Fisheries Committee on Feb. 5th, 2008

[Tommy Kilabuk]

It would be whoever does the ordering on the sealifts, such as the co-op or any individual who does their annual sealift that they would store for the winter. Even individuals have to pay that surcharge that they put on us.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

It can be quite a bit.

One of the things we talked about here, amongst many things, is the access to revenue by which you survive, which I'm sure is probably a bigger issue for you than it is for any of us on the east or west coast. What is the situation?

Mr. Earle, I'll start out with you, and Mr. Toomasie as well.

For infrastructure that exists in OA, what do you take in as revenue? What are your primary sources?

[Lootie Toomasie]

With the current breakwater that we have, we are not getting any benefit from that right now, because commercial boaters can't land there at all anyway. We use this only domestically, and we don't charge the local hunters, because it's very small.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Okay.

[Lootie Toomasie]

If I'm not quite clear about this, if you have any further questions, I'll have Harry explain further.

[Harry Earle]

There is revenue from the offshore fishing, the turbot fishing. Basically, some communities get royalties, and also jobs for the workers, for the crewmen in the boat. But probably the most important benefits would be if they could off-load. The fish is all frozen at sea, and when it's frozen on the boat, it's shipped to....

The market is in the Far East—Japan, and so forth. If they could off-load the boats in Canada, there could be additional revenue in transshipping that product out of the coast of Nunavut. The obvious transshipment point would be to bring it back, perhaps to St. Anthony, which is the closest port in Canada with a cold storage.

That would evolve into a two-way trade, because you would have fish going south and supplies going north. That's very important for the communities to keep down the costs, two-way trade.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Okay.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Mr. Byrne.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you very much to our witnesses for their very informative presentations.

One of the things that each and every one of you hit upon was that the need in the north is for multi-use wharves, not just to service inshore small boat fishing activity but to service offshore fishing activity, to allow or facilitate the supply transport--the vital supplies of groceries, hardware, other things to sustain the community. As well, there was mention of the ability to service industrial things, such as mining.

With respect to all of these wharves from all of the communities, what's been struck upon by you as leaders from the community is that you need more than just fishing wharves; you need something that's engineered to be able to meet all of those community-based needs.

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans, in its small craft harbours program, which is really what we're studying, is only interested in supplying harbour wharf infrastructure to service the fishing industry, and mostly the small boat industry. That, I think, causes some concern.

As expert witnesses from the community, would you be able to relate once again the need for multi-use wharves and how important that is to be able to service offshore fisheries, inshore fisheries, to facilitate the supply of goods, groceries, and hardware, as well as other industrial things?

Could you also comment on engineering requirements? The north is experiencing climate change. That's causing loose ice conditions, which from a structural point of view, when you build a harbour, a wharf into the ocean, the needs of today from an engineering point of view are probably.... We'd like to hear from you on this. Are the needs of today different from the needs of yesterday, from an engineering point of view, for the wharves that would be built?

Mr. Toomasie, would you begin?

[Lootie Toomasie]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As I mentioned in my opening statement, I was mayor for 12 years in the past, up to 2006. In the middle of the 1990s, the fisheries and oceans standing committee came to my community. I think it was around 1995 to 1997.

In my statement at that time, I spoke about how we needed a deepwater port in our community. At that time, this OA was under way for a survey. We didn't want to be left behind for the kinds of opportunity that we were hoping to get from this offshore fishing. We wanted to be part of generating the benefit for Canada as a whole. So I started lobbying for a deepwater port back then.

A few years down the road, one of the staff--I will not mention the name; I just want to try to make it understandable--came to walk with me when I walked into the airport in Iqaluit. He said, this time you're getting a port. But right after that, a few months later, it completely changed. Then I'm not getting a port this time.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Who was that, Mr. Toomasie?

[Lootie Toomasie]

That was just said generally. I would not worry about the name of the person.

But during the consultation--I think it was the consultation with the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans--the chairman at that time was a very kind person, and they were very good at getting to [Inaudible--Editor] on this. He was supportive. This person supported the view that we deserved to have a port in the community, because we're closest to the fishing area, the OA, where the survey was being done at that time.

Then somehow, at this table here, this guy was voted from his...[Inaudible--Editor]. From that time, our lobbying issue was completely dead. That's how it happened.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Thank you very much, Mr. Byrne.

A little bit later on we'll come back to Mr. Byrne's question on climate change and the effect you see it's having in your area.

Now we're going to go to Mr. Blais of the Bloc Québécois, for seven minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, gentleman, who come from virtually everywhere. You protect nothing more or less than a fishing area near Greenland. On the one hand, your small facilities do not give you broader access to the fishing area, and, on the other hand, most of the large ships fishing in those areas land their catches in Greenland. That results in monetary losses.

