Evidence of meeting #44 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 fishing.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
12:40 p.m.
Bloc
Gérard Asselin Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Judging from the background material we received from the Library of Parliament, it would indeed appear that the position of ambassador has been vacant for nearly a decade. A name was put forward in January and it's March already. There seems to be a great deal of work to do. Personally, I'm somewhat concerned, like Mr. Blais. According to Mr. Bevan, there is work to be done. A strategic plan is in place. The action plan called for an ambassador to be appointed at some point in time. This year, someone has been nominated for the position.
If we proceed to appoint an ambassador, then we should also put forward an action plan, since this is a three-year appointment. Priorities must be established, along with goals. A timetable must be set for reaching these goals within a very tight three-year timeframe. Mr. Sullivan's role on the international stage will be to serve as ambassador much more than as a lobbyist for Canada's fishery. Earlier, mention was made of having him travel to Europe to “sell” the seal hunt. That's more in the nature of a lobbyist's job.
When responding to all of the questions asked this morning, Mr. Sullivan regularly referred to the terms of his mandate. Since he is probably the only person familiar with these terms, in addition to the people who drafted the mandate, I'd like to know, as I'm sure the committee would, what responsibilities Mr. Sullivan has as ambassador. Surely these responsibilities are set out on paper. Could we possibly get a copy of his mandate? I'm asking because you regularly referred to the responsibilities associated with your mandate. This means that you do have a mandate. That mandate must be set out on paper. Could we get a copy of your terms of reference?
12:40 p.m.
Ambassador, Office of the Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Merci, Mr. Chair.
Slide 4 of the deck presented to the committee outlines the aspects of my mandate that I alluded to in my opening. I can reiterate some of the key points.
The areas would be to represent the ministers in pressing important issues internationally as a spokesperson for the ministers in international fisheries issues. What issues internationally would we be pushing? We certainly would be pushing responsible fishing practices. I have taken leadership roles in advocating strong governance to advancing RFMOs. One of the roles Canada is playing is in developing a model RFMO so that it can be adopted and used as a tool around the world.
If there are various irritants between our country and other countries that need to be addressed at a higher level rather than at the level of officials for many issues, there is a mandate for us to be representative in that particular role at a high level of intervention. The generalities are outlined here: to advance our fishery management; to encourage, by responsible management, countries around the world to sign on to UNFA, which is a significant instrument or tool in responsible fisheries management; to encourage RFMOs who are a part of NAFO to adopt them; to enhance reinforcement and, in the process, to shape behaviour.
The only thing that ultimately gets results is shaping behaviour and making nations responsible for what they're doing. That's an issue that needs to be advocated, whether it's by me as the ambassador or whether it's through lobbying, or whatever it is. I will use as persuasive terms as needed to achieve the message. Sometimes we require very persuasive messages; sometimes we require more diplomatic messages. When we have a lot of like-minded countries, we can get these together and form a network to achieve our goals. There's a whole variety of things that I could certainly elaborate on at length. I don't want to belabour the point unless there's a follow-up question.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Sir, I'm not sure if you realize, but this committee and members of the committee recently received a letter from the community of Owen Sound, talking about a new invasive species in the Great Lakes. It concerned ballast exchange, not only within our waters. Is part of your mandate at all to deal with or discuss invasive species in ballast water?
12:45 p.m.
Ambassador, Office of the Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Where there are implications on an international basis. If there is a crossing of international boundaries, it would be an issue, but under my mandate I'm not aware of issues that are international in scope within our internal waters at the present. That would be a domestic issue.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Okay.
To go back to that, even though these ships come from other countries, the concern is that they bring these invasive species over. So you have no role in that mandate at all.
12:45 p.m.
Ambassador, Office of the Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Well, we're living as part of an ecosystem, and I did make reference to the fact that when we're looking at putting in an ecosystem approach there, it's important to look at all aspects, no doubt about it.
If there are implications, whether it's shipping or whether it's oil and gas—and some had reference to ecotourism and other areas—there could be implications on an international basis. If there are international issues, they'll be brought to the table. If it's an issue of the environmental aspects, there are agencies and aspects that would deal with that in their particular forum. Its impact on fisheries would come within my specific aspect.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Do you know how much Canada pays into NAFO? If they have a certain budget, how much of that budget is Canada's responsibility?
12:45 p.m.
Ambassador, Office of the Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Canada pays $500,000, and there are probably overhead office costs we're picking up in Dartmouth, too, I would say, in addition to that $500,000.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
What is that percentage of the NAFO cost, compared to what other countries put in?
12:45 p.m.
Ambassador, Office of the Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
It's about 40%.
