Fisheries Committee on Oct. 31st, 2006

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I just have a short question. There are no penalties in your plan for those who do not comply with your new reform. I cannot understand this. It does not contemplate any penalty or fine. It is beyond me!

[Paul Sprout]

I have a couple of responses to that. With respect to the penalty, at this point we're putting a lot of the emphasis on the fact that it's a new program. It's complicated. There's a transition period, and the fishermen have to adjust to it. The consequence of not living within the rules would be that we would not authorize the fishermen to go out and fish.

If it became clear to us that a fisherman was not abiding by the rules—for example, did not have a camera or an observer onboard—then the fisherman would be in violation of the arrangements, and we would be in a position to charge that individual. Similarly, if he misreported catch—and we were able to determine this by investigating, talking with the observer, or looking at the camera results—we could charge that fisherman with violating the conditions of the integrated pilot. So we do have a consequence for misbehaviour. That's how we would propose to manage it under the current circumstances.

Were you thinking of additional penalties beyond that over the long term, in addition to the Fisheries Act violations?

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

If we consider a small trawler operator, such as the example Mr. Kamp mentioned earlier, I understand how you will be able to sanction. However, the operator of a large trawler will be able to get away with it. This is what I do not understand when you say that there is nothing in there but that you will investigate. It is not enough to investigate. If your legislation has no teeth and if you do nothing, they will behave like they did in the past: they will empty the rivers, they will do anything they want. That is my opinion.

[Paul Sprout]

I agree. We have to have consequences for bad behaviour. Right now the consequence is that we can charge individuals who don't abide by the rules. The point you make is that fishermen need to have a consequence. To make sure that they're compliant, they need to know that the consequence is worse than their behaviour. That point, we agree with. Right now, our consequence is the Fisheries Act and a charge if we see a violation.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

There is nothing in this regard in your pilot project.

[Paul Sprout]

I think that's a good point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

You have time for a quick question, Mr. Blais.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Excuse me for being late, but we were delayed by another debate on a very important subject for the community north of the 60^th parallel. It is possible my question has already been asked and I just want to check.

Am I right in thinking that we will deal with the Fraser River salmon later on?

[Paul Sprout]

It will be the next subject.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Okay. So right now we are talking about the pilot project and next we will deal with the Fraser River salmon. I will come back later. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Mr. Stoffer, go ahead, please.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I apologize to our witness today for not being here on time. We were in the House having a debate.

Sir, I notice the proposal page you presented to us talks about allowing quota reallocations and establishing individual quotas for commercial groundfish fisheries. Are any of those quotas transferable, like ITQ or IBQs?

[Paul Sprout]

Yes, they are.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

They are transferable?

[Paul Sprout]

Yes.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Is there not a fear, then, that the transferability down the road may lead to further enhanced concentration of a public resource?

[Paul Sprout]

That was a concern by the fishermen, so they put in stipulations around the amount that could be transferred between fleets. So there are constraints on how much fish can be transferred from one fleet to the other to avoid a concentration of allocation among certain fleets, for example.

The second thing is that it's a three-year pilot, so there's no longevity here. Part of the review will be to look at exactly those questions. That being said, in the process itself, the fishermen looked at this question and put constraints on how those allocation transfers could occur, under what conditions, and also put constraints on the levels at which they could occur.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

I believe you were around when the so-called Mifflin plan was initiated in 1996-97. There has been a fair amount of reallocation of the resource and a reduction of the actual number of fishermen.

I remember quite well, Mr. Chair, when we had our first west coast report in 1998-99. We were talking to fishermen individually on whose lives the so-called Mifflin plan had really had a devastating effect. My concern has always been the enhanced concentration of a public resource. We know that Jimmy Pattison's companies have a fair concentration of it now. My concern, of course--and this is just a comment---is that the transferability of those quotas will enhance the concentration even more, meaning small rural coastal communities having access to fish will have their decisions made by somebody else elsewhere. I just express that as a concern.

[Paul Sprout]

I understand that concern, and I think that is certainly shared by others as well. There are obviously different perspectives on that, as you appreciate, and I think in part, as I've noted, the constraints governing the allocation of transfers would help address the point you've just raised. The other point is that many of the small-boat operators and the community individuals who are involved in this supported this pilot because they saw it as a way to maintain economic value in their communities, because individual fishermen can now choose to land their fish in various locations, in various ways, at various times, providing them flexibility, which they didn't have previously. I think that's part of the rationale for others' support of this initiative.

That being said, I appreciate the point you've raised on the concentration issue.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

You had talked about the increase of fisheries officers on the west coast, and actually I think that's a good thing. The concern we have, of course, is whether there has been a reduction in the number of fisheries officers in the central and Arctic region. If I'm not mistaken, I believe there was a reduction in the number of fisheries officers in the central and Arctic region. I'm wondering if you have any information indicating whether, in the country overall, numbers of fisheries officers have increased, more or less stayed the same, or decreased. The last point on that is whether you have had a chance to look at the planning and priorities, the estimates done by DFO in that regard.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

I'm sorry, there's a very short period of time to answer that, Mr. Sprout, and I appreciate Mr. Stoffer's being interested in the subject, but it's not really part of the discussion here. However, if you'd like to give him a quick answer, go ahead.

[Paul Sprout]

I can answer it quickly. I can say that I'm really not the right person to address the central and Arctic. That's not my region. I think the report and planning committee needs to be addressed. If it's fisheries management, it needs to be addressed by Mr. Bevan. I think that would be my response.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you, Mr. Sprout.

Mr. Lunney.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One of the challenges of going later in the rounds is that a lot of the questions and concerns have been raised. But I want to pick up on a few concerns, because we are talking about a Pacific region integrated groundfish management plan, and I'm the one who represents the west coast and has constituents on the ground there, so I appreciate getting in on the discussion here.

I want to just ask first if there is still a targeted rockfish fishery.

[Paul Sprout]

There is.