Fisheries Committee on Nov. 26th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

I call this meeting to order.

Thank you very much for coming in to meet with our committee today, gentlemen. I have just a few housekeeping items before we begin.

Generally we allow about ten minutes for presentations. I understand that you each have some opening remarks before we get into questions and answers. Please try to be mindful that all the members have some time constraints, and they try to get as many questions and answers in as possible during that timeframe.

Gentlemen, unless there's anything else, I'd ask you to proceed with your presentation. I'm not sure who's going to lead off.

Mr. Fudge, you lead off, and we'll just work across. Would that be all right? It's totally up to you, whatever order you want to go in.

I'll just ask at this time, Mr. Fudge, if you want to proceed. Thank you.

[Morris Fudge, Member, Newfoundland and Labrador, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

Thank you, sir.

First of all, I'd like to thank you for inviting us here, and I would like to thank each and every one of you for the money we already got for the program. I'm sure it's going to go a long way into the program. But--I said but--it's not enough. We need a lot more.

Our infrastructure's been deteriorating so badly over the years that it's going to take a lot of money to get it up to standard. And even when we do get it there, it's going to take a lot of money to keep it up.

In the Newfoundland region right now we have about a hundred wharves that are really at the end of their lives. Three of those we had to shut down this year. Two of them are in the southwest area, where aquaculture's very heavy. They need those wharves in these areas.

If you have a problem getting rid of your money in other sectors, if you can't use the money we already have in the small craft harbours program, it's not a problem. We can use it for this.

Our economic action plan is going full out. I mean, we're well ahead of the game with that. That's thanks to our small craft harbours staff and Public Works. I have to include them, because those guys bend over backwards to keep us on track and to keep us going.

The last time I was before this committee, I asked for a wheelbarrow full of money. Thanks to you guys, again, we got a half of one. This time I'm asking for two wheelbarrows so that maybe we'll get lucky and get a full one.

Thank you very much.

[Osborne Burke, Member, Maritimes and Gulf, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

Good afternoon to Mr. Weston and the members. I'm pleased to be here today to speak to your committee about our small craft harbours facilities in the coastal communities across Canada.

My name is Osborne Burke, and I'm one of the volunteers on our National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee; in particular, I'm from the Maritimes and gulf region. I've had the pleasure of being here on at least two previous occasions representing the national HAAC, as with some of the others in the room, to come before the committee and make presentations. I'd also want to acknowledge that a large number of the 15 members, excluding ourselves, are sitting behind.

We're very appreciative of the support we've had from the committee. I know we're speaking to the converted here in relation to support for small craft harbours facilities, so we're very pleased. And we've been very pleased to see the dollars that have been put into it to date. As Morris said, it's not sufficient, but it's a start in the right direction.

To give you an appreciation of the scope of the Maritimes and gulf region, we're spanning three provinces, two of the five Department of Fisheries and Oceans regions. We've got about 236 harbour authorities, and about 281 core harbours are being managed by that group, about 41% of the national number of harbour authorities.

We're generating about a billion dollars a year in the commercial fishery, approximately $300 million in aquaculture, and through the harbour authorities themselves, right at this time according to our best estimate, about $10 million of revenue generation is being contributed to the overall picture.

As I said, with the $200 million in the economic action plan, I'm seeing the benefits in my community and we're seeing it in a lot of the areas. But as we say that, just in the Maritimes and gulf region for a snapshot, looking forward we've probably got in excess of $700 million worth of work that can still be done, and probably 1,500 to 1,700 potential projects in the long term. I think that, critically, what it comes down to is our A-base funding. It's great with the $200 million now, but what happens when the $200 million is gone, used? Hopefully we'll be able to use it all and use it very efficiently, but we need time to plan and we also need dollars. And in that core A-base funding is where we need the dollars to give ourselves the time, in partnership with small craft harbours directorate, Public Works, and other agencies, to plan it out and do it as efficiently as possible.

