Fisheries Committee on April 18th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

I want to welcome our witnesses here this morning.

We are the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans for the Parliament of Canada. We are comprised of four political parties: the Conservatives, Liberals, Bloc, and the NDP. Last fall we began a study into the small craft harbours program of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. During that process last fall, we heard from many people within the department and in Ottawa. We presented an interim report to Parliament prior to the Christmas break. As part of our ongoing meetings and discussions, we decided to travel to the four Atlantic provinces--Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, and P.E.I.--and we'll finish up this afternoon in Gaspé, Quebec.

What we are attempting to do now is travel and have a look at some harbour facilities, which we have done over the past few days, and also hear from harbour authorities, the people who are on the ground. Basically our process now is to hear from people who are on the ground, on the wharfs, volunteers like you, to hear your concerns about what we can do to improve the small craft harbours program--and not only the marine infrastructure itself, but the concerns you have as volunteers with regard to your organizations, any training assistance you receive, things we can put forward to improve the great work that you do on behalf of many people.

Most of us around this table represent rural ridings in Canada and have many fishing enterprises and harbour authorities in their ridings. As an example, in my own riding of Avalon in Newfoundland and Labrador I have 68 harbour authorities--it's a very large area--and many of the members around this table have also. So we're quite familiar with the work you do and the time you give, but more importantly today, we're here to listen to the concerns you may have, so we can present a report to the House, hopefully before the summer break, that would encompass all the things we have learned and so we can put forward some recommendations that would improve this program.

That's our goal, and we hope you'll be able to assist us with that today.

Everybody understands that we are being interpreted as we speak. I've learned some valuable lessons in slowing down my speech. For the benefit of those who may not speak both languages at the same time, I'd ask that you take the time in your presentations.

We'll open up the floor now. I believe Mr. Arseneau is speaking first.

The floor is yours, Mr. Arseneau.

[Yvon Arseneau, Administration portuaire de Pointe-Verte]

My name is Yvon Arseneau. I'm originally from Pointe-Verte, where I am a fisherman.

I would like to speak in French.

There are approximately 25 fishermen at our wharf, which is equivalent to some 50 direct seasonal jobs for a small village like Pointe-Verte. This is quite a significant number because, in northern New Brunswick, there are currently not many jobs.

We have had a port authority for the past 18 years approximately. I was talking about it with Réal earlier. Caraquet has had one for 20 years, and we signed an agreement with the port authority some 18 years ago. Based on the agreement we signed with the department, we took over the port authority and everything related to management, electricity and minor things, and the department was to be responsible for major issues, such as dredging, wharf repair and so on. To the great surprise of most of the port authorities, the department did not follow those recommendations. Some dredging was done approximately 18 years ago, and the rest of the wharf has greatly deteriorated. Part of the inside of the wharf has collapsed and a support wall is needed but it's not being built. Everything I'm telling you about is already in the system. We reported this in 2002 and every year we're told that it's in the system and there is no money to do the work.

Currently, we no longer have any access whatsoever to the wharf at low tide. I have some photos to prove this. May I pass them around so that you can see?

We are doing the best we can. We had to send a memo to Fisheries and Oceans Canada saying that we deny any liability in the event of any loss of life. In fact, when the weather at sea is bad, some boats can stay out and survive the gale until it calms down, but smaller boats cannot. When boats want to enter the wharf and all the boats are blocking the entrance, as has been the case over the past few years, we have a serious problem.

We reiterate our demand. Every year, we continue to call and ask the department to take care of these wharves. It is an economic driver in our region. You might think that 50 jobs is not very many, but in a village such as ours, where the population is about 700 or 800 people, it's important. Every year at this time, you can see the energy and activity generated by this little economic driver.

The fisheries are important to eastern Canada. I think that the department should get more and more involved and maintain the wharves in operating condition, because they are essential tools for us. At present, we are afraid of losing the inside of the wharf if there is a big storm. Whenever the east wind blows, we see bits of the wharf come off. In my opinion, this is completely unacceptable and it's nonsense. We no longer know what to say to the department. Ottawa is spending money, but we don't know where.

