Evidence of meeting #7 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was negotiations.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
What was the highest position you went to?
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
You want to know the latter part of my career. After being on the fisheries side for a while, I was assistant deputy minister of science from 1986 to 1988. For four years I was away from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, writing a book on the management of marine fisheries in Canada and doing a Ph.D. at McGill University. I returned to the department in the 1990s. I again became assistant deputy minister of science from 1994 to 1998. In 1998, during the latter part of that period, I worked with this committee on the Oceans Act. I was responsible for leading the development of the Oceans Act and working with the committee to get it through Parliament. Then the department established the position of assistant deputy minister of oceans, and I became the first assistant deputy minister of oceans. That was the last executive position I held in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
Subsequent to that, I was on special assignment as president of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, ICES, the intergovernmental marine science organization headquartered in Copenhagen, 19 members who provide advice to the European Union and other countries.
Then I retired.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
That's a long career, and I get tired just listening to it.
12:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Is it fair to say that you were in key positions when the east coast northern Atlantic cod fishery was going through its most difficult times? In fact, we can blame foreign overfishing for the collapse of the cod stocks, but I think this committee knows, and others know, that there's more to it than that. Were you part of the decision-making during those years?
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
Shame on you, Mr. Member. Shame on you and shame on the people at DFO who provided you with that question.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Nobody provided me with that question. It's a valid question, and I want—
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
I will answer the question, but it's a shame that the question should be asked on this topic.
I was assistant deputy minister of science from 1986 to 1988. I returned to that position in 1994. Before returning to that position in 1994, I worked with the establishment, under Mr. Crosbie, of the Fisheries Resource Conservation Council, and in that capacity I worked to ensure that in fact moratoria were introduced on the cod stocks. I was not present in an executive capacity at DFO, contrary to the popular perception that some people have perpetrated. I was not present in an executive position at DFO during the period 1988 to 1992, leading up to the cod collapse.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Fair enough.
Let me go to the negotiations, then. You've made some pretty strong statements about a number of people, I think. You've sort of impugned the EU negotiators and their motivations in this. You've said you've got an idea of what was motivating the fisheries minister to approve this new convention. You've questioned, I think, at least the ability if not the motivations of the Canadian negotiators.
I just wonder what information you have that leads you to that. I assume you weren't part of the negotiations. I know you've read some documents and so on, but these are strong statements, and I'd like you to back them up with some facts, if you could--not just the outcome, because I know you have the right to question the outcome. You can say you think what they've come up with is poor. That's fair enough. That's the job of this committee to look at that as well. Questioning the motivations of both the minister and the negotiators, to me, requires a little bit of support from you.
12:25 p.m.
As an Individual
On my comments about the process leading up to the result and the role of various people in that process, first of all I would make a clarification. I didn't question the ability of the negotiators. I suggested they were under a compulsion to arrive at an agreement. Given that they couldn't walk away from the negotiating table, they had to achieve an agreement in a certain timeframe, and they had to agree to things in order to achieve that agreement.
With respect to Mr. Hearn's role, Mr. Hearn was very public about his commitment to custodial management, extended jurisdiction, and so forth. Mr. Hearn was prominent in the press in Newfoundland and Labrador—I read the papers and listen to the radio there—making statements and outrageous claims about what was being achieved through these negotiations.
You're right, I cannot see inside Mr. Hearn's brain to know exactly what he was thinking, but if I look at his situation in terms of what he had publicly pledged, and then the outrageous claims he made about the results of the negotiations, I then arrive at the conclusion that he was a desperate man in a desperate situation to be able to sell whatever minor improvements he could get as success. I'm not questioning him as a moral individual.
The other thing that's missing in this is that we didn't go out and publicly criticize Mr. Hearn and the negotiations. In the beginning, Mr. Applebaum met with officials in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and it was through that process that it came to light that these problems were emerging. He attempted to bring these problems to their attention so they would take steps in the negotiations to fix them.
It was not one individual. There were four of us, with different backgrounds and different roles in the department at different times, but as Mr. Byrne pointed out, we had a lot of experience. At one point we were invited to a meeting with Mr. Bevan in his office to listen to our concerns. When the young lady from his office phoned me at home to invite me to that meeting, I asked who would be present. She said the invitation had been extended to Mr. Rowat, Mr. Wiseman, and me. I asked about Mr. Applebaum, as he's the one who's really been flagging these issues. She said that Mr. Applebaum had not been invited and would not be invited. After consideration, we collectively, respectfully, declined the invitation.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
I don't know anything about that, and I'm not sure it's relevant to what we are doing.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
I think you should have attended, frankly.
I'm not sure I understood the direction of Mr. Stoffer's question, but let me ask the question this way.
Can NAFO, under this new convention, patrol in Canadian waters without Canadian request or approval?
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
Mr. Kramp said that Mr. Parsons had “impugned” the EU negotiators. Most of the focus was on the Canadians.
I just want to make the point that no one is impugning the EU negotiators. They had their interests. They pursued their interests, and they got what they wanted out of this negotiation. They didn't give in on what they didn't want to give in on, which was to have a binding dispute settlement, a binding process that would override objections. No one is impugning the EU negotiators. They have my congratulations.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
Anyone who has ever known this particular witness--Dr. Parsons--friend or foe, Mr. Chairman, has never questioned his integrity the way I have heard it questioned today. I categorically would remind Mr. Kamp that when future witnesses, current members of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, come before us in the next couple of weeks, this side of the table will be respectful of their role in fisheries management when we hear from them.
Mr. Parsons, the EU is about to embark upon a seafood certification process.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
In reviewing the transcript, I saw no question of integrity raised at all. It was a question of background. I had the same questions. As a new committee member, I simply wanted to know the background, and I don't see any impugning at all. I think the allegation is out of order.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
You're pretty naive then, but anyway.
May I continue with my line of questioning, Mr. Chair?
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
