Evidence of meeting #19 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was dfo.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
The last part of my question had to do with what the committee could do from now on.
The committee has been informed and made aware of the issue, and some of the members will have to look into the matter further. In your opinion, would it be appropriate and responsible on our part to invite department officials to come and explain to us what is happening in that area?
If they accepted our invitation, what questions would you like us to ask them?
12:25 p.m.
Fisheries Advisor, Acadian Regional Federation of Professional Fishermen Inc.
We would like you to ask Fisheries and Oceans to compare the effects of the contamination that occurred in St. Ambroise with what will happen in the Baie des Chaleurs. In other words, you need to ask whether fish are at risk of being contaminated. If there is no risk of contamination to fish or habitats, we do not see a problem. As fishermen, we are not able to conduct those tests. It is a responsibility that falls to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
Our fear is that fish will be contaminated. Once that happens, it will be too late to act. Heavy metals accumulate in fish and cannot be eliminated. The metals also build up in the human body. For people who eat fish, it is a point of no return. That is why we would like Fisheries and Oceans to help us conduct research to determine the risk of contamination to fish and habitats.
12:30 p.m.
Science Advisor, Conservation Council of New Brunswick Inc.
I absolutely agree. I think you need to ask DFO to come. They are in the process of modernizing their habitat management plan; that process is under way. The question is how that modernization plan would address another proposal like this.
Frankly, legally, I don't know what can be done about this project. It's not in your hands. But I think to try to prevent this from occurring again, when DFO comes before you to talk about its plan, think about Belledune, and about how this new plan would really change anything. What would really change under the risk assessment method they're proposing?
12:30 p.m.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
What is important for you is that the analysis model needs to be totally different. Otherwise we are going to end up in the same aberrant situation as the one we are in now, given the previous analysis model.
12:30 p.m.
Science Advisor, Conservation Council of New Brunswick Inc.
Exactly. Exactement.
12:30 p.m.
Fisheries Advisor, Acadian Regional Federation of Professional Fishermen Inc.
We feel that fish, when they are in the water, are the property of Canadians and the responsibility of Fisheries and Oceans. Once they have been harvested, their quality is our responsibility, but fish in the water are the responsibility of Fisheries and Oceans.
12:30 p.m.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
You are not sure what the conditions will be for future catches.
12:30 p.m.
Fisheries Advisor, Acadian Regional Federation of Professional Fishermen Inc.
We are afraid that what we harvest will no longer be worth anything.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As usual, Mr. Blais has made a good suggestion. I'd be very interested in hearing what department officials would have to say.
Having said that, though, I think we need to remember that the responsibility for the administration of the pollution prevention provisions of the Fisheries Act, section 36, has been delegated to Environment Canada, particularly when it comes to atmospheric fallout.
So I guess my question is this. Are you also interacting with the environment committee or the environment minister? Are you also taking that approach? Also, then, if we have officials, we would definitely want to have officials from Environment Canada, who are maybe more on top of what's going on here than the DFO officials.
12:30 p.m.
Science Advisor, Conservation Council of New Brunswick Inc.
We have made a request to speak before the environment committee.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
12:30 p.m.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
I would like to read into the record that when we look into the seal hunt matter, we should invite Foreign Affairs officials to come and tell us what is happening. There is nothing preventing us from inviting Fisheries and Oceans and Environment officials to look at the contamination risks.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerald Keddy
I appreciate that, Monsieur Blais.
I have a couple of wrap-up questions here.
Thank you very much to both of our witnesses for coming here today. It was a very interesting discussion.
My role as chair, of course, is to try to stay within the realm of DFO issues, because this is the fisheries and oceans committee. There are parts of this that are certainly migrating across to the Department of the Environment. At the same time, there's a definite dovetailing that certainly can't be denied.
First of all, I'll preface my comment by saying I'm not sure the proposed incinerator that hasn't started up yet is something we can have much influence on. There is another set of rules and regulations concerning that. I will tell you I do question, although I understand it, the precautionary approach that would say you can't do anything because something might go wrong. After my saying that, there's a whole lot of issues you have listed, from industrial pollution going into the bay today...that there's been no mitigation on. I think that's really the issue we have some opportunities to deal with.
I have a real, major concern, and I want to double-check the number again, because you said 10,000 lobsters caught in the area of the--
12:35 p.m.
Science Advisor, Conservation Council of New Brunswick Inc.
I have to say I don't know what the current numbers are, but the historic numbers are in this report and from documents.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerald Keddy
Yes, but per annum, per year, what would be the number of lobsters?
12:35 p.m.
Science Advisor, Conservation Council of New Brunswick Inc.
Again, I don't know the current numbers, and I apologize. I can try to get that for you.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerald Keddy
But it's disturbing that we actually have a search-and-destroy mission to catch these lobsters, to make sure they're taken out of the food chain, to make sure they don't infect or get into the human food chain, when there's certainly nothing preventing codfish from eating juvenile lobsters and then getting into the food chain.
There is an issue here. It's one that obviously has been ignored or at least passed off to other departments up to this point, so I thank you for raising that issue.
I have a little frustration with government when government says they can't do anything because it's not their jurisdiction or it's not their department. Instead, if you have a problem with gypsum or sediment in the water and you can take it out of the pipe before it gets there, then that's the cost of doing business. That's the cost of doing business for the fertilizer plant, and they have an obligation to take that gypsum out before it gets into the ocean. I may disagree somewhat with your comments on how much that pollutes the ocean, how big that footprint is, what that causes, but the point is that there is no need for it to be there. That's something we can do something about, and we could certainly make a recommendation on it and the other heavy metals as well. Anyway, I just wanted to make those observations.
I very much appreciate you folks coming today, and I thank Monsieur Blais for bringing this issue before us. You can see the struggle we have between DFO, the Department of the Environment, and jurisdictions. It's not simple.
Thank you very much.
We're adjourned.