As Morris said, it's hats off to them right now in what they're doing in the timeframe they have. And we do have some harbours that are not in totally bad shape either. It's not that everything is crumbling, but there's a lot out there that need work.

In addition to that, in our Maritimes and gulf region, another issue that comes to the forefront is harbour authorities with virtually no authority, where volunteer groups attempt to collect fees, generate revenues, and are operating leased facilities belonging to the federal government with no ability to be able to enforce in a lot of the cases. This is something that needs to be looked at by this committee.

Thank you very much.

[Luc Legresley, Member, Quebec, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Luc Legresley and I represent the Quebec region. First, I want to thank the committee members for allowing us to be here today and for hearing our perspective. I think that we are directly involved with communities and fishing harbour users. What is important, today, is that the individuals appearing before you will tell you the truth about what is happening locally.

I believe that you have already received my prepared brief. So I do not need to repeat the budget data on fishing harbours. Everything is included in the document you received and it is a fairly clear portrait of the situation in Quebec.

Today, it is important, I believe, to look at various funds. Quebec's concerns are as follows: the collection of duties; the lack of funding; the devolution, or if you prefer, the transfer program; dredging, an extremely serious issue in the Quebec region; staff renewal within port authorities, an issue that truly requires our full attention. Added to this are the severity and number of storms.

I can tell you that on December 22 of last year, the Gaspé region suffered a terrible storm that I will always remember. It was so intense that we could no longer see one of the fishing wharves; it was totally buried under the waves. Imagine if there had been boats tied up at that wharf.

I have another concern. We now have $200 million, and people are happy, but what about after? This cannot be the end of it; it has to continue. Decisions made within government will be extremely important for the Harbour Authority Program.

Thank you very much.

[Stacy Linington, Member, Central and Arctic, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

I'm Stacy Linington, from Canyon Creek, Alberta, representing the north, central, and Arctic region.

Our existing facilities face the same operational issues as those of the other regions. Where we differ most is in the number of fishers who don't have access to any facilities at all.

In much of our area we have no DFO presence. There is no search and rescue or any other DFO presence, other than that represented by small craft harbours. These small craft harbours are operated and maintained by volunteers, and they serve only about 40% of the fishers in the central and Arctic region.

There are many other areas where the opportunity to develop sustainable commercial fisheries exists. Many of these are remote northern areas with indigenous people. We need the economic opportunities that a commercial fishery could offer.

The Pangnirtung project is a great start. However, we have many other opportunities to develop viable and sustainable commercial fisheries in our area. These opportunities exist in northern communities in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and the territories. When we consider the lack of facilities in our remote indigenous communities, it is indeed a very low percentage of the potential fishers in the central and Arctic region who have access to government-funded facilities. All these fishers deserve to have a safe harbour.

When I volunteered to participate as a member of this harbour authority I felt it was my responsibility to work with the government and work toward safe harbours for all of our fishers. It is to this end that I would respectfully ask that this group consider additional funding to aid in the economic development of viable and sustainable commercial fisheries in our northern communities.

For approximately $5 million the central and Arctic region could provide an additional 15 harbours to accommodate 400 to 500 fishers on the lakes in Great Slave Lake, Northwest Territories, Chip Lake in Northern Alberta, Baker Lake in Nunavut, Deschambault Lake in Saskatchewan, or the northern regions of Lake Winnipeg. As an example, Goodman's Landing has no facility there now, and there are 60 to 80 vessels that go there and 500,000 pounds of product are landed there now. There is no dock. At present they are beaching their vessels there at the landing and they offload from the beach. Whenever there is a storm that comes up it becomes impossible for them. They are losing product right now because of the lack of facilities to offload.

I can't stress enough the need for safe harbours in our region for commercial fishers of our area. We have all known fishers who died on a lake in the past few years. We feel that we deserve to have safe harbours, and we would like for our families to feel that we are safe while we are on the waters, especially when we are coming in to unload our catch.

Thank you.

[Ben Mabberley, Member, Pacific, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee]

My name is Ben Mabberley. I'm a commercial fisherman from Galiano Island in British Columbia. I was before this committee when it came out to B.C., and it's a pleasure to appear before you again.

