Fisheries Committee on March 22nd, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

I'll give a quick answer to that.

We have very good environmental controls and an enforcement process in place for bilge dumping, the loss of petroleum products, diesel, or anything like that being dumped over the side. We're still working on doing a better job with ballast water control. It's all part of the new Fisheries Act, which would give us more tools in our tool box for enforcement on issues like ballast water and invasive species.

There are other environmental issues that concern a different department instead of Fisheries and Oceans. It's really the responsibility of the Department of the Environment when you have pollution from larger cities and towns going into the ocean--raw sewage--and similar issues that we're working on to try to remediate. It's a work in progress.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

In closing, Mr. Pasaribu and the Indonesian delegation, again we appreciate the opportunity to talk to you today. I apologize that we didn't have more time for more questions. We will send you lots of information about how the fishery is controlled in Canada.

The one thought I would leave with you is the fact that in Canada we look at the fishery as a common property resource; it belongs to all Canadians. Fishermen are all licensed fishermen, but any Canadian who takes the proper courses can enter the fishery if they buy a licence and a boat.

Your question earlier was about TAC, or total allowable catch. When the TAC for various species is divided up, there are things that apply, such as the traditional fishermen who would have caught that fish and who would have been fishing in that fishery, and adjacency--how close they are to the resource--but I'm going to say that there are really no exclusive fisheries. You can get into the fishery if you buy a licence in that fishery. Lots of fisheries are controlled by certain groups, but it is still a common property resource. That's hard to explain.

[Dr. Bomer Pasaribu]

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Indonesian delegates of Parliament, again I want to thank you for the nice meeting here in Canada. You country is very nice, of course, but very cold for Indonesian people.

Again, we're very sorry about our clothes and our problem with our luggage.

Thank you very much. See you in Indonesia--not only in Ottawa, but in Jakarta. Please come to Jakarta and we'll have a discussion in Jakarta. Thank you very much again.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you very much. Merci beaucoup.

We're going to suspend for about two minutes to allow us to move our chairs around and allow us time to say goodbye to our guests.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

I'll call our meeting back to order. Welcome.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are undertaking a study of small craft harbours. Welcome to our witnesses from the National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee: Mr. Osborne Burke, chairperson; Mr. Bob Baziuk; and Mr. Luc LeGresley.

Just before we hear our witnesses—I know there will be some questions on funding here—I'm going to ask Mr. Kamp to explain the recent changes to the funding arrangement.

Very briefly, Mr. Kamp.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I know all of you are probably scouring the budget documents to see if there was any additional money for small craft harbours. You won't have found it in there, but I wanted to make sure the committee knew that the $20 million of funding that was due to sunset has now been extended and in fact put into A-base funding, which means it's permanent. In addition, there is about $8 million of transformational funding permanently in small craft harbours as well.

That may not be everything we wanted, but I think it's at least good news to know that the $20 million is now part of the predictable financial framework from year to year.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you for that, Mr. Kamp.

Mr. Burke.

[Osborne Burke, Chairperson, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the committee members. On behalf of all the harbour authorities and their volunteers across Canada, as well as my colleagues who are here with me today, I want to take the opportunity to thank the committee for giving us an opportunity to make our presentation. In particular, honourable mention goes to Miriam as well, because there have been many e-mails and phone calls back and forth.

So thank you. It's much appreciated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

She does a great job.

[Osborne Burke]

Yes, she does.

My name is Osborne Burke. I am the chair of the national HAAC and I am from Nova Scotia. Sitting with me is Bob Baziuk, who is from British Columbia and is our secretary; and Luc LeGresley, who is from Quebec region, and he's the vice-chair of the national HAAC.

I'm going to start off the presentation today.

In our presentation, we are going to provide a brief overview, from a volunteer perspective, of the harbour authority program, the challenges we face as volunteers, and how we try to work together with the small craft harbours program of Fisheries and Oceans to maintain and operate these harbours. One point we certainly want to stress from the beginning is the collaborative relationship we have with Fisheries and Oceans' small craft harbours branch, and that the issues we're presenting today are not so much with the program itself but with the level of funding.

Before I continue any further, I'd like to take a moment as well to thank the committee for their efforts to date, because you have made many over the years to increase awareness of the issues and challenges facing the small craft harbours program and highlighting to government the need to increase the program's budget.

One particular comment I would make at this time, before I pass it on to my colleague Bob to carry on part of the presentation, is that I'm pleased to hear that the $20 million is going to continue, from what has just been mentioned here today. I'd also like to stress that this $20 million really doesn't change anything; it has been there for five years. It's much appreciated that it's now part of the A-base or permanent funding; however, it still leaves us a shortfall on an annual basis of $35 million, which is barely enough to maintain the facilities we have.

