Fisheries Committee on March 26th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Good morning, everyone. I would like to begin this morning's meeting by offering Madam Dansereau the opportunity to make some opening comments. I'd ask you to introduce your delegation at that time.

Thank you very much for being here this morning to meet with our committee.

Madam Dansereau.

[Claire Dansereau, Deputy Minister, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for allowing us the opportunity to provide some information on our international activities and especially to answer your questions about the travel, specifically Ms. Ridgeway's travel.

May I introduce, on my far left, Ms. Michaela Huard, Assistant Deputy Minister of Policy in our department. On my left, Ms. Lorraine Ridgeway, who is the subject of much discussion these days, and the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Fisheries and Aquaculture Management, Mr. David Bevan, whom everyone knows, I believe.

Mr. Chair, as the chief accounting officer for the department, I am accountable for departmental expenditures including those that relate to our international activities and to all our other activities, including travel. I want to emphasize that all travel in the department is pre-approved by managers according to priorities and relevance. All international travel is approved either by an assistant deputy minister, the level directly below mine—so approval for international travel is done at a very high level—or by a regional director general, or the Canadian Coast Guard Commissioner. I personally sign off on the travel of the people I have just mentioned. They sign off on the travel of people at lower levels and I sign off on the travel of managers at higher levels.

Ms. Ridgeway's travel is authorized by Ms. Huard. That is why she is here today. All reimbursement claims for travel are audited for accuracy and consistency with government guidelines.

Our work is complicated internationally. Canada has three oceans, the world's longest coastline, and strong reliance on balancing use and conservation of our resources, which we wish to preserve by influencing international debate and practice.

DFO's mandate covers both fisheries and oceans. Fishing is a global industry, as we all know. Canada exports more than 80% of its fish and seafood, which translated into $3.9 billion last year and is Canada's largest food export. Canada, therefore, has significant fishing interests to protect and advance. International engagement is critical.

This is a complex policy and management field, increasingly dominated by new players and power arrangements and by new issues, such as linking fisheries to environmental and trade issues. We seek to influence international policies and standards for healthy, productive, and sustainable fisheries. We ensure consistency between international and domestic priorities and standards.

For example, combatting illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing is an important goal of the Government of Canada because it threatens legitimate fishers' livelihoods and ecosystems. DFO plays an important role in this area through activities under the Food and Agriculture Organization, or FAO, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or OECD, and elsewhere with our international allies. This work includes the development of new frameworks and standards. We will provide you with further details on this.

I must say that Ms. Ridgeway is a recognized expert at working in this complex arena.

Advancing and protecting Canada's interests internationally on fisheries and oceans matters requires working strategically and tactically through international organizations and with other states. This means being present and engaged internationally to truly influence the international agenda and specific issues over their life cycle.

We are well organized to advance our international work effectively. The breadth of the DFO mandate, unusual in many countries, helps us understand how fisheries, oceans, and trade policy and management issues link together. We have formalized this into an international strategy with specific objectives and plans. The government's international governance strategy, for which we received permanent funding in 2008, guides our strategic engagement. It knits together the priorities and specialized contributions of various DFO sectors. Our international priorities and achievements have been highlighted to Parliament in DFO's report on plans and priorities and in departmental performance reports since 2005.

Lori Ridgeway, as director general of international policy and integration in the policy sector, is accountable for the overall integration of the international strategy within the department and with other departments. Ms. Ridgeway and her team are called on to represent Canada in a range of fora, on a variety of highly technical topics. As an international policy expert and negotiator, she leads specific activities related to multilateral international fisheries, oceans and biodiversity issues, and trade-related policies. She is involved in formal international organizations, such as the OECD, the FAO, and APEC, which is the Pacific organization for economic cooperation, as well as other key international organizations. She has often been elected by her peers in those organizations to chair committees or workshops or other activities.