We have a lot of varying issues in the Pacific region. You talk about dredging derelict vessels, issues like that, but what it really comes down to right across the country is the volunteers. We have 5,000 volunteers running over $3 billion worth of assets for the federal government. These are numbers that come out of your interim report, but there is something in your interim report on which we have done our research since then. If you look at the revenues that have been generated by harbour authorities over the last ten years, ten years ago harbour authorities generated $11 million in revenues toward the program. Today that number is $24 million. That does not include the man-hours that we put in, and that is 135,000 man-hours on top of the $24 million in revenue.

In that time the increase in our A-base budget has been around $10 million, so while all of these volunteers running government properties have increased their revenues by 250%, the government's increase has been less than 10%. When it comes right down to it, when, as they say, the rubber hits the road, it's all about A-base funding. If the government kept pace with the harbour authorities, and if you looked at the success of this harbour authority program—you only have to go around the country and look at these harbours and talk to the people and see the pride and see the state of these harbours since this program was instituted—you would understand what I'm talking about.

It's appropriate for the government to step up to the plate and increase the A-base funding to small craft harbours. I'm not saying that it has to be 250%, but they have to try to keep up with those people who are running the harbours for them. These are volunteers running your facilities for the benefit of all Canadians. If you look at the numbers, it's about 700-and-some-odd communities. These are big numbers. There are a lot of people putting in a lot of effort.

I look forward to answering any questions that you have today.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you very much, gentlemen.

Mr. Andrews, I believe you will start off.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you so much, gentlemen, for coming in today.

It was a pleasure earlier this week to go to the Prix d’Excellence awards for small crafts harbours and meet some of you there for the work that you did, the recognition that some of you received this week in receiving awards on behalf of your harbour authorities, or as individuals, for the work that you do. It was an excellent evening. I quite enjoyed myself meeting some of you there. It was a pleasure to take part in that. Congratulations to you on some of the awards that you have won this week for the work you do.

I have three questions. The first is not specific to any area, but it may relate to your area.

A number of years ago the coastal wharves were transferred from Transport Canada to small craft harbours directorate and then down to the individual harbour authorities. As you know, a lot of these wharves were much bigger than the ones you normally deal with. I was wondering about the impact that the transfer of these wharves to small craft harbours and then down to harbour authorities is now having on the harbour authorities as these properties get a little older. I'm not familiar with whether it's the same throughout all regions. I know it is in our region, in Newfoundland.

[Morris Fudge]

Well, it's not just recently that the harbour authority at Burin took over a public wharf from Public Works.

It happened to us, and it increased our revenue quite a bit. We now operate with big boats there, because we never had a place to tie up big fishing boats. It's too early for us to see what impact it will have on the harbour authority, because it's only a couple of years that we've been in the business. But it did generate more revenue for us.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

I know of a harbour authority that has one of these coastal wharves, and it needs some repair. It generates a lot of revenue for the harbour authorities. However, when small craft harbours were asked, they responded that they don't build that size of wharf any more and they weren't going to maintain that size, but they could tear it down and replace it, bring it in another 50 yards into shallower water and make it smaller. But they were not going to keep that same size of wharf.

The harbour authority is really upset, because it generates huge amounts of revenue for the harbour. Could you just elaborate on the revenue part, Morris?

[Morris Fudge]

Well, like I say, we do take in the revenue from them. Last year we had four Nova Scotia boats that landed that summer. It was something like $4,200 we made off the four boats for the month or so that they were landing fish. That's where they were tying up; it's the only place we had to tie them up. So yes, they do generate revenue.

What happened before we took over the wharf was they got the wharf up to standard. I don't know if there are too many of the harbour authorities that did take over those wharves. I don't know how many it is, but I don't think there are really that many.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

It's a good question. I know of a couple of incidents in my area, and I didn't know if it was like that across the country.