On that note, now I'll pass it over to my colleague Bob. Thank you.

[Bob Baziuk, Secretary, British Columbia, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

Thanks very much, Osborne.

Once again, gentlemen, thanks very much for your time this morning.

If you would refer to slide four, it's basically the composition and the objectives of the NHAAC. I know some of you are wondering what an NHAAC is. I did when I started. It's the National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee. To summarize, it's a group of people, volunteers from across the land, who come through their regions to the national forum to provide information on small craft harbours and how we can better the program, and to find success stories and share them for the overall betterment of the Canadian fisheries in the harbours in general.

We're here as the elected board that meets from that national body. Today I would not want you to look at us as three individuals. I want you to look at us as 5,000 pairs of eyes of the volunteers--and I stress the word “volunteers”--who run these harbours across this land. I must say, personally, it's an honour to represent each and every one of them.

I refer you to page five. Osborne touched on this, and I want to reiterate his comments about the positive relationship that we have with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans small craft harbours. It's had its growing pains, but I'm sure all of you are pleased to hear that we work with them very well. There's transparency, there's trust. It's a win-win for everybody. I know they have the passion as well to keep these harbours going. Working with a regional and headquarters staff has been absolutely nothing short of fantastic these days. I think that's evident when we came up with our theme: creating the future together.

Slide six is simply an overview, and I won't spend a lot of time on it, because we are here on behalf of the volunteers. It points out the importance of the Canadian commercial fishery in an economic context of the whole Canadian economy. The one part of this slide that I'd like to point out is that small craft harbours' facilities are often the only visible federal presence in some remote communities, or the only public access to waterways. To me that should be key, as I'm sure it is to everybody in this room.

I refer you to slide seven. This slide simply points out the history of the harbour authority program. It started in 1987, and it points out, through the bullet form, how the program came to be. Note that the day-to-day operations of these harbours all across Canada are now the responsibility of the harbour authorities. I will make a note that the harbour authorities do charge for services to the best of their abilities, or to the best that the condition of their harbours will allow.

Slide eight is an overview of how many harbour authorities there are versus how many harbours there are. It's evident, if you do the math, that there are a lot of harbour authorities managing more than one harbour, and I myself do that. That comes with its challenges, but just to point out the extension to the volunteers, sometimes managing two harbours can be quite a challenge.

Luc and I both used to have hair, right, Luc? Mine has diminished over the years, but it's all worth it.

It also points out that in smaller harbours, the activities are conducted by the volunteer members or by the board of directors. In the larger harbours we have a sufficient revenue base, where we can hire managers and what have you. But for the most part they don't.

The previous slide pointed out the harbour authority day-to-day operations. Slide nine points out the responsibilities of small craft harbours and DFO. They retain the responsibility for the overall physical condition of the harbours, especially with respect to major capital repairs. I will also point out that it's not just wharves and floats, gentlemen, it's dredging, and that is all across the land, from my region at one coast to the other end of the country. Dredging is huge. You could have the prettiest harbours in the world, but if you can't get to them, how in the world...? We're dysfunctional when it comes to that aspect of it.

I don't want to come across as an antagonist, by any means. I want to come here and share a success story of working with Fisheries and Oceans staff, who are doing their part, but I certainly do want to make a point about the funding. I appreciate the announcement that was made this morning. We were not aware of that. But by the same token, it's still, in our eyes, not sufficient to properly sustain the program as a whole--every aspect of it.

With that, I will pass the presentation on to Luc.

[Luc LeGresley, Vice-Chair, Quebec, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

I'm going to be doing my presentation in French.

The Harbour Authority Program is now 19 years old, and it has become the cornerstone of service delivery for small craft harbours. You can take it for granted that the harbour authorities are mainly the eyes of the Small Craft Harbours Program within a fishing harbour and that everything that happens is reported to Fisheries and Oceans.

The contribution by volunteers is very significant. There are currently more than 5,000 volunteers working in fishing harbours in Canada. Harbour authority revenues total approximately $11 million annually. The volunteer effort approximates 135,000 hours a year, which corresponds to about 70 full-time people. In addition, harbour authorities engage approximately 125 full-time staff. When you combine the two, you see that harbour authorities provide approximately $25.5 million a year in time and money in the context of the Small Craft Harbours Program.