Every time we are close to getting a wharf project, one reason or another is given for it not going forward. The project has been delayed for another year. For at least the past 15 years, the Pointe-Verte port authority has not received a dime. Other port authorities are in the same situation. I think that they will also talk about this.

This is completely unacceptable. In the past few years, we have operated with the little money that we have gotten successively from the Conservatives, and the Liberals, most of the time at the beginning of an election. Important people have already come to Pointe-Verte, which means that the fishery here is important enough for them to come. Among other people, Mr. Tom Siddon came to Pointe-Verte to see the condition of the wharf. After that, we obtained funding, because he saw the truth and understood the importance, for fishermen, of having a tool to do work. If we can't come in with our boats and tie up at a wharf at different times of the day because of the tides, then something isn't working.

This situation is preventing, among other things, other sectors in our region from developing. Some people would be interested in developing the tourism industry. But what is the point of investing in a tour boat if you can only go out when the tide is right? Developing the tourism industry has to be logical and entrepreneurs need tools to do so.

That is mainly what I wanted to say. I could talk to you about the project that I drafted, but since I've already sent it approximately 20 times, it's already in the system. I could give you a copy nonetheless. You could also get it directly from officials responsible for the Small Craft Harbours Program.

We're a little tired of all this. We are volunteers. We're trying to operate with the means we have, but at any given time, we can't do our jobs anymore because of the lack of vision for any given harbour. You're going to tell me that there's no money, but that you understand. The port authority does part of the work, and then it gives up. Ten years later, it has to redo what it has already done because too many years have passed before it was able to restore the wharf properly.

For example, the last time the wharf at Pointe-Verte was dredged, the inside of the wharf was supposed to be dynamited. We had to fight with the different levels of government to dynamite the entire surface of the wharf. Ultimately, we got permission to dynamite three-quarters of the wharf. Approximately 10,000 metres of rocks were left in the wharf, due to lack of funding. However, the money allocated by the federal government was more than enough, but the project was interrupted and the money was allocated elsewhere.

Any project should be done for a certain purpose. It needs to be completed and then moved on to the next step. A business plan has to be followed in order to obtain a tool that makes sense.

That's all I wanted to say.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Arseneau.

I don't want to cut anybody off, but we need to hear from the witnesses so that we can begin our questions. Our plan is to spend an hour and a half with this group and an hour and a half with our next group, so it is important that we allow that time to happen. I know you have a lot to say, and hopefully we can gain some of that knowledge through our questions. So just make your points, and then we'll get to our questions.

Mr. Mallet.

[Camille-André Mallet, Administration portuaire de Shippagan]

Good morning. My name is Camille-André Mallet and I am the Director General of the Shippagan Port Authority in New Brunswick.

To begin, I want to make clear that the port authority program is a good one. As for the implementation, Fisheries and Oceans Canada staff responsible for the Small Craft Harbours Program have given us excellent support and direction. The major problem we are facing today is the same one we faced when the program started, meaning infrastructure. In Shippagan, we have infrastructures for a total of 1,182 metres and a wharf where 2,700 metres of boat can tie up under normal conditions. When conditions deteriorate, we only have 812 metres of wharf to shelter the same number of boats in safe berths. We have a serious lack of infrastructure when the temperature drops, which is a frequent occurrence in our region.

The Shippagan Port Authority is the home port for 105 traditional and aboriginal commercial fishing boats during the crab, lobster and herring fishing seasons. During the fishing season, this represents approximately 69 65-foot-long commercial fishing boats and 46 45-foot-long inshore boats. Furthermore, the port authority rents 26 unloading sites during that season to crab buyers, two sites for unloading mackerel and four sites to unload herring. Furthermore, we rent lots big enough to hold two freezers.

According to Statistics Canada, the landing values in the gulf region are, for 2007, 114,000 metric tonnes, for a value of $336 million. For 2007, at the Shippagan wharf, the landing statistics are 11,000 metric tonnes, for a value of $41 million. You can see that this is extremely important for the Maritimes. In fact, this industry provides a lot of work for many people in our community.

Among other things, we have to manage the infrastructures that are almost at the end of their lifespan. In fact, they are almost all at the end of their lifespan. In 1999, following a recommendation by engineers at Public Works Canada, we had to close a section of our facilities found to be unsafe. It took us five years to complete this project, between 1999 and 2003.

