switch to other species than salmon, but that's part of what the planning process is about.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Basically, if we look at the return of commercial fishing versus sport fishing, we see that sport fishing creates more jobs and has a stronger economic impact than commercial fishing.

Do you not think that maybe you should increase the sport fishing share at the expense of commercial fishing, or do they go hand in hand? To protect sport fishing, I would imagine that there has to be less commercial fishing.

[William Otway]

No, I believe and have always believed they go hand in hand. The first thing you have to understand is that the recreational fishery generates $1.4 billion and harvests less than 10% of the total run. So its impact is minimal and it leaves a large amount of stock available for commercial harvest. Why would you not take advantage of that?

With proper management, one need not necessarily infringe upon the other. Together they're worth more than either one on its own.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I have one last question. In your second recommendation, you said that the funds dedicated to this program should be under the control of the Pacific Region of DFO and not the deputy minister or the Ottawa Mandarins.

Do you have specific examples to show that, when things are controlled by Ottawa, either they do not work well or they do not work at all?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have about 30 seconds, Mr. Otway.

[William Otway]

The numbers or the examples are legion. First of all, in the main, the people in Ottawa have no experience in fisheries management and no experience in fisheries. They simply direct money to their specifics. We've seen SEP reduced dramatically over the timeframe. On habitat stock, the habitat protection budget has been reduced by 90%. Ottawa controls the budget and puts it where it wants to, and we're saying that we want the people of British Columbia and the people out here--