If the harbour authorities did not exist, taxpayers across Canada would have to find a way to pay $25.5 million more every year to satisfy fishing harbour users. Consequently, the contribution of all administrators and members of harbour authorities cannot be neglected.

We of the harbour authorities are proud of our harbours and of providing a high-quality service. People consider this a challenge. It is a good challenge for them to be able to tell the people of the community that they are taking care of fishing harbours and that they are proud of that. However, their pride stops when they see the state of the fishing harbours. Volunteers are experiencing frustration. They are physically and morally affected by the present situation. You have to understand that most volunteers are retirees. These are former fishermen, many of whom are over the age of 65. They have given a lot to their community, and when they see their fishing harbour deteriorate from year to year for lack of funding, they become discouraged. All harbour authorities agree that the present budget is inadequate for small craft harbours. You need only go into the field to see the state of disrepair of current facilities.

It must also be understood that the day-to-day management of fishing harbours is becoming more complex. From year to year, we have increasing government, but especially environmental obligations. There is also the risk associated with the management of fishing harbours, which every volunteer must bear. That isn't easy.

It must also be understood that a lot of volunteers have been involved with a harbour authority from the outset, for 19 years. These people would like to be able to ask someone else to take over, to replace them, because they are tired. At the national level, it is hard to recruit new volunteers. The people who seem interested in becoming members of a harbour authority are often frustrated when they see the responsibilities of management, the state of facilities and the reactions of users, who are even more frustrated than we are. It isn't always easy to find yourself in a fishing harbour and to be told by a member of your family, a fisherman or a friend that the harbour is in a lamentable state and to be asked if there's a way to do something. You have to deal with the arrogance of fishing harbour users.

It has to be acknowledged that the people of the Small Craft Harbours Program have listened and responded to certain requests by the harbour authorities, but their willingness has been constrained by a lack of funding. We know very well that the Small Craft Harbours Program people would like to do more, but that that is currently impossible. We're trying to find a way to save a dollar, and that's not always easy.

For example, I will tell you that the Small Craft Harbours Program currently provides $500,000 annually to deal with fatigue within harbour authorities, which represents $100,000 per region. I can tell you that that $100,000 is very well spent to assist the harbour authorities in day-to-day management.

In addition, the Small Craft Harbours Program includes a civil liability insurance program for administrators and accidental death and dismemberment insurance. If, for one reason or another, Fisheries and Oceans Canada did not have to buy these insurance policies and thus protect 5,000 volunteers or more who work for the fishing harbours, I wouldn't be here today talking to you. No one would respond to you in the fishing harbours; you'd have to speak directly to the Small Craft Harbours Program. These volunteers clearly cannot injure themselves in a fishing harbour and not be insured; that's unthinkable.

In closing, it is interesting that the National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee and the Small Craft Harbours Program worked jointly to prepare a brochure to promote the Harbour Authority Program. I don't know whether you have received it, but it will be distributed to you. It provides an explanation of the Harbour Authority Program. It's one way to promote the harbour authorities.

Having said that, I'm going to turn the floor over to my colleague Osborne. Before closing, I should tell you that we are nevertheless pleased to hear that the annual $20 million amount should remain. In spite of that, if we went to see the people in the field and tell them that we have $20 million more, their answer would be that there was a budget for 2005-2006 or 2006-2007 and that, even if that amount was maintained, there would still be financial problems. They will continue until additional money is invested in the small craft harbours.

Having said that, I thank you very much.

[Osborne Burke]

Thank you, Luc.

I'll continue with slide 14, looking at challenges to the harbour authority program. As Luc and my colleague Bob as well have stated, there are volunteers out there who are trying to do their best. They're doing their part and trying to do it to the best of their abilities.

In the harbour authority program, though, we're facing budget issues, and these impact upon the integrity of the program. We need additional funding not only to maintain the commercial fishing harbours; as we said, dredging is a major issue in all regions, from the west coast to the east coast.

Some of the harbours that formed harbour authorities have not seen any major repairs or improvements to their harbours for many years. We firmly believe Fisheries and Oceans' small craft harbours program is doing its part. It's making representations. We're well aware it's been to this committee before, making arguments and representations on additional dollars.

Although small craft harbours program invests in many of the harbours, its current budget is seriously deficient. As I said, some harbours are seeing minimal investment. It's tough for the volunteers to get individuals to go out to collect fees. Imagine yourself on the wharf trying to collect fees, and the first thing in your face is the fisherman saying: “What about this? This is falling apart. I've not seen any improvement in a year, or five years.” It's frustrating. There are barricades, where they can't go onto the wharves.

