Fisheries Committee on March 24th, 2010

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

I know many of us are looking forward to working on that as soon as possible.

The question was raised at our last meeting about the aquaculture situation in British Columbia and when it becomes a part of federal jurisdiction and we're going to have the opportunity to manage it, whether we want it or not, as the federal government. There was a question raised about where that money is going to come from to allow us to do that and whether we should be able to find it in the main estimates. If you or one of your officials could provide a bit of clarification on that, we would appreciate it.

[Gail Shea, Conservative, Egmont, PE]

It is my understanding that funding is not currently in the main estimates. I believe it is in December 2010 that we're scheduled to take on the management of aquaculture in British Columbia.

I don't know if Roch or Claire want to speak to the process.

[Roch Huppé]

Yes, the money has been earmarked in 2009-10, but the money has yet to be accessed in the fiscal framework. So it doesn't show in the main estimates currently, but it will be accessed through the supplementary estimates in 2010-11.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Good. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

The budget speech, and perhaps the throne speech as well, referred to the coming freeze on operating budgets within departments, and I'm sure that was welcome news to all of your officials there. I'm just not quite sure how to read the main estimates, with that news in mind, when, for example, the operating expenditures figure in here. It's significantly higher than the main estimates in 2009-10, an increase of $184 million, so I just wonder in general, how is that going to happen? How are you preparing for that, and what impact do you think it will have on the management of fisheries in this country?

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

In fact the member is right that there will be some impact on our numbers going into the year, and some of them will actually be decreased as a result of that.

We'll manage. This is the direction we have received, so we are, as we do every year in our budgeting process, factoring in the increases that are required for salaries with a ceiling, or at least a freeze in terms of any kind of growth. It will be my job and the job of the management team to make sure we don't exceed the numbers we are given, while looking at continuing to provide the services to Canadians. It's a fact of life, and this is what we do.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Is it right to say then that this figure in our main estimates is a pre-freeze announcement, and the number will actually have to change?

[Roch Huppé]

Yes, from a technical perspective, the budget 2010 items obviously are not reflected in the main estimates you see today. During the year, the Treasury Board Secretariat will freeze part of the money for the operational freeze that's been announced, the 1.5% basically. Through the supplementary estimates process, money will return to the centre for that perspective, so it's not reflected. What you're seeing here does not exclude that money that we will have to return. It's basically through the subsidy process that it will be done.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

And how does that whole process correlate with a strategic or expenditure review that I think we're going through as well?

[Claire Dansereau]

It is definitely strategic review and not expenditure review, although I think some people would see them as one and the same. Strategic review will be the department looking at every one of its programs, and while we look at this, obviously we will be factoring in the reduced amounts in the operating side. We assume that this process will happen through the course of the summer. It's not an unwelcome set of activities, because it's worthwhile for us to take a look at all of our programs, so it will just be another factor that we add into that.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

I'll turn it over to my colleague, Ms. O'Neill-Gordon.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Madam Minister. It's certainly nice to have you with us today and for you to take time from your busy schedule to be with us, even though I know you have an awful cold.

I certainly want to reiterate your words when you said we can be very proud of our fish industry. Having visited my constituency last summer, you know that I certainly feel that way and am very proud of the work they do and the employment they provide.

Just recently I met with a group of fishermen in my constituency who were concerned about repairs to their harbour. I'm just wondering, how is the funding distributed for these small craft harbour programs, and has the funding increased at all?

[Gail Shea, Conservative, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Tilly.

The funding for small craft harbours is allocated across the country based on regions, so the more small craft harbours in a region, the more funding of course would go to that region.

Then there is a list that is compiled, a priority list that takes into account the health and safety of the users of the facility and the general condition of the facility as well, and decisions are made from there. Generally it's around $100 million on an annual basis. It had been $80 million. We added $20 million to the base budget of small craft harbours, which brought it to $100 million annually, and as part of our economic action plan, over the last year and this fiscal year coming up, we will spend an additional $100 million in each of those two years on small craft harbours.

