Fisheries Committee on March 22nd, 2007

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I don't want to criticize anybody, but I think it's a bit of a shame, looking at what you do and how important that is to what you're trying to do.

I'd like you to elaborate a bit. You indicated that small craft harbours and the harbour authorities are, in many areas, the only federal presence in the area and the only access to the waters. There are a lot of extra problems as we go down the road. A dollar today is not worth what it was yesterday, and certainly not what it was five years ago, when the $20 million per year for $100 million was put in place.

Could you elaborate a bit on the environmental aspect, or anything else that probably wasn't as big an issue five years ago but that would add to the cost?

[Osborne Burke]

I'll probably defer over to my colleague Bob as well. But when we first started with the harbour authority program, harbour authorities did a limited number of activities. Since the inception of the program, what we're looking at 20 years later has certainly got quite more detailed. Next year will be the 20th year.

Bob, do you want to add something?

[Bob Baziuk]

I wouldn't know where to start with that.

Steveston Harbour, where I come from, is the biggest harbour in Canada. With that come a multitude of things. There is environmental cleanup; there's the provision of services for environmental recycling; there are a lot of things like that.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I might add that you have to incur that cost. As these extra costs come into play, isn't your harbour authority expected to continue to provide the service with the same number of dollars?

[Bob Baziuk]

That's correct, sir.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

That's what I need to know--what the extra is.

[Bob Baziuk]

Yes.

[Luc LeGresley]

If I may answer you also, just for your information, I have two wharves in my municipality in the Gaspé area, and one of them is to be divested. Five years ago the value to divest was about $500,000, but now it's up to close to $1 million.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

The third party liability was a big issue, if you'd like to elaborate on that. I know there's a number of wharves in my area that certainly need more dollars in order to keep them in shape.

I remember when the concern we had was that we had fish plants on the wharf and we were scared they were going to go into the run or into the sea. We don't want to get back to that point, but you need dollars to be able to repair the wharves. The third party liability is a big issue.

[Osborne Burke]

In relation to the third party liability, it was an issue for the volunteers. Going back to the year 2000, roughly when the national HAAC started, it was one of the major concerns at the time, because the industry, as volunteers, were saying they were federal assets and the federal government should be responsible for third party liability insurance. We kept making our representations and message to government, and they did listen. The cost of the third party liability insurance is now covered by Fisheries and Oceans' small craft harbours branch, and it's a load off the volunteers' shoulders in relation to that. As you can appreciate, you're down there as volunteers, and if somebody gets injured, there are lawsuits, liability, and it's a stressful item for the volunteer to be bothered by worrying about it all the time.

In addition to that, the secondary part, which I believe Luc presented and he can speak to, is the directors' and officers' liability, which was the next step, and personal liability or bodily injury. Luc can speak to that, as to what activities we're undertaking nationally with small craft harbours branch to deal with that. It was the most recent concern, from an insurance point of view, for volunteers across Canada.

[Luc LeGresley]

The two last insurances he was talking about were put in place in November 2006. We also have to put in 25% in order to have it. DFO has made a contribution of 75% and we have to do one. It costs the harbour about $28,000 per year to have those two last insurances.

I have to say that this was a big issue for all harbours across Canada, because people wanted to be insured and protected from all the risks they were taking by managing a wharf.

[Osborne Burke]

If I may add to that, as a snapshot example, for a harbour authority that was paying $4,000 out of the operating funds--which they couldn't put back into the wharf facilities--to pay for directors' and officers' liability insurance, it was reduced overnight to a $100 contribution. That's a significant savings and a stress load off the volunteers. Hopefully, as the year pans out, we'll have 100% participation from all the harbour authorities, where they'll all have coverage for the directors' and officers' liability and personal bodily injury.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Of course, a big concern in our area is that if there are not extra dollars, there will have to be extra fees charged. And talking about dredging, it's an environmental issue every time we go to dredge, and rightly so, but this is also adding extra costs. Where do we go or what do we do with the same amount of dollars when every year it costs more? And beyond that, it's a safety issue too. If you don't have the dredging done and there's a storm on and they can't get in the run, fishermen will die.

If you wish to, elaborate on this.

[Osborne Burke]

You particularly point out dredging. For dredge spoils, there are a lot of environmental regulatory requirements as to where you can dispose of them, and it adds to the cost. Habitat adds to the cost. It comes back to this $55 million annually that is required to deal with just maintaining those facilities, but there are the other costs creeping in and increasing all the time.

If you were to go back five years ago, you would see that the detail in trying to do an environmental assessment is certainly significantly greater now than it was previously. Those costs are creeping in all the time. They are a major concern and they have to be addressed. As I say, $55 million just patches up or repairs what we have, and as we're doing that, these other costs are coming on stream and they have to be addressed.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

What do you see then? As a committee, this committee did all it could do, but if the level of funding stays where it is, what's going to happen? Are fishermen going to have to pay more fees in order to have wharves? This is a big issue in my area.

