Fisheries Committee on March 31st, 2010

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

In the labelling that occurs by environmental NGOs, is that simply a voluntary process decided by the ENGO, or is there an opportunity whereby a company, organization, or association can actually offset or pay some of the costs to that ENGO to actually have their product listed or labelled under that circumstance?

Let me get specific, Nadia, with where I'm going with this. The certification that occurs by reputable organizations with transparent, pre-existing criteria is less subject to subjectivity than other forms of consumer-related campaigns. Is there a risk that we face from some of these consumer or ENGO groups that may have ulterior motives as they produce labels? And say, for example, I want to curry favour. Is there a possibility that if I give them a bunch of money, I can get my product labelled?

[Nadia Bouffard]

I don't know what is involved in those private arrangements. What I can say is that there are organizations, fish producers, entering into business arrangements with ENGOs to have those ENGOs review their purchasing lists or help them sell their products to foreign buyers, by demonstrating that their products are sustainable, and helping them to get there. Loblaws has actually publicized the fact they are working with ENGOs to help them look at their purchase list to determine what is sustainable and what's not. What's involved in that business arrangement, I can't tell. Obviously those organizations could probably give the committee the information.

In dealing with the information, the processes of some of these organizations are outdated. I'm not going to name names, but I will tell you there are organizations that have outdated stock assessment reports on which they will base their conclusions. I'm not ascribing wrong or false intentions to these organizations; they may just not have access to the up-to-date information or, more importantly, they may not have the staff to make sure they do have the updated information. Conclusions are reached and those conclusions are published on websites and are picked up by chef X or cookbook Y. This situation has proliferated and there's a danger of having information out there that is not accurate and leads to conclusions that can have impacts on our fishing industry.

There are also biases built into some of those assessments. We have seen some of these biases, either in anti-farm or anti-certain types of gear products, like trawls and others, built into the policies of these ENGOs, who will then automatically put the products coming from these fisheries on their web lists.

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

Are you aware of any organizations that have participated as ENGOs in private labelling and also participated in some of the calls for the banning of Canadian seafood products, such as from the seal hunt?

[Nadia Bouffard]

No.

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

However, there is that possibility. What you are saying to us is that there are built-in biases that do influence these organizations in their decision-making.

[Nadia Bouffard]

Yes, absolutely.

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

Is the intent of the current position of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, along with that of your partners from International Trade—whom, I assume, are also involved in this in some respect—to go with actual certification from certification organizations like the Marine Stewardship Council, as opposed to moving toward trying to gain the favour or appreciation of those engaged in private labelling?

[Nadia Bouffard]

There are two questions there. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans remains neutral in terms of recognizing one organization versus another. We have supported industry clients who go through these processes, whether it's the MSC or another process, by providing the information. It is publicly available information. We have stayed away from supporting one organization versus another. That part of it is really a business decision.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lawrence MacAulay]

Thank you very much, Ms. Bouffard.

Mr. Blais, the floor is now yours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your presentation, Ms. Bouffard.

I don't really know where to start. I will begin with a comment.

It has nothing to do with you, but when I learned about eco-certification...I imagine we have to be very cautious about this. I realized this when I looked at one of the tables in Canada's Seafood Guide. I am going to say frankly that people where I live were really not happy to see that document. I would not say that its direction was predetermined, but still there is a risk of going off the track. The table really goes off the track when it comes to Atlantic products. Taking that route and assigning a particular organization responsibility for deciding which products should be banned or avoided and which ones are wonderful is fraught with danger. You referred earlier to trawling and other factors. It would be easy to go off the track.

This year's budget provides that starting tomorrow, an agency is going to study eco-certification. Has the Department planned for anything other than creating this agency? Creating a national agency and locating it, I don't know, probably in Halifax, is worth considering. I have nothing against the idea. It might even be located in Quebec City. But that can't be the end of it.

I'm not saying you are necessarily going to reassure me, but I would like to understand what brought us to where we are today. A document like that one is very damaging to the industry. It is dangerous. It also sounds as if it has been endorsed.

I would like you to comment on that particular aspect.

[Nadia Bouffard]

Mr. Chair, I would like to clarify that this list is taken from the French version of a document produced by a group of non-governmental environmental organizations called SeaChoice. It does not come from Fisheries and Oceans Canada or the federal government. I brought it as an example, to show you the seafood that is considered at present to be sustainable or not sustainable, by those organizations.