In 2004, we had to close another section of our facilities following another recommendation by engineers at Public Works Canada. The reconstruction project is still on the drawing table. It is currently 2008, and the project has not yet begun. According to estimates and the budget set out by Fisheries and Oceans officials, the project will have to be done in phases, over a three-year period, meaning that each phase will take two years. If we do the math, we realize that the construction project will take six years to be completed. Yet, during that entire time, we will have to work with fewer facilities.

That's the end.

As you can see, we lack infrastructure, given the number of boats and the important volume of landings we have to manage and the poor condition of our facilities. Furthermore, reconstruction projects should be completed much faster. It is incomprehensible that the reconstruction work would take six years. We are underprivileged, even neglected, compared to other government infrastructure. I don't think that anyone would allow other facilities, such as the RCMP's, the airports or your own offices, to be treated this way. The government must invest more money so that the reconstruction projects can happen more quickly.

In closing, we mustn't forget that the port authorities are managed by volunteers. It is important not to take advantage of their patience.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Mallet.

Mr. LeBreton.

[Jacques LeBreton, Vice President, Administration portuaire du Quai de Tracadie]

I'm going to give the floor to Mr. Philippe Ferguson. We belong to the same port authority, in Tracadie.

[Philippe Ferguson, Secretary, Administration portuaire du Quai de Tracadie]

Good morning. My name is Philippe. I am a municipal alderman for the Town of Tracadie-Sheila. I have been working with the port authority for the past six years. I have no sea legs; I don't have a boat. Like others, I am a volunteer. Here, in short, is why I am speaking here today.

In the spring of 2006, the port authorities of eastern New Brunswick were invited to Miramichi. We were told about the legal aspect of the port authority and reminded that we were primarily responsible for the port authorities.

In the fall of 2006, we were invited to Moncton to take part in a meeting with all the port authorities throughout the Maritimes. During that meeting, we talked about volunteers. We wanted to know how long we could go on without wearing out our volunteers.

Time passed. In the spring of 2008, we met again in Miramichi. We were told about the importance of keeping our accounts up to date and we were told that we had responsibility for doing that. I want to make clear that our facilities are quite modest: they are used by a dozen fishermen and approximately 70 pleasure boaters. This formula works and it's quite nice.

Now that Fisheries and Oceans is telling us what to do, will we have the means to do it? We are only volunteers and we don't want to wear ourselves out. Our small facilities are extremely important for our community's vitality. We are responsible for the management and all the related duties, but we don't have the means we need.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Ferguson.

Ms. Payne.

[Margot Payne, Secretary-Treasurer, Stonehaven Harbour Authority]

I'm going to give my presentation in English because I can speak English faster than I can French.

Tom and I represent Stonehaven Harbour Authority, which is located between Bathurst and Caraquet small harbour. Stonehaven Harbour Authority was formed and incorporated in 1996 with a 10-member board representative of the fishing industry, community, and fish buyers.

The harbour authority has been very effective in managing the day-to-day operations of the wharf, including minor repairs and improvements to the structure. Financial assistance has been forthcoming from DFO when necessary. The harbour authority has managed to secure sufficient funds through docking fees, employment programs, and in-kind contributions of wharf users.

The Stonehaven Harbour Authority is a service provider to the commercial fishing industry, fish buyers, aquaculture, native fishery, tourism, and the local community. Stonehaven is predominantly a lobster fishing port with approximately 30 fishers, but a small fleet of both home and transient vessels remains at the wharf through late fall of each year. Other species fished include herring, groundfish, scallops, mackerel, and mussel aquaculture.

While the wharf is occasionally used by recreational boaters, this is not a significant issue. The commercial fishing fleet continues to be the main priority for the Stonehaven Harbour Authority.

What benefits and improvements have we experienced since the incorporation of the Stonehaven Harbour Authority? The harbour authority is the means to garner income for improvements at the wharf that are recognized and supported by the fishermen, and this is very important. We get them to agree to the improvements and the work that we present to DFO. We have been successful in improving several areas of the wharf.

Small wharves have a voice in the process, and we appreciate that, but we also acknowledge that it is a smaller voice with less impact as compared to the larger commercial ports.