[Osborne Burke]

I'll defer to both my colleagues to make a comment. But as far as fees go, harbour authorities, as we said, are doing their part. It's not just about fees. They're looking wherever they can to raise other dollars to assist, such as reducing the insurance costs. I don't think there are fishermen out there who are opposed to trying to contribute more--

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I agree.

[Osborne Burke]

Long-term planning to look at your wharf, to see where you're going to be in five years.... We're collecting fees now, but it's not enough. We're going to have to do a combination of things. And they don't mind contributing if, on the other hand, they see their partner, the federal government, putting in the dollars to assist with the hard assets.

But I'll defer--

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

But that is the concern, because if the other partner is not putting in the proper funding, then there's only one other funder in place, and that happens to be the fisherman.

[Bob Baziuk]

That's why we're here today.

[Luc LeGresley]

If I may, I'd like to make a very important comment. I'm going to give you an example concerning the Magdalen Islands. Approximately five years ago, the municipalities paid for electricity. They paid dividends and managed virtually everything. The municipality provided a lot of services. Then budget cuts were made, at both the federal and provincial levels, and that affected the municipalities. The Magdalen Islands had to force the nine fishing harbours to pay all electricity costs.

In addition, this year, for 2007 especially, one of the bigger challenges the fishing harbours must face is to find a way to dispose of waste. Today, a fishing harbour must pay approximately $20,000 a year. That means it has to find $20,000 more from users. To be able to reduce that cost from $20,000 to $12,000, we had to buy a waste compactor. That machine is worth approximately $50,000.

Let's consider the obligations of all users, of all harbour authorities. The federal government has to intervene financially. How do you think we can ask the taxpayers of the Magdalen Islands or North Shore...

In addition, in the southern part of the Gaspé Peninsula and Prince Edward Island, fishermen's incomes are quite low. Some fishermen earn approximately $12,000 to $15,000 a year. How do you think we can ask them to contribute more, financially speaking, to harbour facilities as a whole? I think that's impossible. Some fishermen are able to pay, but I don't think we can ask them to do it directly; that's ridiculous.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

We appreciate that.

Monsieur Blais.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I imagine you'll continue to be generous with the time that is allotted to us.

First, I am very much interested in the small craft harbours issue for various reasons, and I think your presentation today provides me with another one. Without going back over what I've previously said on the subject, I would like to cite a comment by Mr. Asselin that I've used in certain speeches. In fact, one wonders whether the dock is attached to the boat or the boat is attached to the dock. This kind of situation is terrible and ridiculous. I've said it on a number of occasions, and I will continue to say it.

Now you add another dimension to this issue when you talk about the 5,000 volunteers in Canada who give their time and, ultimately, money. You clearly mentioned that the department did not have to provide approximately $25 million because your work makes it possible to get that money.

Unfortunately, the government makes it so that these volunteers, who are concerned about the small craft harbours issue, are frustrated and exhausted, and when people are frustrated and exhausted, they may give up. If they feel abandoned, they will have no choice but to abandon as well. In my view, we have now reached that point.

I know very well that the committee will continue its work, and I'm going to ensure that we keep up the pressure with regard to this morning's improvisation concerning the $20 million—I call that improvisation. You were here at the meeting yesterday, and the people from the department knew it. You were the main people concerned by the small craft harbours issue and you were stunned, as I was, to learn that nothing was provided for in the budget with regard to the $20 million. This morning, in an improvised manner, we learned that—I want to check this first—the $20 million will probably stay in the budget. You can never be too vigilant.

I'd like to hear your comments on this acute frustration. I recently spoke to a harbour authority chair, and he feels, as you said earlier, very bad about his fishermen colleagues who wound up blaming him because the department doesn't provide him with enough money to address the needs of his harbour authority.

I get the impression that, in Quebec, the elastic has snapped among volunteers, and the harbour authority people have criticized the situation at a press conference. We shouldn't go through that anymore.

I'd like to hear your comments on this aspect that we can characterize as new, because it's not because we didn't know it. However, I think it's important to examine the situation in this way; that is to say that, as regards the harbour authorities and the small craft harbours issue, there are some parliamentarians, fishermen and communities that are frustrated, but there are also volunteers who are increasingly frustrated and who may well give up.

[Bob Baziuk]

I will point out that, as you've just said regarding the frustrations of many people express, it's these volunteers who are at the front line. We're the ones, as Osborne suggested, on that dock having to listen to the same rhetoric of the same complaints, and what can we do?

I was going to go further and expand upon what the last person asked.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Keep it brief, please, because I know Mr. Blais will have another question.