First, I'd really like to understand the strategic and geographic position you occupy. What is the economic value of this area? I suppose you don't get the impression we really help you, in view of your strategic position. That strategic geographic position should normally be considered first. In that sense, you should already have the deep water wharves you've been seeking for a number of years now.

What steps have you taken in recent years to have that strategic geographic position recognized?

[Lootie Toomasie]

Yes, thank you very much for asking the question.

This morning I have to speak in my second language, which is not as easy as if I were speaking in my own first language. I just want to be understandable.

Since my fisheries adviser has been working on this legal stuff, he has some briefing notes and so on. I want to have him respond to you. Thank you.

[Harry Earle]

Just to give you an order of magnitude, let's look at the 12,000 tonnes of turbot caught in the area called 0A and 0B. When the fish are landed and shipped out, they're worth roughly $50 million American. Most of those fish are landed over in Greenland.

Typically when vessels go into port, in addition to off-loading fish, they'll take on fuel and supplies, change crews, and make repairs. In my experience in dealing with vessels in the Arctic, parties will spend another $4 million, $5 million, or $6 million in those activities. That would generate secondary industries such as machine shops, welding, and different activities--much as you find, at least back in my home province in Newfoundland, communities that handle offshore vessels. Qikiqtarjuaq is less than 100 miles from most of the fishing. It's fairly close to the fishing area and directly across from the coast of Greenland. We're only 200 miles away, so it's not a very large distance.

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

Thank you.

Earlier you mentioned that our committee had previously had the opportunity to hear from you. You belong to a territory called Nunavut; you have a government. I can quite readily imagine that that government supports your demands, except that it is funded by Canada. That's what I understand.

What steps have been taken in recent years? Have you simply been listened to, without any real measures being taken ?

[Lootie Toomasie]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Could we answer the question once again?

[Harry Earle]

I think the Government of Nunavut has been listening. Really, it's a matter of funding. Primarily, these harbours are a source of federal funding. That is why they have...[Inaudible—Editor]...as well.

Does that answer your question?

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

No. I wanted to know the history of financial demands concerning wharves, because this isn't the first time we've talked about this matter. The demands no doubt go back a number of years; they didn't start today.

[Lootie Toomasie]

The port...[Inaudible—Editor]...I mentioned to you this morning. But as for the deepwater port, I turned it down, because the deepwater port is not coming from the local government; it has to come from the federal government. I completely turned down the deepwater port for that reason. But for the small craft harbour, they're planning, but the present plan is five years down the road. We need it now in order to accommodate the needs for the present fishing in the Davis Strait.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Thank you, Mr. Toomasie.

Mr. Stoffer now from the New Democratic Party, for five minutes, please.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thanks to all of you for appearing before us today.

Just a reminder to the committee that Resolute and Grise Fiord are resettlement communities from the early 1950s. People were taken from northern Quebec and moved up there to assert Canadian sovereignty. After my visit up there, I always like to think Canada should try to work with these communities to improve their livelihood so we could have a permanent settlement and not have young people move away. One of the areas we're discussing is infrastructure. If you have the infrastructure, then you can have access to whatever resources are up there to improve your livelihood, because everything is very expensive.

Tommy, Isaac, and Jaypetee, I want to let you know that this committee moved a resolution, I believe a year or two ago, to have the Government of Canada remove the marine service fees, as they're called. Those discussions are ongoing with Mr. George Da Pont, the commissioner of the Canadian Coast Guard, so it's not a lost cause yet. We're still encouraging the federal government to work toward that to alleviate the cost you have.

But, Tommy, Isaac, or Jaypetee, if any of you wish to answer regarding the young people and the opportunities they're looking for.... The last time, in my discussions with you, Tommy, you said that if we had infrastructure up there and small craft harbours or multi-facility harbours and access to fisheries resources by moving the 0A line, the young people would have a bright future up there in accessing what would be considered traditional ways of life.

I wonder if you could elaborate on that.

[Tommy Kilabuk]

Thank you.

Seeing what's happening to our world today.... Just recently we felt another impact on our livelihood from the sealing industry. The Europeans once again affected us with their marine fishing; that's happening more and more. It's fairly new to us up this way in Arctic Bay, but we've always known marine fishing is around us. We want to have more economic measures to make our livelihood up here, because it's been our livelihood for hundreds of years. All we have in our territory are marine mammals and land animals.

Now more and more fishing is coming in our direction. We feel the younger generation growing up now could have more to look forward to with the fishing industry if the 0A boundary could be moved past Lancaster Sound and we were given the opportunity to fish in our area instead of being shut down, because our economy is affected by the European sealing industry. It seems like our livelihood up here is getting harder, that more is being taken away from us, and people are tending to look elsewhere for jobs.

Our livelihood depends on what surrounds our communities, marine mammals and all that. In that sense we are asking and needing help with the small craft harbours we were talking about so we could proceed with our livelihood and be who we are up here.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you.

Isaac or Jaypetee, do you have any comments?