Board members feel a true sense of community and ownership for the wharf facility. They have the ability to really influence change.

The board has the ability to establish rules and regulations that improve the day-to-day activity of the wharf for all users.

We have worked closely with small craft harbours staff in order to establish business plans, safety plans, and environmental management plans that were not in place prior to the harbour authority's implementation.

What are some of the frustrations we have experienced since the incorporation of the harbour authority? A small wharf cannot generate the revenue or the interest to warrant large infrastructure improvements, as is the case with the larger commercial wharves. We have fallen prey to the requirement to play the political game. Some harbour authorities may be more adept at the game than others, and from a pure moral stance we should not need to play the game in order to generate a reaction from small craft harbours.

There is an ever-increasing administrative burden placed on harbour authorities by government--small craft harbours, CRA, etc.--that speaks to Mr. Ferguson's comments. The level of managerial and communication skills required to function within the system is increasing. There is a benefit to being technically adept--computers, Internet, etc.--when dealing with government officials and other partners, but this level of management skills may not be available within all harbour authorities.

The same individuals continue to be heavily involved, resulting in some volunteer fatigue. This can be due to a requirement for their expertise or a lack of interest by others.

We believe there could be some inherent problems with the current process in place for major works and projects. Is it possible that costs for work submitted and completed by contractors is inflated as compared to the estimated costs determined by PWGSC? Is it true that a large percentage of the budget is also dedicated to administrative costs paid to internal partners such as PWGSC? If this is the case, this results in less work for the amount of dollars allocated to the harbour authority for any particular project.

While the harbour authority recognizes their responsibility to establish rules and regulations, we also recognize that we do not have the ability to police the enforcement of these rules. With a volunteer board and no full-time presence at the wharf, it's impossible to ensure that all users respect the rules established by the board. This reality creates frustrations for those who wish the harbour authority to take action against violators.

In conclusion, we would like to bring to your attention several areas that need to be addressed in order to bring Stonehaven wharf on par with surrounding wharves in northeastern New Brunswick. Our haul-out facility, the slip, needs to be repaired. Reconstruction of the west pier is required. Dredging is required within the wharf. These projects also have been in the system for a number of years. We recognize that the completion of these projects would represent a significant financial commitment on the part of the federal government. We will continue, however, to work closely with small craft harbours staff in the hopes of obtaining approval for these three work proposals.

On behalf of the board members of the Stonehaven Harbour Authority, we wish to express our appreciation to committee members for their time and interest. We truly appreciate this opportunity to provide input. We believe that the Stonehaven Harbour Authority is a good example of how the federal government can work closely with the volunteer sector for the benefit of the community and its people.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Ms. Payne.

Mr. MacAulay will lead off our questions. You have ten minutes, sir.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I will likely be sharing my time, but thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be here.

My first question would be slightly off the subject probably, but you talked about the mussel fishery. Are there any problems with invasive species?

[Thomas Kenny, Stonehaven Harbour Authority]

No, absolutely none in our area.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Good. That's short. Be careful; it's a big problem. We know. I'm from Prince Edward Island, and we're involved in this. It's a problem that was given to us by somebody. Nobody wants to take the blame, but it's very difficult to get the solution.

In your presentation you mentioned the cost of repairing wharves. From your involvement, I'd like you to comment on how you feel the harbour authority system works. You talk about the cost, and possible cost overruns have not been addressed. I don't know if you were involved previously--since you're so young, probably not--but you might have heard the cost is now more under control than it was before. It is better now than it was before the harbour authorities went in place. One of the reasons would be to have the fishermen involved in the actual maintenance of the harbours, which you are, of course.

Can you comment?

[Margot Payne]

I'll comment and then maybe Tom will add to it, because we sort of have a different opinion.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

That's what we're here for: we want to hear the different opinions.

[Margot Payne]

I've been involved with the harbour authority since it started in 1996. I believe that for the minor work, absolutely, there's an improvement, because less than $50,000 we're allowed to administer ourselves. So we go out and we get estimates and costs and we do the work and basically hire people ourselves. Over the $50,000, I feel those contractors recognize that they're working for the government, and I believe they inflate the price. I really do. I mean, we have work being done on our wharf right now that started in January.

