Fisheries Committee on April 18th, 2008

[Camille-André Mallet]

Yes. I perhaps did not have time to go into the question.

The harbour authorities, the public servants and the harbour authority program provide us with liability insurance. If a tourist using our facilities is injured and sues us, we do have liability insurance.

But I was referring earlier to insurance that covers the decisions made by the board of directors of our harbour. As I said earlier, if something happens that affects the companies using our facilities due to a bad decision made by our board of directors, those companies can sue us. That means that we must take out insurance to protect ourselves in case the board of directors makes a bad decision.

Does that answer your question?

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

No, that's fine for now. We can explore that, because that's a new one--or a new one on me, anyway. I wasn't aware of it, which is why I wanted the clarification. We can investigate that from our end now, so thank you for that.

Mr. Blais, you have seven minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning.

To begin with, I have spent a lot of time working on the small craft harbours issue since 2000, and have been doing so as a member of Parliament since 2004. At that time, there was a budget of $50 million for all of Canada. It was completely ridiculous: $50 million for all wharves across Canada. It made no sense.

The budget is now $100 million. The part of the work that you do and have done in a volunteer capacity can be assigned a dollar amount. According to the harbour authorities at the national level, it can be costed at approximately $25 million. That means that, year in and year out, the budget is actually not $100 million but $125 million as a result of your efforts. However, the extra $25 million does not come from the government but from you, the users, from the way you work, etc. The department itself admits that the situation is very serious since its own figures show that, in 2004, $400 million would have been required to do all the work required on the various wharves across Canada. And I am not talking about the program to develop or significantly improve or build new wharves; I am only talking about repairs to wharves deemed to be active. Some of them are occasionally forgotten or not included. So the amount required in 2004 was $400 million.

In 2006, it had risen to $475 million. Today it would probably be over $600 million. It is like a leaky roof. If it is not repaired, it will collapse. That is what happens. Generally speaking, the situation gets worse. From what I hear and see, it may even amount to a breach of contract. When the harbour authorities were established, nobody said that the situation would deteriorate. They said that there would be cooperation and that it was a good thing. You were even threatened that you would not have any money. This is very serious.

Someone should take out insurance. The government should even do that. Would there be any possibility of going to court on the basis of irresponsible actions or breach of contract?

Mr. Mallet, thank you for your message about the Quebec harbour facilities. A wharf might look just fine, but it may be in very bad shape inside. That is unfortunately the situation in Quebec as well. In some places, it is beyond the pale! The department's solution is to put up a fence because the wharf is too dangerous to walk on or tie up a boat to. We are familiar with these situations.

People are absolutely fed up. I have heard the expression about not walking the talk. People say things, but there is no follow-through. I imagine that it becomes terribly difficult for you. You are not only tired, but frustrated. In a way, you are the ones that get criticized. Moreover, from a financial standpoint, you have to protect yourselves against civil or other types of prosecution. That is an interesting aspect, and we will surely include it in the report.

We have come to the breaking point. I have the impression that the situation is already broken, because it is not improving. A lot more money is needed.

If people are too nice, the situation will continue to deteriorate. In 10 or 15 years, there will be fewer harbour facilities. There will be only a few wharves in each region, which will cause a number of villages to disappear. A village has to have a wharf.

I would like to hear your comments on this idea that people are absolutely fed up. What is your perspective? What direction do things need to take?

[Philippe Ferguson]

The money needs to be better managed. A certain amount of money is provided, and it needs to be managed properly. I will explain. The hundreds of people who are brought together in Moncton to talk about volunteer efforts and sustainability have their accommodations and food covered for two days. That costs money. Once the meeting is over, everyone goes back home. We have done our work. We have been able to express our differences, but what good is that? I have no idea how much that kind of meeting costs, but I am sure that it could have met the needs of several harbour authorities.

The challenge for the harbour authorities is to manage their money better. The fishermen and the volunteers all contribute. But someone will have to help us a little more. I am talking here about the small craft harbour authorities.

Jacques LeBreton, who is here with me, spends countless hours and days each week doing volunteer work. And then there is the two-day meeting in Moncton, with all expenses paid, to discuss things.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Ferguson.

We have to move on to Mr. Stoffer.

Mr. Blais, I realize it's a good question, but you were five and a half minutes asking it and that doesn't leave much time for an answer.

Mr. Stoffer.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to all of you for coming today. I appreciate being up here in this beautiful part of the country.

I have a couple of questions for you. You said, sir, something that was very poignant. You said, “We're managed by volunteers and we must not abuse their patience.” We've heard before from people almost on the edge of volunteer burnout. What would happen, in your assessment, if some of the small craft harbour authorities that are there now just said, that's it, we're done, we're finished, we can't do this anymore; we're fishermen by nature, and if we're not going to get assistance from the government, then we're just going to end this once and for all?

Do you think it's possible that that may happen in this particular area? What would happen in that case? What would the cost to government be then?

[Camille-André Mallet]

That is a good question.

Our harbour authority is at Shippagan. There are other nearby harbour authorities, including one in particular that is very close by. The people in charge there did exactly what was just mentioned: they just washed their hands of everything. They came to ask us to take them under our wing. I brought the request to my executive committee and they agreed. I am sure that they are not the only ones to be in that situation.

I am not a fisherman; I am an employee. And I would not want to be in the shoes of a fisherman sitting on an executive committee of a harbour authority that has to draft by-laws. As you know, not everyone is on the same wavelength. So there can be friction among the fishermen at some point if one of them is on the executive committee and establishing rules about his own wharf.