Some specific activities have captured recent media attention because of the location and length of the meetings. One of the cases highlighted concerned an APEC oceans ministerial meeting in 2005, hosted by Indonesia and co-chaired by our minister. Ms. Ridgeway chaired the senior officials meeting. It was Indonesia that chose the hotel in which the meetings were held, and its choice turned out to be fortuitous, because a terrorist bombing occurred very shortly thereafter in a hotel in the vicinity. We all remember that bombing.

The meeting's success was largely attributed to Ms. Ridgeway's leadership on the negotiation in the senior officials meeting of a detailed action plan and proposed ministerial declaration. Ministers fully endorsed the Bali plan of action as a marine-sustainable development plan for the region and committed APEC leaders, including Canada's leaders, to help strengthen economic well-being founded on healthy regional fisheries and oceans. APEC accounts for 75% of global capture fisheries and 90% of global aquaculture.

Ms. Ridgeway also travelled to the annual NAFO meetings held in Estonia and chaired two separate OECD meetings, which included the committee on fisheries.

An excellent example of the domestic significance of our international policy work is related to various proposals, by mainly environmental organizations, in 2006 to ban bottom trawling, an activity worth almost $1 billion annually to Canadians and one that supports more than 10,000 jobs.

Ms. Ridgeway brokered a 2006 UN resolution on this matter that's now widely considered to be the most important regime shift in fisheries in recent years. It allows bottom fisheries to proceed, while avoiding significant adverse impacts to vulnerable marine ecosystems. Her efforts to bring a sharply divided international community to a consensus on this issue, one that is strongly supported by both industry and environmental organizations, fundamentally protected and advanced Canadian interests.

What are the implications of not being at such debates? International discussions and decisions affecting our short-run and long-run interests occur whether Canada is present or not. Nobody waits for us to be there; we must ensure we are there.

In the case of bottom trawling, a badly polarized global debate was facing stalemate. This placed a UN resolution at risk, one that contained many issues of critical interest to Canada, including a commitment by the global community to advance reform of regional fisheries management organizations—a much needed reform, which I think everybody recognizes.

Promoting or defending Canadian interests in a complex international agenda requires an investment of both expertise and funds. We are guided by a comprehensive strategy that has been approved at the highest level, and we strategically engage with the right people to maximize our influence.

To conclude, I want to assure you that, as DFO's new deputy minister, I know that we must remain as cost-effective as possible, especially in these tough economic times. I know that and I understand it completely. This includes ongoing scrutiny of DFO's international activities to ensure that we are making careful choices as to where we can be most effective and produce the best results for Canadians. As we come to the start of the new fiscal year, I have asked for and have received a departmental plan for international travel for the coming year. We will be scrutinizing it carefully to make sure that we are sending the right people to the right key meetings. On that, you have my word.

That is all I have to say. We are ready to answer your questions, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Merci.

Mr. Byrne.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I guess we'll hear directly from Ms. Ridgeway in the context of our questions.

What I basically want to know, Ms. Ridgeway, is if there's a particular element of your international plan that you're particularly proud of in your accomplishments. One of the things I've noted in relation to your line of duties was your help in negotiating and skilfully managing various complex and difficult files, such as the amendments to the NAFO convention, the defence of the Canadian seal hunt, the negotiations related to the WTO and fishery subsidies, and, as well, the Law of the Sea and the jurisdiction over the extended continental shelf.

One of the concerns I have is that we've had two former assistant deputy ministers of Fisheries and Oceans come before this committee and say that the amendments to the NAFO convention that have recently been negotiated are, quite frankly, destructive of Canadian international policy interests. We now have a situation where France will soon be claiming a significant portion of Canada's continental shelf and will be filing that claim with the United Nations under the Law of the Sea provisions. We have a complete ban potentially occurring in Europe on Canadian seal products. And we all know that Canada's position with regard to WTO and international fishing subsidies does not mesh with the rapporteur's recommendations or report.

For the money that has been spent on international policy development, we as a committee, or some of us on the committee, feel that we have been less than successful on those elements.

Why don't you add some input on those concerns I've raised?

