Fisheries Committee on Nov. 7th, 2006

[Jim Winter]

Of course.

DFO interprets its mandate as explaining and defending management policies, not defending the citizens who engage in sealing. So is DFO the appropriate lead department? I'm not so sure. Yes, we have more than adequate management philosophy and practices. We run probably the best wildlife management killing operation in the western world, but defending that is not the issue. The issue is how do we stop people who are using arguments that have nothing to do with the operation of sealing, other than in a facile manner, but have to do with a desire to end killing of a particular species with, as I believe, the ultimate goal of extending beyond that species to others?

It appears to me that the main player should be the Department of Foreign Affairs. These activities are led by foreign groups, primarily American-based and British-based, and take place in foreign countries. They are attacks upon the respectability, reputation, and dignity of Canadian citizens, whether they be Inuit, Quebeckers, or Newfoundlanders, with the odd time some sealing taking place in other places. These are reprehensible, and something that citizens of a country should not have to accept.

Therefore it seems to me that the explanations of the management of the hunt are fine and dandy. We've seen how effective that is, but the Department of Foreign Affairs is in a much better position to argue with foreign governments as to the reprehensibility of their parliaments passing regulations on the activities of Canadian citizens when Canadian citizens are following the legal dictates of their government.

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

Mr. Winter, I read the statements that were made not long ago before the committee in Ottawa by the people from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. They told us — and tell me if you agree with me that this is a relatively weak strategy — that our missions in Europe, on the advice and counsel of Ottawa, in particular of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, adopted an approach that was proactive at times and reactive at others, depending on the circumstances.

Starting in early 2005, to support the missions in their efforts, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade organized training and information sessions for Canadian staff and locally engaged employees responsible for providing information.

They said they had maintained consistent virtual contact with a network of missions to ensure that standard messages were transmitted across Europe.

When I heard that — and I'd like to have your opinion on this — I thought it lacked substance and action. If we always react, we run the risk of always working on their terms.

This is a war of images. In addition to the image of the whitecoat that's still used and that causes a lot of emotion, they use the words “baby seals”. We don't talk about baby cows, baby deer and so on, but they use the expression “baby seal” and the image of the whitecoat.

[Jim Winter]

When is the last time anybody ever heard, in a public battle, facts defeating emotion? It doesn't happen. We are sitting in a situation in response to exactly what you have identified. On paper, a lot of what our people are doing looks great. In reality, it doesn't work. We've had 40 years to figure this out. And unless we change our strategies, I don't think we're going to be around.

My biggest concern is, to follow up on what you're thinking.... The people and the individuals in the Department of Foreign Affairs are very nice people. They're doing what they're told to do, but they have no commitment and no heart in it. And you can't blame them. They don't understand it, most of them. They have very little exposure to it. They've never been to the Magdalen Islands; they've never been to Nunavut; they've never been to Newfoundland and Labrador. To them, it's a foreign concept. They're mostly urban people. They don't associate their food with the killing of a baby cow. They don't associate their kid gloves with a young animal. Yet we're asking them to go out and take a brochure that is produced by DFO and explain something. How can they put passion in it? How can they put emotion in it? And if you don't put passion and emotion, you're lost.

You have to realize the enemy we are looking at is not the parliamentarians of Europe. It's not the little old lady in Hamburg who donates money to an anti-sealing group. It's not the little old lady in Boise, Idaho, who gives money. It's not the little old lady in Manchester. It's the people who put the propositions before the little old ladies that encourages them to donate. That's who the enemy is.

And these people are smart. They are media savvy; they are well organized. And we go off half-cocked. This year, we're sitting around. I was watching an exchange of e-mails. Who is the leading group? DFAIT is saying it's FA; FA is saying it's DFO; DFO is saying it's somebody else. We're going around in circles again. You'd think after 40 years we'd have our act together. So far, I don't really think we do. The ultimate payer, if we don't have our act together, is the citizens of those areas that depend on it. These are rural communities throughout eastern and northern Canada where nobody gets a chance. Their income is comprised of a mosaic: a bit of this and a bit of that and a bit of the other thing. All put together, it looks like a pretty picture. You take one stone out and the whole thing crumbles and they can't live in the villages. And sealing is that stone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you, Mr. Winter.

Somehow you got eleven minutes out of that, Monsieur Blais. I don't know how that happened.

We'll go to our next questioner, Mr. Manning.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And I want to thank the people for coming forward this morning and making their presentations. As it was yesterday, it's a learning experience, to say the least. I'm not going to try to pretend in any way, shape, or form that my experience with the sealing industry is anywhere compared to the people here at the table. But I have some questions on your work itself.

I want to continue in the vein of Mr. Blais' question to Mr. Winter. As you told us here this morning, you're a man who has great experience, not only with the industry, but with the biggest problem we face in the industry, and that's the marketing of our product to European countries, the States, wherever. Not to put words in your mouth, but you've outlined several concerns that you see as the way things should not be done versus the way they should be done. If I were to ask you, as I am now, to name two priorities where you think government should be able to go into Europe or into the States, whatever the case, and take these two bulls by the horn, as we say here in Newfoundland, and to further the ideals of what you're trying to do in the sealing industry, what would the top two priorities be? I'm looking at it from government. If you were to tell the government today about the two things we should do now to help your industry and promote your industry and save your industry, what would those two things be?

