I am Jacques Dufresne of the Rivière-au-Renard harbour authority.
About a month ago, the media reported that Rivière-au-Renard was doing very well because it was a large port with a high volume. Let me tell you why. In 2001, Fisheries and Oceans allocated $700,000 to plan a rationalization project, including the rock filling of wharves, and the demolition and installation of pontoons within the harbour. We were technically ready and had properly defined our needs. We had also drafted the things that were to be done. We were lucky to have everything we needed.
At the meeting that dealt with the rationalization, the harbour authority presented its project, which was rather well developed. Everyone supported it and we began to rebuild the facilities. Of course, that represented a lot of work. Things just didn't come out of the blue. The harbour authorities had to work very hard. We did, however, receive a lot of technical support from engineers and harbour authority managers. In the course of the process, we came to realize that harbour authority managers at a regional level were more concerned with slashing budgets or managing in a very cost-efficient manner. In my view, there was a lack of vision for the development of the port and a lack of technical assistance.
I came away from the discussions that were held in the Gaspé with the sense that harbour authorities do not have the vision and technical assistance needed to make project proposals. The people who manage those administrations, whether they come from Quebec City or Montreal, also lack the required technical knowledge and basically work to maintain tight control over operations, save money and make use of volunteers to carry out all the work. That might be one of the problems.
A wharf can hold surprises. I'd compare it to an iceberg: one-eighth of it is visible above the surface, but the rest is under water. It is quite difficult for a harbour authority that might not have the required skills to estimate how much it will cost to repair part of a wharf or paving stone. If there is a tear or a gaping hole under water, you might well repair the wharf, but it won't solve the problem. A number of wharves are in a bad state. I had an opportunity to get an underwater view of every single wharf in Quebec. I think everyone is full of good intentions, but we should perhaps change the way we do things.
Up-to-date, we have invested $11 million in Rivière-au-Renard and we'll need to inject another 4 or 5 million. Because we submitted structured and well-founded projects, we were able to carry them out without any problems, contrary to what we might have thought. But in order for a harbour authority to carry out such projects... Few people have what it takes to carry them out. In my view, that's a problem.
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans no longer offers that service. In the past, Public Works Canada regularly came to conduct structural analyses and hold discussions with harbour authorities. However, that is increasingly no longer the case and harbour authorities are less and less aware of the state of their wharves. They try to carry out minor repairs as best they can, which explains the results we are seeing today. If we are to save harbour authorities, technical assistance has to be provided and creative solutions have to be found. That would change a lot of things.
That's all.