Fisheries Committee on April 14th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you.

Mr. Blais, one quick question.

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

Thank you very much.

You are aware of the negotiations concerning fishing subsidies and subsidies granted by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to wharf infrastructures? These subsidies have been challenged. During preliminary negotiations, the United States and New Zealand, among other countries, are saying that Canada and other countries should cease subsidizing wharf infrastructures for fishermen.

In addition to the financial problems we are grappling with, there is that sword of Damocles that is hanging over our heads.

[Warren Parsons]

Does anybody have any idea, on this committee here, of the millions of dollars that fishermen pay to the federal government for our licence fees in a year? I mean, we have boats out there, longliners, paying up to $5,000 or $6,000 a year to the federal government for licence fees. So really, for everybody it's all pay, pay.

When you say “subsidies”, do you mean the federal government should not be building wharves but that the fishermen themselves should be building the wharf infrastructures?

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

Allow me to elaborate. The WTO, the World Trade Organization, is currently holding negotiations on fishing subsidies. These negotiations reveal that certain countries want to prohibit certain types of subsidies. Among the subsidies that would be forbidden are those granted to wharves that are used exclusively for fishing.

[Dave Johnson]

I'll ask you now. I have 13,500 pounds of crab to catch. I had 2,285 pounds of crab last year. It went down from the year before. There were more fish last year than there were the year before. What am I going to pay to build a wharf? The money is not there.

It's a renewable resource. Your country is made up of the resources that you have. It's a resource, so let's look after it. We're creating money, the spinoff.

In Old Perlican, there's an estimated two million to three million litres of diesel fuel for the boats. Those taxes are going to the federal government. That's a lot of fuel when we had 180 boats.

You talk about creating revenue. What about all this fish that gets trucked in? Bay de Verde had their redfish landed in Bay de Verde, and it was only ten miles away to truck it to Old Perlican. We were looking to see if we could get a cash cow there, but it never happened. You couldn't do it.

In my opinion, we're giving. The fishery is giving back to the federal government in leaps and bounds. Now, some in Alberta might disagree. But it's a renewable resource that is there. It's going to be there. Look after it.

If you're looking at the bigger boats, we're not all in that luxury area. There are more smaller ones than there are bigger ones, I can tell you that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Johnson.

Mr. Stoffer.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen.

Mr. Blais, we saw the report. It also includes unemployment insurance concerns, any wharf infrastructure.... Basically, anything that aids and abets from the federal government to fishermen and their communities could be construed as a subsidy. These are what the ongoing talks are about right now.

Of course we have addressed those to Minister Hearn and Minister Sullivan, the ambassador for fisheries, and they will be raising those concerns overseas.

Again, we only saw a draft report. There was nothing in concrete, as we say. So we'll be keeping a very close eye on that, but I would ask that you also keep a close eye on it.

Mr. Johnson, you had talked about the future of the fishery. I see it sort of the way you see it as well, except for one thing. Is there not a fear that eventually the raw resources we have off the coast here in Newfoundland can now be just transferred off to bigger freighters and ships somewhere else?

In central Canada, for example, whitefish is sent to China for processing and sold back to the stores. At the Safeway stores, it says “Product of Canada. Made in China.” My fear is that a lot of this raw resource we have will be sent out to the cheapest place to get it processed. So why land it here? Why not land it immediately on the bigger boats, the freighters that can be 200 miles off the coast, and send it right to China or wherever? That's my great fear.

Sir, you're absolutely correct: it's a renewable resource. Done right, it could hire your great-great-grandchildren in the future.

So thank you.

[Dave Johnson]

You mentioned unemployment. I don't know if I'm reading you right, but you're talking about getting rid of the EI, right?

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

No. The WTO round, the Doha Round, could consider.... They may consider unemployment insurance benefits for fishermen as a subsidy. The reason for it is that they argue the fact that there are billions of dollars going to the fishing industries of the world, having a devastating effect on fish stocks. So they want to eliminate these subsidies not just in Canada but around the world, and of course the fear is you get the baby thrown out with the bathwater.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

You have to get to the question.

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

There's no question, just a comment. That's the concern.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Mr. Kamp.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I can only say I don't want you to be unduly concerned about these comments about the WTO. What's being referred to is what's called a chairman's draft. The reason the chairman of that section wrote this draft is that the discussions up until then weren't going anywhere because there was so much disagreement about what subsidies were and how they should be handled.

So our negotiators in the Department of Finance, as well as the DFO people who are assisting them, are certainly on top of this. The WTO works by consensus. Either everyone agrees or there's no agreement. It's not a majority vote or anything like that. So I can assure you that the government is certainly following this and is not about to sign off on some of those things that have been mentioned as possibilities here today.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Kamp.

I expect to be talking about the subsidies in 30 years' time, the same way we're talking about the wharves. So don't stress out on that one.

Mr. Calkins.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Chair, is there time for one more question?

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

You have thirty-four seconds.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I do have one question. I just wanted to clear up for Mr. Johnson that I needed somebody from Newfoundland to explain to an Albertan how the math works. So I appreciate it. I certainly want you to benefit in the long term from the resources you have here. As an Albertan, I know very well about the value of managing your resources wisely.

I have a question for you, Herb, on the deck that you gave me with these slides. You have a picture here of a yacht from Sag Harbour yacht club in Long Island, New York. One of the questions I asked at a previous committee meeting was how a vessel that's not registered in Canada, that has a destination and passengers from another country, gets to a small craft harbour through our customs process. Normally a vessel that originates in another country has to go to a port of entry, which obviously has customs and everything. How is it that a vessel that's originating from another country proceeds to a small craft harbour--legally?

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Why did you have to add that last word?

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I'm just wondering, because it seems to me as though it would be of great economic benefit to have these yachts and so on. Maybe I shouldn't have brought it up in a public debate, and if I've caused some undue problems, I apologize. My concern is that if we're not doing this legally, how do we make it legal so that it's not an issue? Maybe it isn't an issue. I certainly see the long-term benefits of tourism for smaller harbours and smaller communities with small craft harbours, and not just of regional tourism from our own country, but also of international tourism. I think that's probably where the future lies and where we have some of these open-ended questions. It's trying to manage that balance between what the fishermen need and what tourism is going to bring to the regions as well.

I'm just kind of curious how that all works.

[Herb Butt]

Either way--

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Don't worry about it, Mr. Butt--

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

It works just fine is what you should say.

[Herb Butt]

It works just fine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Mr. Curran is going to have our closing comments.

[Judge Pat Curran]

To answer the question, we've done some assessment around American swordfish transshipment as well, positioned in Trepassey and some other ports in our region. Exactly the same issue comes into play.

Customs is a challenge. The quick answer to the question would be, in my view, to provide the local detachment of the RCMP the function of being able to clear a boat for customs as opposed to having a customs officer come out of St. John's or one of the major centres. That's the quick answer to the problem.

You're quite right, it is an impediment to development.