Speaking about boats getting bigger and bigger, they've changed regulations now, and people seem to be moving to bigger and bigger boats. What impact is that going to have on the harbour authorities?

[Luc Legresley]

I'd just like to make one comment if I could, Morris.

The one thing we saw with the whole fisheries renewal initiative and other programs of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans outside of small craft harbours is that there's a lot of consultation done with fishermen's organizations, and those people--in fisheries and aquaculture management's eyes--were the ones to consult. But in many cases they forget about the harbour authorities and the potential impacts it will have. Whether you're talking about vessels that are going in Newfoundland from 64-11 up to 89-11, it's going to have an impact--larger boats, much larger; fewer boats in some cases. In some cases we've seen increases because of changes in fisheries policy.

The one thing we've been raising nationally is the need to consult with groups such as ours, from a harbour authority perspective, because we're the last ones they think about in terms of a potential impact. At the same time, people like to talk revenue generation, and we have policies that are changing, but we're not being consulted. Let's face it, they have to leave from a harbour and come back to a harbour, so it does have an impact, the policy and changes that are happening. In the west coast we've seen there have been buybacks or purchases of licences, access to licences, but no vessels, and some of the harbour authorities are left to deal with vessels that become abandoned or derelict.

So there are a number of issues there where some consultation in the initial stages would have been, I'm sure, very useful.

[Ben Mabberley]

I have a couple of comments.

When you talk about the Transport Canada docks, I think in our region the certain impact that it had was that a lot of our uses for various harbours suddenly had to be amalgamated into one harbour. I know that especially in my area we had a Transport Canada dock that we were using for an off-loading facility.

When that was divested, we no longer had access to an off-loading facility. We took over two of the other harbours on our island, but it's been ten years now that we've been gradually working towards being able to off-load on the island. That's ten years we've lost, not having summers where we can adequately off-load. I think Osborne touched on it. It's the consultation, when these things are taking place.

The buybacks are a really good example. If you look at PICFI, the purchasing of licences, that isn't a buyback. It is a reallocation of licences to first nations. What those fisheries will look like, we don't know yet. We have to be able to plan to be able to accept not only those boats but also the fish, the off-loading of fish. A big part of it is being involved in the process so that we can plan at our harbours to facilitate whatever changes are coming into place. It's really important.

[Luc Legresley]

Boats are constantly increasing in size, which is causing congestion in the Magdalen Islands. Some forty boats will need to use Transport Canada infrastructure instead of the Fisheries and Oceans infrastructure, which represents a very serious problem. On the Magdalen Islands, expansion work enabling the provision of adequate service to 40 or 50 additional boats would cost over $10 million. It is essential to also consider the fact that increasing boat size means larger drafts.

So, dredging will be increasingly necessary in order to enable these boats to enter current harbours. Whether we like it or not, dredging is quite costly. Furthermore, there are many more requirements related to energy consumption, in particular. This is creating numerous problems for port authorities. Costs are ever increasing. I would like to mention, for example, the fact that about a dozen boats are so large that they have to remain in the water, in the ice, because they cannot be taken out and dry-docked. This is creating many problems.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Finally, I have another thought. We discussed it at our last meeting as well: the working relationship that you have with recreational boaters and the relationship between the commercial side and the recreational side, and then where small craft harbours fit in there, because in a lot of incidents you have a lot of recreational boaters. If you could do something for them, you would move them from one part of your harbour to another and free up space on the commercial side.

I'm wondering if I could just get your thoughts on the recreational boater side, and on how small craft harbours treat recreational boaters in the scheme of things. Is it important?

[Osborne Burke]

Perhaps I may speak to that.

I'm a president of a harbour authority where there are six harbours. We've merged together voluntarily. In some of those facilities we do accommodate recreational vessels, so it's not so much small craft harbours as small craft harbours facilities. We will request funding to rebuild the facilities or do what we can. Where possible, we would try to put some floating docks for recreational vessels on one side of the harbour, looking at the potential of revenue generation. There are some facilities where it's just not suitable to have a recreational component, but there are some where there is a willingness to do it.

