Fisheries Committee on March 29th, 2010

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think the point is that some direct questions were asked of Mr. Swerdfager, and he offered the department's view and position. From what I understand, there is certainly an alternative view or concern from the public that seems to be of a higher degree than what the department is presenting.

However, I'm not saying that Ms. Morton wants to come to correct anything. I have no idea. She may very well want to do that, but I think it's providing an alternative. It would only require one meeting to get the full perspective on what's happening on the west coast. It would be another scientific perspective. She's done a fair amount of work on this subject, and I was very specific to have her come and present information. It might be of interest, although if we start to look at other perspectives, such as Marine Harvest Canada or others, we would probably start to get into the concern that you raised, Mr. Kamp, with turning this into a work plan item.

My intent with the motion is to have a perspective from a scientist who will offer a different view on the testimony that we heard on a very key issue on the west coast regarding salmon.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. Donnelly.

Go ahead, Mr. Byrne.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

While the certification exercise is probably worthwhile as well, it's my understanding that the committee has not finalized its work plan for this session. We've got some good ideas, but it's still open to amendment or addition. It's my understanding that the B.C. study was still very much in play.

I view having Ms. Morton appear before us like a grand jury exercise. It's to help the committee decide whether or not there's enough meat on these bones to continue with the study. I'd like to hear from her, and, based on what we do here, determine for myself--and hopefully with the committee--whether there's cause for a more elaborate or extensive study.

We just heard the senior counsel for the Cohen commission, and asked them whether they thought a study by this committee into the Fraser River sockeye or salmon stocks on the Pacific coast would generally be an intrusion into their mandate or their work plan. The answer I thought we heard was that they didn't really see it as an intrusion--that the two are separate beasts.

The question would be, why would that question be asked if we weren't still considering it as a potential course of study? So I'll be supporting this motion.

I look forward to hearing what she has to say in open and transparent dialogue, so that we can use it to determine whether there are grounds to flesh out this as a major piece of business for the committee to work on in this particular session of Parliament.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. Byrne.

Are there any others?

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

I understand that point of view.

This motion is about sea lice, I think, and not aquaculture in a broader study. That's why I thought if we wanted to go in this direction.... Yes, she is a scientist and she has her particular agenda or involvement, I think, in this.

I wondered whether, in addition to Alexandra Morton, it would be helpful to also ask Dr. Mark Sheppard, the senior aquatic animal health veterinarian for the province of B.C., who is responsible for controlling and monitoring sea lice, and all that stuff. As I understand it, he is a provincial individual, but I think it would be interesting to have both of them here. It has been provincially managed up until now--well, largely, with some federal involvement there as well.

I'd be happy to amend the motion to include him after Alexandra Morton, and have them both appear, maybe on the same day for an hour each, or something like that if we wanted to. That would be up to the chair.

So my amendment would be to add the words “and Dr. Mark Sheppard, senior aquatic animal health veterinarian for the province of British Columbia” after the words “Alexandra Morton”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Do you have a copy of that?

There has been an amendment moved by Mr. Kamp that the words “and Dr. Mark Sheppard, senior aquatic animal health veterinarian for the province of British Columbia” be added after the words “Alexandra Morton” in the original motion.

On the amendment, we have Mr. Weston.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I'll be supporting the amended motion.

I think it's important, in the spirit of getting to the bottom of this, for us to hear from both persons. I've heard from Ms. Morton informally, and I look forward to hearing from her formally in this committee. I think it can only help us to hear from this other expert on an issue that is of great concern to my constituents, and I would say to all Canadians, based on the importance of the salmon to the country.

I think the amended motion is a good one, and I will be supporting it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. Weston.

Mr. Byrne.

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

I too will supporting it. I think we'll get a good sample as to whether there are competing or conflicting ideas and views related to Pacific salmon. Albeit this is just an issue on lice per se, it gives the committee a sampling of whether there's unanimity or solidarity on these kinds of things. If there's not, then obviously it's a good indicator that maybe this is something the committee should delve into; if there is unanimity on this, this is probably an indication the committee could use its talents or time elsewhere.

So I'd heartily support this and see what the witnesses have to say.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Any other comments on the amendment?

(Amendment agreed to)

(Motion as amended agreed to)

Thank you very much, members.

I will instruct the clerk to contact the two individuals mentioned as to their availability, and we will advise in due course when they're available.

Mr. Donnelly, you wanted to make a comment.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Just a final comment, more to Mr. Kamp's concern about the work plan. Perhaps at the next committee meeting, or soon, we can address the work plan. At some point we'll need to revisit this. When is this—

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

The work plan was adopted by this committee, and we'll proceed with that work plan. As for the comments from the discussion during the motion here, if the committee deems it necessary to review that after hearing from the witnesses, we'll do so in due time, once the committee has the opportunity to hear from the witnesses and to determine if they want to amend the work plan to take a different course.

So we will continue with our plan for our meeting on Wednesday and we will hear from DFO officials on eco-certification.

Mr. MacAulay.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I think it's fair to say that we were waiting for the two officials to come to determine whether the committee should or should not or if it was a difficulty for them to go to the west coast. I think that's been resolved today. If you check the minutes of the meeting, you will find that was the main reason why these witnesses were here today. Now it's the committee's decision whether we will or will not go to the west coast.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

I think that will be determined after hearing—

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Over the next...right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

—the next series of witnesses. I think that will be determined, and the committee will have to reconvene after that point to determine what its next course would be.

Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.