[Claire Dansereau]

If I may, Mr. Chair, comment quickly on the division of the responsibilities, Ms. Ridgeway will answer in her areas of real expertise. Ms. Ridgeway is not responsible for the entire file.

As I said in my opening remarks, it's a collective approach, in the sense that there are people, for example, in Mr. Bevan's shop who are responsible for much of the work in the RFMOs, and that's one of the reasons why Mr. Bevan is here with us today. The seal file is one that is directed primarily by me, with the help of Ms. Ridgeway and the people in Mr. Bevan's office.

So if I may, I think it would be valuable to the committee to ask Ms. Ridgeway to speak on those areas she has direct responsibility for.

[Lorraine Ridgeway, Director General, International Policy and Integration, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you very much.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

Thank you very much for allowing me to appear here to answer your questions and explain how our international activities fit together.

With respect to how our activities fit with the activities of those who lead very specific files, I would start by saying that what we need to do in order to achieve sustainable fisheries, to achieve sustainable oceans and biodiversity, and to achieve a fair trading system--the three areas where I would be more specifically responsible at the multilateral level--is to build a system of governance that fits together. That's from the broadest set of laws, through to very specific laws, through to implementing activities such as guidelines and other kinds of laws, and then it gets into management applications. It's a system that all works together, and it also makes sure incentives are aligned.

The part that lays out the enabling framework--the norms, the policy frameworks, the agenda-setting, and all of that in a multilateral sense--is what I am responsible for in those kinds of areas.

The negotiation of the operational regulatory management, especially at the regional and bilateral level, would, in the fisheries area, be under David Bevan. I also don't have specific responsibilities for any of the seal fishers, who are also in David's area. That's how we would fit together. We work very closely, and our stakeholders understand how we work together.

Just before I answer your very specific question about specific activities, I'll describe our strategy. We started to build our strategy in 2005 and made it permanent in 2008. It is a strategy that aligns the department behind a common vision. It builds a very coherent, competent, united team that can play for those issues coherently across all sorts of forums. That's what is going to give us international influence, because we want buy-in to our vision on these issues.

To answer your very specific question about things I'm proud of, I feel I've played a very major role in a number of activities, but you raised the one of subsidies, so maybe I should start there.

It is true, of course, that right now the international negotiations are going through a very, very slow track in the Doha Round in Geneva. The subsidies negotiations are part of that round, and the fisheries subsidies are just a small part of, or just an annex on, the rules negotiations.

That's not where it started. It started quite a long time ago, although the negotiations have been going on for seven years. It started in an area where I could say I did play a role. You've met some of my staff for now at the negotiations, but I don't go to those negotiations specifically. I'm not a detailed trade expert, but we knew this Doha Round was coming, and we needed to make sure our interests were protected. That meant getting international agreement on some parameters of that discussion, parameters that would be very important to us when the time came.

I was chair of the OECD fisheries committee for six years. That gave me a tremendous amount of influence in terms of getting items onto the agenda and getting outputs that would have a huge impact on the way the world saw those negotiations when they came.

At the time this was happening, in the early 2000s, the U.S. and some other countries had a very strict resolution that they wanted ministers to adopt. It basically said that all fisheries subsidies were bad and all fisheries subsidies had to be eliminated. We knew this idea was not in our interests, so we organized a program of work over a period of years that resulted in publications that are available from the OECD, the think tank for fisheries issues. They got buy-in to the concept of different kinds of subsidies, and we laid out an organizing framework to think about them. We started to collect data on them to show that maybe it's not such a simple picture.

I moved from that into a project on trade liberalization that showed where we really needed to fix things, and then started to take it apart, and then moved into some more analysis, which again was published, to show how to think about certain components. That's the kind of work that gets buy-in to a certain framework, which we can now rely on when we get into those negotiations. While I'm not at the table, the kinds of things that we agree, with the points that have been made here, ought not to be in the chair's text, we can now, in the way he's taken the negotiations, refer back to that literature to make our case.