Our harbour authority board of directors, for example, includes a representative of recreational boaters. We try to encourage it wherever possible. In the long term, I think there's potential for that, from one coast to the other, where possible, to increase revenues. Again, that's part of our lease. It's not only the commercial fishery—which is a priority, of course, to us—but it does also state public access. From a tourism potential, a recreational boating potential, wherever we can try to accommodate that, I think most harbour authorities have.

[Morris Fudge]

In the Newfoundland region we accommodate recreational boats, but the fisherman comes first. If we get space and so on for recreational boats, then we get to do it. There's a lot of revenue in that, and we do the best we can for those guys. We don't have any complaints with them, and I'm sure they appreciate it. It's not only for the Newfoundlanders. These yachts come in from all over the world. We're having yachts in Burin. We accommodate them to the best of our ability. We just haven't got a problem with that.

[Stacy Linington]

In our area in Alberta we actually adjust our commercial fishing seasons around the angling. We fish early in the spring and late in the fall, typically before school is out, and not again until after school is back in. We do that deliberately to make room for the anglers, because they help support our facility. Their fees pay most of the shot for our facility for the year, so we do whatever we can to accommodate the anglers at our facility.

We don't view them as a problem, but once in a while they view us as so. We do whatever we can to accommodate them, and I believe it's the same throughout the central and Arctic region.

[Ben Mabberley]

In the Pacific region, as you know, it's a big source of our revenue. We rely heavily on recreational boaters. The one advantage we have, of course, is year-round moorage. We don't have to pull boats out and we don't have ice problems. So our ability to accommodate recreational boaters through the winter is a big source of revenue for us.

Keep in mind that we are fishing harbours. The relationship with small craft harbours is actually a relationship between harbour authorities and recreational boaters. As a harbour authority we give priority to our commercial fishermen. We accommodate recreational use when we can, because we need the revenue. It's clear when you look at the numbers that we need all the revenue we can get into this program.

I think the relationship's pretty good. As Stacy said, maybe sometimes we're viewed as being a little bit of the problem, but they're fishing docks, and that's the number-one priority.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you.

Monsieur Blais.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Members of the national harbour authority advisory committee, good day.

This week, the committee members had a discussion. We talked a great deal about the request for proposals process. It was announced that there is a certain amount of money in the budget for repairs, etc. Is there sufficient oversight of the process to ensure that delays will not be an issue? Perhaps the requests for proposals will be announced in early fall and, as a result, work may not commence before next year.

I wanted to hear from you and learn whether, for each region, the current request for proposals process is sufficiently clear, smooth and reasonably quick from the time the funding is allocated to the program to the time you learn that your application has been given priority. Is there anything in the request for proposals process that needs to be changed? I would like to hear from Mr. Legresley first, and then the others.

[Luc Legresley]

The best people to talk to you about that are members of the regional boards. However, from having spoken with different people waiting for some work to be done, I can tell you that the process is sometimes slow, particularly when we know that winter is coming, for example. Without taking sides and saying that the work has not been well done, I think that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is doing quite extensive work in order to be able to respect government standards. In fact, we are asking it to spend $200 million over two years. If we asked it to do this over three years, things would be done differently. I can answer you in the affirmative, but it depends on the region.

In Quebec, it's not always easy, since there are fewer and fewer entrepreneurs, a fact that you must be aware of. Each time there is a request for proposals, there might be one or two bids whereas, previously, there would have been three, four, five or more. I know that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is doing its best in Quebec, but I am convinced that there may be a staff shortage, that it does not have all the staff it needs to properly promote its files. That can be a disadvantage.

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

Morris?

[Morris Fudge]

To me, the earlier in the year they can get those projects out the better, in the Newfoundland region. We're on the northeast coast, and after January the ice comes in and you really can't do much work. So you want to get the projects out early in the spring and get the work done in the summertime. Most of the projects come out in March, and then it's July, August, or maybe September before you get started, and then it's too late in the fall. So I think the projects should be announced and attended to earlier in the year.