We're seriously concerned with this and that there was no funding re-announced in the budget. Irrespective of the $20 million, everybody was expecting to see something in the budget above and beyond it. Even with the $20 million, as we said, if you add in $35 million additional money, which makes an approximate number that's been quoted to us of $55 million annually, that's just to keep our heads above water, so to speak.

I'll turn to slide 15. The small craft harbours program's mandate was narrowed in 1995, and all recreational harbours were to be divested. There is no dedicated budget to deal with divestiture. There's $1.5 million being diverted from the existing budget to try to deal with regular maintenance on these recreational facilities.

These facilities are continuing to deteriorate. The costs are going to increase as time goes on, compromising the safety of the users or access. It's a major priority of this National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee that something has to be done to address the issue of divestiture of recreational harbours.

When we talk about that, we're talking about additional dollars above and beyond the $55 million. The $55 million is to maintain the commercial fishing harbours we have. Divestiture involves a separate number of dollars. Something has to be done to address it. If we're getting out of recreational harbours, then let's put some dollars there and move on with it.

I turn to slide 16 now. As we've said previously and said many times during this presentation, we're confident that Fisheries and Oceans' small craft harbours branch is doing its best to support the program. Funding, funding, funding keeps coming back. It comes back from us, and we're hearing it from the volunteers, right out to the wharf.

The standing committee has certainly demonstrated its support and interest. There was a debate initiated last June. There was a vote in the House for $35 million to be added to the budget. It was a unanimous vote; everybody in all parties supported it.

When the budget came out, there was a real expectation from the volunteers across Canada. With unanimous support on the vote, they fully expected to see something greater than the $20 million we've heard about this morning. As you can appreciate, when we prepared our presentation, we weren't aware of any dollars.

It will still be perceived to some degree that we're being abandoned here. Yes, the $20 million is great, but we need more dollars. There's a frustration level, and we have to deal with it on a day-to-day basis. Put yourselves in our shoes, as the national representatives of the volunteers, going back out on the wharves to address that and deal with these individuals and answer those questions.

It's a program that I think everybody among the volunteers is quite passionate about and supportive of. It's probably, I'd say, the best example in Canada of a volunteer program, and we don't want to lose it. We don't want the volunteers getting as frustrated as I sound now and saying “Here are the keys” and walking away from it. We don't want to see that happen.

In closing, I want to thank you again for the opportunity to make the presentation. We'd be pleased to answer any questions we can as well as we can with our limited abilities and what information we have.

I don't know if there are any closing remarks from either of my colleagues.

[Bob Baziuk]

No. I have just a simple thank you for hearing us, on behalf of all of our volunteers across the land.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you, gentlemen. We appreciate your coming here today.

As you are well aware, this committee has been a very strong supporter of small craft harbours over the years. Monsieur Blais has built his entire reputation on small craft harbours here, and Mr. MacAulay and all of us, quite frankly, have been good supporters.

We also deal with larger issues. There are the issues that relate to dedicated wharves and the small craft harbours wharves, including the ones that have been divested, and the whole issue with recreational wharves, as you've mentioned. There is a myriad of issues that we're all dealing with, and we're all dealing with budgets from this government and from the former government. But I can assure you that from this committee there is certainly a willingness and a want to continue to work on the small craft harbours program and to continue to improve it.

Go ahead, Mr. MacAulay.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you very much for what you do. Thank you for coming here. Thank you for presenting the problems you have, which are many, on behalf of people who are not getting paid to do it. It's a big task.

Could I ask Mr. Kamp one question, first, on what you indicated? Is the budget now the same as it was last year?

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

It would be approximately the same.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Yes. I just wanted to get that.

There are a lot of questions I could ask you, but you indicated that there was approximately between $25 million and $30 million of volunteer labour put into this issue. That itself would go a long piece to solving a lot of the problems, wouldn't it?

[Osborne Burke]

Yes, it certainly would, and that, for the choice of a word, is a conservative estimate.

A lot of hours go in there. There are a number of volunteers, and that's the best reasonable estimate of what's put out that we can come up with. We'd be very pleased to see another $25 million, but $35 million would be preferred, over and above the $20 million.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Right.

Now, did you meet with the minister yesterday?

[Osborne Burke]

No, sorry, I did not meet with the minister.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I thought you were briefed by the department yesterday, but that's not the case.

[Osborne Burke]

No.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

You were never informed about the $20 million until you heard it here this morning?

[Osborne Burke]

No. It was an absolute shock. As we said, the $20 million is much appreciated, and we are pleased, very pleased, that at least it is there now on a permanent basis.