[Jim Winter]

I think there are two issues. One would be internal. There are a lot of things that need to be fixed up that a lot of these other gentlemen have brought up: the question of the EI, the question of the regulations governing boat size, movements, loading principles. All these administrative things need to be done.

Externally, we need the Government of Canada to stand up to the European countries and say: “It is unacceptable for you to attack citizens of our country, following the dictates of single-issue groups who use—and I don't think this is overstating the case—violence of language and portrayals. If you have no facts, there is no conservation issue. We have six million seals; we've tripled the herd in the last 30 years. Conservation is not an issue. Our killing techniques are better than yours. You will not pass acts, without retaliation, attacking the dignity, the respect, and the rights of our citizens.”

That would be what I would do.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

When you say we don't need to—

[Jim Winter]

Of course I'm not a politician and not a member of the government. It's easy for me to say.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Fair ball, and that's what I wanted to hear.

When you say it's not the parliamentarians in a lot of cases that we have to convince in Europe and other places, how in your mind do we reach out to the ordinary Joe and Mary on the street whom we need to convince in the populace?

I remember back when Captain Morrissey Johnson and others went to Europe trying to promote our seal hunt, and they met with the protests. It seems that the protesters are well organized, as you said, and well funded, and they grabbed the media attention, because there is nothing as bad as blood coming out of a white seal on white ice.

What, in your mind—and you've been over there yourself—would be the best way for government to approach getting to the general population of European countries?

[Jim Winter]

Mr. Manning, I have a lot of ideas about that. I'm not sure a public forum is the place to discuss them. I don't mean that in any kind of negative way to you, or to the committee.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

No, I appreciate that.

[Jim Winter]

I think, whatever needs to be done—and as I say, I do have ideas, and there are a lot of you who have ideas—you need to get the ideas together before you go public with them, because I'll guarantee you one thing: ten minutes after you come up with the idea, they'll know about it.

So I'd just prefer to avoid the question, if you don't mind.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

No, that's fair ball. The struggle, I guess, for government, whatever party is in power, is trying to find a mechanism to get that—

[Jim Winter]

Ask me after the meeting.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

I will.

Again, we're dealing with situations where the hearts override the minds.

[Jim Winter]

I think fundamentally that's exactly right, and if we do not come to grips with the fact that we are dealing with a propaganda campaign that is unparalleled in the twentieth century—the latter half.... I won't say the twentieth century, because there was certainly a very good, parallel campaign run in the 1920s and 1930s that resulted in a democratically elected government going on to behave in an abhorrent manner.

This campaign is equally efficient, equally well-run, and it has equally captured the minds and the hearts of European and American, and I must say, some Canadian people, with the same kind of tactic. It's called the big lie. If you repeat a big lie, the thesis goes, often enough, sooner or later people start discussing details. The minute you are discussing details, the big lie has won. That's what we're dealing with. We're not dealing with facts and figures; we're not dealing with economic realities. This is what we're dealing with.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Yes.

I want to get back to Mr. Gillett, if I could. Correct me if I'm wrong. Did you state that 75% of your income came from sealing this year?

[John Gillett]

That is correct, sir.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

And none of that income was permitted to be EI-eligible?

[John Gillett]

No, but it was taxable.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Are you aware that there are sealers for whom part of their catch is EI-eligible in this country?

[John Gillett]

I didn't understand you, sir.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Are you aware—because I wasn't until yesterday—that there are sealers in parts of Mr. Blais' province who are allowed to use part of their sealing income for EI eligibility?

[John Gillett]

No, I was not aware. It doesn't surprise me, though.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

If I understand correctly, it's part of how the catch is recorded in regard to the boat itself--the people who put, more or less, labourers on the boat versus being a shareholder. That's how they get around it; that's how they do it. I wanted to know if you were aware of it, because I wasn't aware of that until yesterday.

I find it amazing that you go out on the water and fish, it's all fishing. You fish or you seal and you can't use it as income, especially when it's 75% of your income. Yesterday we were dealing with about 20%, but at 75% it really blows it out of the water for me.

In regard to the hakapik, I haven't run into a sealer yet who's against using a hakapik as a safety tool as much as part of the work. So I don't think you should be listening to anybody else, except for the people who are around the ice, when it comes to that.

With the protestors, again I have a big problem. It's the only industry that I know of where people can go in and interfere with your job, and not in any way, shape, or form be penalized for it, unless there were some small situations earlier this year.

I don't know if anybody mentioned this morning--I'm trying to make some notes--the hail system. Yesterday we heard in St. Anthony a fair bit of concern with the hailing system. I want to know, because there was some concern up there on Holy Thursday. Then things were shut down Good Friday, Easter Saturday, Easter Sunday, Easter Monday. There was no way to phone in, because the staff from DFO weren't there. Would you give us some idea of your experience with the hailing system, anybody who would like to answer?