[Thomas Kenny]

Even before that. It started the last of November.

[Margot Payne]

If you were running a project and you were laying cement, would you do that in the middle of winter, where you needed to plow a road about ten times this winter? You have to set up heat. The cost overrun is....

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Are you actually saying that the government can't do things as well as the private sector?

[Margot Payne]

I'm saying that occasionally the government might not do things as well as the private sector.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I thank you very much.

Mr. Mallet, I was very interested in your presentation. I would just like you to comment a bit more.

Of course, coming from a fisheries community myself, I'm well aware of the lack of money and the problems with DFO. But DFO can only distribute what government allots. You have good public servants here, I'm sure, as we have in Prince Edward Island and across the country. I feel, and I'm sure you feel, that governments need to invest more dollars--not all that's needed right at once, but there need to be more dollars invested into the small craft harbours repair budget in order to take care of the issue right across the country.

Also, I would like you to comment on how you feel we should deal with the project itself. Should there be a long-term business plan in place for these harbours or wharves before you are allotted dollars? Should you know where you're going?

What I'm getting at is that sometimes this repair dollar spent in fact is wasted. Or that's the view we get sometimes. Perhaps if you had a long-term plan in place for your harbour, it would mean that perhaps the maintenance dollars wouldn't be put to waste and you would actually have a better bang for your buck, if you know what I mean.

[Camille-André Mallet]

If you do the math, you will see that there are large sums involved. Recently, we repaired one third of our facilities. The total contract amounted to $5.2 million. That's a lot of money, but we should remember that the useful life of these wharves is 40 years. If you divide the total amount by 40, the amount per year is not very high.

As concerns strategy, we are currently working with the public servants. We have long-term plans. We are working very hard to achieve our goals, but we always run into the same problem: a lack of money. Our facilities and their high rate of use allow us to invest a bit of the fishermen's money in the repairs. We estimate that since the implementation of the program, the Administration portuaire de Shippagan has invested over $100,000, which comes directly from users. However, it only allows us to carry out minor repairs, since the cost of Maritime infrastructure can be unbelievably high.

We are administered by a board of directors. Since it was founded, the same directors have been sitting on our committees. My chairman, who is part of the National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee, was unable to be here today, and I find that a shame. He is currently in Quebec City for a national meeting.

We are extremely engaged and accomplish a great deal of work. As I said at the beginning, there is excellent cooperation between the public servants and ourselves. The problem does not lie with the public servants, because they receive our requests and work on them. The problem is that the money is simply not there.

I was speaking earlier with a Quebec representative and I was telling him that the situation in Quebec simply could not be compared to the situation in New Brunswick. Quebec has extraordinary facilities. I don't know how you manage to do it, but I take my hat off to you. I don't know if it's because there are fewer wharves than in New Brunswick, but as I said our facilities are coming to the end of their useful life. We are obliged to shut them down because the engineers with Public Works Canada have ordered us to do so, because otherwise accidents could occur.

As my colleague from Tracadie said, we are responsible for our facilities, given that, when the harbour authorities were created, we were given a fine package and told to look after it. That means that we are responsible, and that's why, if an engineer tells us to shut down a wharf because there are problems that could occur, we do so.

I would just like to repeat something because it is important. During conferences and recent meetings concerning small craft harbours, we were clearly told that if a problem occurred, we were responsible. We are obliged to take out insurance policies to protect our board of directors. Don't forget that today, especially in the case of my facilities, the users all have companies that are worth millions of dollars. Therefore, if a problem occurs while these people are using our facilities, they have the means to hire lawyers and sue us. Therefore we have to work on all aspects, whether...

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. MacAulay. You won't be sharing your time with anybody, because your time is up.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

I can ask a question every now and again, as chair, but first I have a point of clarification. I would just let you know--you may already be aware--that we did hear from the national advisory board on harbour authorities in Ottawa. Our committee had a great meeting with them. Maybe your representative was there at that time. We had a great session with the national advisory board earlier, before Christmas.

I want to ask you a question, Mr. Mallet. You mentioned insurance, that the harbour authority would have to cover insurance on the facility. My understanding was that small craft harbours covered insurance on the infrastructure that belonged to them. Would you clarify that for me? I may have just misinterpreted what you said.