Fisheries Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2010

[Claire Dansereau]

Mr. Chair, if I may, I don't remember that particular memo, but I do remember having many conversations with Faith on this issue. It was very clear that we were dealing with at the time was a difference of opinion.

I don't think the minister said “confusion”, but there was certainly a difference of opinion on the interpretation of what 50-50 meant. The department took the view, and the minister agreed, that 50-50 meant an equitable share, not an equal share for each individual. That would not have been equitable.

So the decision that was made was done through very significant deliberation and analysis.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

The recommendation was made that you reconvene the independent panel. How come you didn't reconvene the independent panel to get clarification?

[Claire Dansereau]

I'm sorry, I'd have to look back into what the answer was to that question.

I presume--and I shouldn't presume on record--that....

I won't presume on record.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

I'll go on to a couple of other questions.

With respect to the fisheries ambassador, Mr. Sullivan, why was his appointment only extended for one year?

[Claire Dansereau]

I'm sorry, we in the department are not responsible for establishing his appointment. It's a GIC appointment.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Will you have any input on a new fisheries ambassador, when the time comes?

[Claire Dansereau]

I have no idea. That's speculation.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

For my final question, as you're aware, there's an MOU being produced by the province and the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. The federal government is not a partner, not a player, at this particular point of the process.

Have you guys made any representation to this process? How are you going to see this process through? What's your department's role when this memorandum of understanding becomes public? The federal government has a huge role in the fishing industry, but you're not part of this process.

[Claire Dansereau]

Mr. Chair, thank you for the question.

When the process began in Newfoundland and Labrador, we were not invited to be party to the process. Much of the work had already started when we were approached.

We are observers, we are clearly very much involved in some of the discussions that helped develop that MOU, but we are at this point not official partners.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

So your officials were involved with the discussions? Who was involved with the discussions?

[Claire Dansereau]

The officials in the regions work very closely; the provincial officials and the federal officials and the industry talk all the time, as you know.

So we would provide advice or information, but we are not party at this point to the MOU. Whether or not we ever will be, we don't know; we have not been formally asked.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Will you be providing a response to the MOU when it comes out? Obviously it's going to have impact on regulation changes, so will you be responding to the MOU? Are you disappointed you're not involved with the process?

It's quite frustrating that the major player in the fishing industry is not a part of this process.

[Claire Dansereau]

Whether or not we will respond will depend on what the MOU finally looks like. If there are elements of the MOU that can only be implemented by the federal government, obviously we will have to give consideration to what those are and make a determination as to whether we can respond.

Again, it's somewhat speculative. We'll see what happens when the MOU is finalized.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you.

Monsieur Blais.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would simply like to know what has happened to the fisheries ambassador. Has he disappeared in the fog?

[Claire Dansereau]

No, not at all. He is very active. He even took part in the Canadian delegation to Paris and in the talks on ICCAT. He made presentations everywhere. He's very active internationally. He is working on a number of files. I don't have a list of them. I didn't know that I would be asked that question.

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

For how long has he been appointed, Ms. Dansereau?

[Claire Dansereau]

This time, it was for one year. That will be in the spring, I believe. I don't remember the exact dates.

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

I would like to discuss the wharf at Carleton-sur-Mer.

I've previously had the opportunity to discuss this with you a number of times, and I very recently tabled a petition in the House of Commons. That petition had been signed by several thousands of people from the Gaspé region. When that many people sign a petition, it is indicative of the interest in this issue, and especially of its importance.

The answer I received from the department leaves me flabbergasted. It states:

In the circumstances and considering the various uses of the harbour, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is working with Transport Canada to identify economically viable future alternatives for all port infrastructure in Carleton in a manner mutually respectful of each department's respective mandate.

Surely you can clarify those last words.

That suggests that all the discussions between Transport Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada concerning an eventual and full return of the wharf to DFO have been entirely forgotten. If they're talking about the respective mandates of each department, they're considering that Transport Canada will have one part of the wharf and that Fisheries and Oceans Canada will have another part.

Is my interpretation correct or does yours differ?

[Claire Dansereau]

I can discuss that small boat harbour in a general way but not specifically. Each of us clearly has our own mandate and we must respect each other's. You will understand that, if we have to share responsibilities, the question of accountability will arise. Who will be accountable for the safety of the place, among other things?

I know we usually do our best to work together to serve clients well. I would have to do a little research. I don't really remember the details. I'm really sorry about that. We came here to discuss aquaculture and a few other issues. That's entirely my fault. I should have inquired into issues such as that.

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

It's never your fault, but it's still your responsibility.

[Claire Dansereau]

It's still my fault.

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

I'm nevertheless waiting for that answer. I'll get it soon, I hope. I would like to have some details on the response to the petition. That really leaves me wondering.

Furthermore, I know you were at Daniel Pauly's conference. It was very interesting. It was held very early in the morning. A few committee members were there as well, and that's so much the better. The fact remains that Mr. Pauly's remarks do raise some questions. In his view, by continuing to do what we're doing with regard to the resource, we're heading straight toward a wall, and it's going to hurt. In fact, it already hurts.

Did it make you feel a sense of urgency?

[Claire Dansereau]

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the entire presentation because I had to go to another meeting. I wanted to hear at least part of that conference.

I have had occasion to meet Mr. Pauly and the entire team at the University of British Columbia. That was about a month ago. He is a researcher at a fisheries research centre. I thought the work of those people was very interesting. So I asked—and I'm still asking—that our management table work with that research centre.

I think it's very important to consider more than one scientific viewpoint. Researchers have quite clear viewpoints. Our responsibility is to listen to our scientists, but to listen to others as well and to bring them together.

With regard to your question as to whether that made me feel a sense of urgency, I would answer that the urgent nature of the decisions we must take is always a concern for me. It's always present. I know that global fisheries management is a very important issue. So we're doing our best to bring together a variety of scientific viewpoints.