That's how we got ahead of some issues, and I'm quite proud we did it. It's true as well in other areas, but I won't take up any more time in answering.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

In this context, I think it would be important to ask the question. All of these out-of-pocket expenses that were incurred were indeed audited, I assume, and were in full compliance with all audit requirements. Can you give just a very quick answer, for the benefit of the record?

[Lorraine Ridgeway]

Yes.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

I think that is very important, because there should be no supposition of impropriety here, nor should it ever be assumed, and that I think is very important for your professional reputation. I think all members of this committee recognize the professional standards of the Public Service of Canada. I want to get that off the table. You have been audited, per se, and there has been no malfeasance whatsoever--suspected or assumed.

[Claire Dansereau]

I did want to attest to that. Yes, all of it is audited. As we said in the opening remarks, the choice of venue is never our choice.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Then let's get to the value. That's really the substance. You obviously have taken a direct point of mine. I have questioned some of the value that has been achieved at some of these international fora. Obviously I would do that, because I don't necessarily see the results that you do.

You obviously forecast what your requirements will be for future activities. What will be the budget in future years for your activities and for your directorate in general?

[Claire Dansereau]

As you know, we go through this every year, and at this point in time we are looking....

As I said in my opening remarks, I just received the travel plans for everybody for the coming year, and I intend to scrutinize them carefully to make sure that we can get the results people are looking for, even though they may not be the results this year. As Ms. Ridgeway said, sometimes it takes five years to get a result, so it's hard to show on a year over year basis whether we're making progress. Sometimes it simply means yes, we're getting along better because they like us more, which means that three years from now we can actually get an outcome.

We can, through our reports on plans and priorities, provide you with past budgets and the amounts allocated for this. It's not a significant portion of the department's budget. I'm sorry, I've forgotten the percentage. We can certainly provide you with the upcoming.... The reports on plans and priorities were actually tabled today, so some of that information is there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you. Your time is up.

We'll go to Madame Faille.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you very much. Today, I am taking a colleague's place, but normally I sit on the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. We have not yet had to deal with a file from Fisheries and Oceans, so I have not worked in this area. But I have worked at international level and I can understand how expensive travel can be. Logistically, too, there is the question of the availability of rooms, because a number of the places that you visited host major conferences. I just wanted to make sure that the hotels you stayed at are those suggested by the conference organizers. That would then mean that the security of all the participants, all the other aspects of the conference, and the logistic support are provided in one spot.

When you travel, do you go alone or do you take staff?

[Claire Dansereau]

That always depends on the trip. Sometimes, it is just one person. However, if we have a number of matters to discuss, we send the appropriate number of people. We also often try to take advantage of a person being in a certain country by asking them to attend meetings that they would not normally attend. So we try to send the fewest number of people possible, while sending as many as are necessary to do the work properly.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

For the benefit of my colleagues, the total amount for Ms. Ridgeway's travel that we were talking about was about $400,000. That probably does not represent the entire amount spent to support international activities. That could be much higher.

Can you give us an idea of how much it cost this year?

[Claire Dansereau]

We discussed that yesterday. It was $2 million.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

The reason I asked the question is that I just came from Washington, and, on the plane, I was sitting with officials from Ottawa. They explained to me that some officials had left a few days earlier in order to do the set-up work. It was similar in a way to Ms. Ridgeway's situation. My colleagues should understand that we are not just talking about $400,000. We are talking about a budget of more than $2 million.

[Claire Dansereau]

It is just under $2 million.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Okay, but it is around $2 million.

[Claire Dansereau]

It is around $2 million for the international activities of the whole department.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

For international activities, but for Fisheries.

[Claire Dansereau]

For Fisheries and Oceans.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

You mentioned that you are in the middle of preparing budgets for the coming year. But do you know what conferences you are planning to attend, in support of Canada's trade efforts?

Do you already have an idea about the extent of that?

[Claire Dansereau]

It will be about the same. I will not accept anything higher.