Fisheries Committee on Dec. 3rd, 2007

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

I have a couple of questions, one just to confirm the previous one, when I ran a little out of time.

Just so I can be clear, is this five-year appropriation for the regulatory system in natural resource projects going to be $5.9 million over each of the next five years? It's in addition?

[Michelle d'Auray]

Yes, the average is around, if I recall, $8 million a year. The allocation for this fiscal year is for the first year.

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

Okay, thank you.

My next question is on your funding for the coast guard and the coast guard vessel life extensions. There's $4 million there. What I'd like to understand is how common a practice it is for this life extension expenditure to be in the supplementary estimates.

The second thing is, what is the life extension timeline? These are all in vote 5, which means they're in capital, so I would assume there would be a fairly lengthy life extension to these vessels.

My third question, associated with that, is how this line item maps to the line item on the next page, which is $23 million to establish a fleet refit capital budget. If we're talking about a life extension refit, to me they're probably about the same thing.

If you could answer those for me, that would be great.

[Commr George Da Pont]

To start with, vessel life extensions are becoming extremely common. Our fleet, as you undoubtedly know, is getting older. We've had significant investment in new vessels, but it will take some time to procure them. In the meantime we have to make major investments to keep the existing fleet going. How much additional time comes from a vessel life extension varies from vessel to vessel, but generally it's five to ten years for the investment.

On the $4 million, it is carry-forward funding that we had intended to spend in the previous year. Because of complications around shipyard time and other things, we've had to include it in the supplementary estimates as part of a carry forward. It funds part of two projects: one on the west coast with the Sir Wilfrid Laurier, and one on the east coast with the Alfred Needler.

The $23 million for vessel refit corrects what has been a difficult issue for us. We have covered vessel refit costs from major capital sources, operating sources, and minor capital. Each had an authority to do very specific things, and it made it very difficult to manage when we drew from the same pots of money for one project.

So we went to the Treasury Board to create a new general refit authority within major capital. We're transferring what had previously been in operating into that authority so we can have one global refit budget.

It is a bit different from vessel life extensions. Vessels require repairs and upgrades on an ongoing basis, and sometimes they can be significant. But they're different from a major vessel-life extension, where we do very significant work and generally spend anywhere from $6 million to $15 million on one life extension.

[Michelle d'Auray]

What Mr. Da Pont was explaining actually clarifies and makes a lot more transparent how much is being used for refit and how much is being used for major life extensions over and above day-to-day maintenance.

There is another fund for major capital, if you wish, or for procurement purposes. Rather than trying to pick and choose from a variety of funds, we now have maintenance, life extension, and major capital projects.

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

Okay.

There's a line item showing $3.136 million for funding related to the assessment, management, and remediation of federal contaminated sites. I suspect that with the number of federal contaminated sites we have there'd be a fair.... Will that be ongoing, or is it based on another initiative, if this line item is now in the budget?

[Michelle d'Auray]

The funds are an overall allocation that the government manages through the Treasury Board Secretariat. I will ask Mr. Hegge to respond to the specifics.

[Cal Hegge]

Basically it is ongoing. It is kind of planned out. There's a huge amount of money going into this from the government. It's a matter of allocating the resources in the year in which we can best use them. You'll probably see it as part of the supplementary estimates throughout, as we try to match the funding with the sites we're going to address.

So DFO is one of a number of participating departments in this government-wide program.

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

The last question I have is on the reinvestment of royalties from intellectual property. What intellectual property are those royalties coming from?

[Michelle d'Auray]

It's mainly with regard to the science sector. A number of investments are made and approaches developed. Occasionally we will issue them to be developed and applied in the private sector, rather than manage them ourselves. We receive royalties from the use of them.

There was one initiative or development in particular that generated a fair amount of royalties that we are showing. But I can get back to you with the specifics.

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

That would be great.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Acting Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Thank you, Mr. Allen.

Now we'll go over to the Liberal Party and Mr. Lawrence MacAulay, from the great island of Prince Edward Island.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much.

I see there's just under $20 million in small craft harbours. You're no doubt aware that there was a motion that was supported by all the House for $35 million. I wonder if you could give us somewhat of an understanding as to what's been done with Treasury Board in order to acquire that $15 million. Of course, as we're all aware on this committee, that doesn't even attend to what needs to be attended to with infrastructure problems.

As well, on Prince Edward Island we have a blue mussel industry. I'd like to know where funds would be acquired or what can be done with the invasive species, the vase tunicate and this type of invasive species, that are going to destroy the mussel industry off the coast of Prince Edward Island if something is not done.

[Michelle d'Auray]

With regard to the funds for the small craft harbours, as I think my colleague indicated earlier, we are working on a business case. We do recognize, as I think has been stated many times before this committee, that there is a gap, and an increasing one. We are working with our colleagues from the Treasury Board Secretariat on the business case that would encourage an increase in the funding.

With regard to the invasive species, we have in fact met with our colleagues from Prince Edward Island, as well with ACOA, the economic development agency, to see what in fact could be provided in terms of direct technical support for the aquaculture enterprises.

In terms of the invasive species per se, in terms of the science work that we have done, there are some techniques that can be used in order to, I would say, contain, but it's not something that we can eradicate. So the techniques have to be used on a recurring basis in order to remove this rather ugly invasive species from the mussel.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

You mentioned that they're going to ACOA for funding. Would this not be a fisheries responsibility? Why is it ACOA funding that would be used in this situation?

[Michelle d'Auray]

The issue is to acquire the equipment necessary. I'm not a specialist in this area, but I understand that there is a high-powered water treatment that can be used. To purchase the equipment around that is not a fisheries activity, but if businesses want to make the acquisition of that, perhaps ACOA would be one opportunity for them to do so.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Okay. I'll pass on to Geoff.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. MacAulay and Mr. Chairman.

You spoke earlier of creating a network of marine protected areas. How is that a measurable goal?

[Michelle d'Auray]

The issue around that is to be able to have similar approaches, similar standards, to be able to identify across Canada which are the areas that the country would identify as protected areas, so that in fact, as a standard internationally, they can also be recognized and we can establish leadership. I guess from the point of view of a specific goal or result, it would give us a coherent approach across the country.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Let me ask it a different way: how many do we have now in place?

[Michelle d'Auray]

Currently I believe we have six areas and are moving to nine.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Were there two areas put in place over the last 22 months or so? Did I see an announcement this summer on two areas? When were the last ones announced, and how many have been announced since the current government has been in office?

[Michelle d'Auray]

I would have to get back to you on the specifics of that.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Do any of your colleagues know? Do the ADMs know?

I guess the question really is that the department—I shouldn't say “we” anymore—has talked for a while about the goal of establishing a network. The thing is, when will the public know? How will the public be able to look at that and say, “Well, they've done it”, or “No, they haven't done it”? Is it 10 MPAs or 20? Is there a magic number?

You've talked about standards. Again, that's not really a measurable thing.

[Michelle d'Auray]

In some ways, yes, I suppose if you said here's a finite number and here are the MPAs, here they all are.... But I think the goal for us in terms of the network is to have a coherent approach and standards.

Have we identified them all at this point? I don't think so. So is there a finite number? Probably. Do we know what the specific number happens to be today? Not that I know of. Do we have an approach that allows us to deal with them on a consistent basis, so that there are ways in which, once they are set up...how they're managed, who manages them, how we deal with the approaches, for example, in terms of shipments, in terms of ecological sustainability, all of those things? That's what we mean about a network and a standardized approach.

So those are measurable elements in some ways to say yes, we do have a national approach to these things.