I know that this can lead to disputes. My colleague might be able to address this. When that happens, there are procedures to be followed, lawyers get involved, letters have to be sent. The harbour authorities can no longer just let things roll along. Fishermen end up fighting against their own colleagues to have the wharf rules followed, and I am sure that there is some amount of friction when they are out at sea.

That wears people down when they are volunteering on harbour authority executive committees.

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

Madame Payne, you remind me of a woman we met the other day down at Woods Harbour. Like you, she is very active, very proactive, and she thoroughly enjoys what she does in the harbour authority. So thank you for that.

You talked about playing the game. Could you elaborate on that a bit, please? I know what you mean, but I just want to get it on the record, the reason being that we don't want your harbour to fight with Shippagan or with these guys over the same dollar. That, I don't think, is the purpose of what government wants to do. I don't think MPs, because of lobby efforts, should say, okay, I have this area and you have that, or I'm closer to the minister, or I could do something here in order to get it to you so that I'm happy, but these folks may not be, or vice versa.

Could you explain that a bit, please?

[Margot Payne]

First of all, I want you to know that this is not what I do for a living. I am also a volunteer, but I actually work for the federal government.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Margot Payne]

I'm a manager of a Service Canada call centre here in Bathurst, for EI and ISP. My husband and my son are fishermen. I have been involved in this, and was asked to be involved, as a community rep since the very beginning.

I am so committed to that wharf that I would never walk away from it. I don't care how burned out I was; I would never walk away from this, because this is a good thing.

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

Who is following in your steps when the day comes?

[Margot Payne]

I don't know.

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

You see, that's the concern we have. We see the people who present with us, and no offence, but they're the same age as we are. Who is the next generation to look after these wharves? If DFO is going to invest millions of dollars, who then will take over after that?

[Margot Payne]

I don't know.

If I can speak to your question about playing the game, we've also received money, like Mr. Arseneau, and usually it's in advance of an election year. We have done everything in Stonehaven exactly the way the small craft harbours people asked us to do it. We have set up plans, we collect the docking fees, we hold the annual meetings, we keep minutes, we have agendas--we run it like a business. So we feel that we should be either...not rewarded, but at least we should receive from them what they promised to us, to help us with the administration of the wharf.

Before an election it starts, and we basically write letters and we make phone calls. I've met with executive assistants of members of Parliament personally. We play the game.

At one point, we were going to play a particular issue, because we happen to be an anglophone wharf at the entrance of the Acadian peninsula. We watch the rocks go by. We watch the construction going on in the bigger wharfs--I'll be honest, in Caraquet and Shippagan. We have said, do we need to play? Do we need to call it a language issue? What do we need to do? I don't like doing that, because I feel that we've worked with DFO, we've worked with the small craft harbours people, and we've done exactly what they want us to do. Why do I need to stoop to that level, to say that I'm going to do that? I don't want to do that. I was told: don't threaten; just do it.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Ms. Payne and Mr. Stoffer.

Mr. Allen, welcome back.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

It's good to be here, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much.

I have quite a number of questions, and I'll get as many of them in as I can.

Ms. Payne, when you commented on the $50,000 contract value, plus or minus, one of the statements you made is that if it's less than $50,000 you take care of it yourselves. Does that mean you hire the contractors and then the small craft harbours program actually pays the bill and you submit some paperwork?

[Margot Payne]

We submit paperwork to DFO, but we're able to contract out. We have to follow the process that they've laid out. We need to go and get two or three bids. We function exactly the same way as they would, but we handle it; we pay it out. I basically bill them.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

You handle the administration on the ground.

[Margot Payne]

Yes.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Another question I'd like to ask relates a little bit to one of the things that Mr. Mallet said about contracts and construction projects taking so long. This is a general question to the group.

If each of the small craft harbours had a multi-year plan in terms of a development plan, a maintenance plan, and an infrastructure plan...are we resource constrained? We're resource constrained in a lot of areas of the country right now when it comes to actually getting resources to do work. So when you talked about inflated costs, I kind of picked up on that. Do we have the resources here for a multi-year plan? Even if the financing is available, do we have the resources to do the work without the cost getting so inflated?

Can each of you comment based on your areas?

[Thomas Kenny]

I would say that we do have the resources here. For contractors to bid on these jobs...there is no limit to those; there are always two or three contractors bidding on all the jobs. I believe the resources are there; all we need are the finances.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Okay. And it's the same in the other areas? Okay.

Mr. Arseneau, you said the last dredging you did was 18 years ago and at that time you had to do some blasting and then you didn't have the money to remove the rock.

When we had our testimony in Ottawa a lot of people commented on dredging, and you commented on it in Stonehaven again. You can see in the picture of your wharf there that it looks like it needs dredging. Obviously 18 years is too long to wait between dredgings. Based on what you're seeing from storms and that type of thing in each of your wharves, what is the optimum time you see where dredging really is the best to do--how many years, and what is roughly the cost?

[Thomas Kenny]

A lot of that would depend on where your wharf is situated. In our area, and maybe even the Greenpoint area, a lot of the places are rock, and if the whole thing is dredged well, you only have to dredge once every 20 years. Our wharf was dredged probably 30 years ago or more, but we only have so much silt in there because all the outside of our wharf is rock; it's not mud. There is silt and stuff that accumulates over 30 years or more, but in some places there's a lot of sand outside, and that comes in.