12:45 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Fisheries and Aquaculture Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
It's in the range of half, because we are the ones with the biggest catches in the area. It's about half. The next biggest one is the U.S.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
So Canada pays almost 50% of NAFO. You'd think we'd be the big dog there, wouldn't you, when we go to those meetings?
12:45 p.m.
Ambassador, Office of the Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Well, I guess setting a fee, a certain amount is in line with your access to the stocks that are there, too.
If you look at, for example, the yellowtail flounder, that would appear to be 97.5% of the quota. Some are much less, but there are significant areas that we fish in those areas.
Whether one particular aspect should be rejigged, we realize that we do bear a reasonable cost, but I think we have a very strong vested interest to ensure that NAFO is responsible. Because of that, that brings with it a high responsibility, too.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Sir, when the previous Pacific Salmon Treaty was done—I believe it was in early 1999, when David Anderson was the minister—those discussions were basically done without the input of fishermen.
I remember arriving at an airport, and on the newscast there was an announcement on the Pacific Salmon Treaty in downtown Vancouver. Fishermen weren't allowed in there. In fact, there was the Governor of Alaska, the Governor of Washington, and some aboriginal groups from the United States. One of the things that concerned a lot of fishermen was that they signed a treaty without fishermen from British Columbia having any input.
When the new Pacific Salmon Treaty is being discussed, which I assume is either happening now or is coming up very soon, will you be advocating, as ambassador, that fishermen and their communities have an input to this treaty and that it be an open and transparent process, as compared to the previous one, which was closed? Or would you have any say in that matter at all?
12:50 p.m.
Ambassador, Office of the Ambassador for Fisheries Conservation, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
It's dealing with an international treaty, so, yes, that would come within my responsibilities and my mandate, no doubt.
I'm generally aware of the problems in the past by virtue, I guess, of being a Canadian citizen and hearing it.
At this point, I think chapters 5 and 6 are due by December 31, 2008. I think it is in the initial stage at this point. I'm sure Mr. Bevan can tell you exactly where we are in the process and what engagement has been happening. At this point, it hasn't come to my attention at my level, any particular concerns at this point, and we are almost two years away from that.
If there are things, Mr. Bevan might want to comment on that, because I'm not familiar with all the details at this stage of what's transpiring in the renegotiations.
12:50 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Fisheries and Aquaculture Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
There are discussions at the Pacific Salmon Commission level that involve, as you know, commissioners from both parties. Decisions have to be made as to whether or not we're going to extend the provisions that exist now or do we want to renegotiate.
Renegotiation has significant risks as both sets of fishermen view that as an opportunity to get more. Both view the fact that they may have sacrificed too much last time around. That's a significant question. Do we want to open that up and risk a fish war with the casualties always being the fish, or do we want to have these arrangements extended? That's a discussion under way right now. If it's based on that determination, then there will be a decision as to whether or not we set up a process for renegotiation or continue with what we've got.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerald Keddy
Thank you, Mr. Bevan.
You can ask that question later, Mr. Stoffer. We have another issue to discuss, and that's the trip to Îles-de-la-Madeleine or whether we go to Newfoundland due to ice conditions.
If there are no further questions, I know Mr. MacAulay has a quick statement and question. I would hear Mr. MacAulay, if no one else has a question, and then we'll wrap up.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Lawrence MacAulay Liberal Cardigan, PE
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to emphasize to the ambassador—and I'm sure he's aware of the mussel industry in Prince Edward Island. Peter Stoffer brought up that of course we live in a world community, but we've got invasive species, like the base tunicate and these types of things, that are invading the mussel industry in Prince Edward Island.
Without help from the Minister of Fisheries, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Minister of State for ACOA, this invasive species has the potential to destroy the mussel industry in Prince Edward Island. Do whatever you can to put a bug in somebody's ear in these departments, as there are things that can be done and things that should be done. I've made a representation to the departments. All I ask of you as ambassador is please try to persuade the ministers to take a look at this and try to save this very important industry.
We sell mussels, and we are a very small province. You've travelled the world. If you eat a blue mussel, you'll eat Prince Edward Island mussels practically anywhere in the world. I urge and beg you to please indicate to the ministers how important it is that the measures I've asked to be put in place be put in place.
Thank you.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerald Keddy
We thank you for that short statement, Mr. MacAulay.
Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Bevan, Mr. Sanford, we appreciate your appearing at the committee as witnesses today.
Mr. Sullivan, I wish you good luck with your new ambassadorial job. It's an important job. It's one I'm sure all committee members hope we see positive results from, and given your track record, I expect we will see positive accomplishments.
Thank you for coming today.
I'm going to suspend the meeting, and then we're going to discuss our seal hunt in camera.
[Proceedings continue in camera]