There have been a number of projects that have been carried out. I believe we said maybe there are 263 that have been either completed or are in the tender phase, or in some phase of their project. There has been a lot of work, and it certainly has allowed us to address a lot of the issues that small craft harbours might have. We still have a deficit. I know that this committee has dealt with a report on small craft harbours. I certainly appreciate all the work that was done on that, and we will be providing a response to that report very shortly.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

I'm happy to hear you talk about the safety and the health of the fishermen. That was one of the main issues the fishermen brought to me when I was meeting with them concerning their harbour, because there were some unsafe conditions.

Another thing I was wondering was if you can outline the importance of the small craft harbours program and how it provides different things for our community.

[Gail Shea, Conservative, Egmont, PE]

Basically, what small craft harbours does is it allows fishers, inshore fishers in particular, a close access to their fishing grounds, and this allows them to not have to spend a lot of money to steam for miles and miles to get to the fishing grounds. So it allows them to stay within a small area to keep their costs low, and it's very important to so many communities.

Your community, I know, is made up mostly of fishers and that is the industry of that community, and that harbour is the centre of the community, and people take great pride in the harbours.

I must also mention port authorities. Most harbours now in Canada are managed by port authorities, which are a body of volunteers who do excellent work. The small craft harbour volunteer program is just over 20 years old now, and I believe we have in excess of 5,000 volunteers who volunteer their time to ensure the harbours are safe.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Minister.

We'll proceed to the second round of questioning. In the second round there will be four minutes for each party.

Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madam Minister, welcome and thank you to you and your associates.

Madam Minister, your Conservative government has been asleep when it comes to the B.C. fisheries, when it comes to that part of the country. Your party platform in 2006 promised an independent judicial inquiry. Why did it take all the pressure from the opposition parties, and more importantly the collapse of sockeye salmon stocks in the Fraser River to fulfill that promise?

[Gail Shea, Conservative, Egmont, PE]

I can't really answer that, because I only got here in 2008, so I have to say I was quite quick.

I think the important thing is that it is happening now, and this inquiry will take a comprehensive look at all the issues around sockeye salmon in the Fraser River. I know, and I'm sure everyone who's ever been to British Columbia knows, how important salmon is and how big a player the Fraser River is to this fishery.

I'm looking forward to the results of this inquiry. I know it's going to take more than a year. We expect there will be an interim report in August, so we have to let the inquiry do its job.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

It took you four months after the collapse to decide to establish the inquiry, and it took you four months now. It's been eight months since the collapse.

What is happening now, and when will we finally achieve the results we want?

[Gail Shea, Conservative, Egmont, PE]

The commission is working independently of government, so we do not have a report from the commission now. They are going ahead and doing their work.

We as a department are working with stakeholder groups in British Columbia to set the management plan out for 2010. We have to realize the sockeye stocks did not just disappear in the last four months or the last eight months. There are a number of things that have to be looked at.

I just might want to mention as well that we talk about the devastating non-return of the sockeye last year and at the same time we had pink salmon stocks that came back in record numbers. So there are a lot of unexplained things that are happening around the salmon industry, and I think by letting this inquiry do its work is the only way we're going to get the answers.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

It might be something to do with the data collection. The previous Liberal government found we needed a better data collection system to know what's happening with our salmon. What has your government done to improve the data collection?

[Gail Shea, Conservative, Egmont, PE]

That is a very specific question that I'm going to ask my officials to take a shot at.

[Claire Dansereau]

First of all, we think the commission of inquiry will provide us with some advice as to whether our data collection systems are sufficient. Up until now, we have assumed that they have been. We do have very well-established systems, not only with ourselves, but we have partnerships with universities and we work with other stakeholder groups to gather information. So as far as we're concerned, what we have been doing has provided us with sufficient information. The commission will tell us if we're correct or not.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Good timing. Thank you very much.

Monsieur Lévesque.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, Ms. Dansereau, Ms. Huard and gentlemen, good day.

I would like to draw your attention to the table entitled “Main estimates by input factor”. I am having some difficulty with certain things. There is a $115-million increase in operating expenditures. I would like to know where that applies.

[Roch Huppé]

As you noticed, there is a total increase of $326 million over the last year. Most of this increase results from the budget 2009 economic action plan. Most of the increase is due to that. A significant part of operating expenditures amount to $200 million which was what we received for small craft harbours. Out of this amount, $100 million are for the year 2009-2010, and a large part of these funds are within the operating budget.