I understand your point of view. It has been voiced several times by representatives of the fishing industry. I think the people in these organizations have heard the industry's concerns and are reviewing their list. They have to update the scientific opinions and information they collected at the outset, on which to base their conclusions. They have also listened to comments from producers concerning the fact that species like tuna, for example, are described generally, without specifying which ocean, country or region is in question. Tuna may travel in several countries and regions and be managed differently. It may be perfectly sustainable in one region or country and not in another. As well, if we don't say what species of cod the fishery is open for and which it is closed for, it creates confusion.

This problem has been pointed out. Myself, I spent a full day with our scientists, with the people from this organization and their scientists. We questioned them about the conclusions they have stated. They are going to review their list. They have particular views about what sustainability means and about products derived from aquaculture and products that come from trawling. Ultimately, those views are theirs.

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

It's not just a point of view, it's prejudices. We are talking about judgments made by these groups. There is a risk of going off the track.

That was done in 2007. And so the work was done before 2007, in 2006. Where I live, throughout Quebec, the industry was not made aware of all this. When it learned about it, it reacted as I have. It was devastated to see that a document like this was circulating and enjoying a degree of credibility.

I do understand that we can't avoid eco-certification and that we have to go through it. You put it very well, the Department puts it very well, and everyone puts it very well. How do we avoid going off the track? That's another story. I am still looking for views, for ways, or an action plan at the Department, to deal with this situation. This is 2010 and that has been circulating since 2007.

Even though I don't want to draw comparisons, I'll draw one. For 30 years, there was no talk about the seal hunt, and now there is starting to be talk. There is some serious catching up to do. It is much harder.

That document was circulating in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Now it's 2010.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lawrence MacAulay]

Thank you, Mr. Blais.

I'll let you respond.

[Nadia Bouffard]

I will be brief, Mr. Chair.

Page 29 shows, very generally, the actions taken by the government to deal with how this has gone off the track, to use your expression. Not only have we met with these organizations, but we have also met with buyers to give them information about the stocks we manage. I have had several meetings with major retailers and with NGOs, to explain our thinking about sustainable management of Canadian seafood.

Your colleague referred to international trade officers at Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada. We are working with them to get that message out and provide information. We are in constant contact with them, to provide information to buyers who want to know whether that list is valid.

One interesting aspect of this trend is that people no longer look at these lists as the sole reference. They want to have more information. Three or four years ago, they looked at the list and they accepted whatever it said. People are more informed and want more information. We give them that information and the producers also provide information. The industry has the burden of providing that information. We work with the industry to disseminate the information.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada has an information booth about sustainable fisheries in Boston and Brussels. We provide information on site for buyers to demonstrate the sustainability of the seafood.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lawrence MacAulay]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Donnelly, the floor is yours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Madam Bouffard, for coming before the committee and presenting this information.

I'm wondering if, in your opinion, there is a preferred certification process by the interests involved, the industry, the retailers, and the ENGOs.

Could you also comment on what you or the department think is the best process? Or do you have a comment on that?

[Nadia Bouffard]

Is the question whether or not there is a preferred eco-certification process in the industry and the markets?

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

Which type is preferred? There are several. Does industry say this is the one we prefer? Do retailers say they prefer this one? Do the ENGOs say they prefer another one? Or do they all agree that the MSC is the way to go? It seems from your presentation that the MSC is the most popular, but does that mean there's agreement across the board from the different interests that this is the way to go?

[Nadia Bouffard]

I think it's a bit of all. The industry decision in Canada is highly based on what markets are asking for. In fact, as I mentioned, in northern Europe they're demanding MSC, so that was a lot in the decision to go down that route.

In terms of the actual credibility of the program, what makes an eco-label or an eco-certification process popular is what markets are asking for, but also the credibility of the process. The Marine Stewardship Council seems to be the process out there that meets the most FAO guidelines in terms of independent third-party process. It's very thorough and allows for input into the process by the public. By and large it's a very credible process. There are processes that don't have a very thorough process. You pay a couple of bucks, $5,000, and you get your label. MSC processes are credible, strong, very thorough, but on the other side they're very expensive to go through and to maintain as well.

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

Thank you.

Food safety is one of the factors in the certification process. I'm just wondering if health factors are considered. For instance, there are the chemicals, the toxins, the pesticides that may be used or associated with certain industries.

Is that factored into the processing?

[Nadia Bouffard]

It's not factored in eco-certification, so it's not factored in the MSC process. I believe there are other standards, other government standards, international standards, ISO standards, in relation to food safety. There are labels associated with the safety issue that are separate and distinct.

In the aquaculture sector, they appear to be trying to bring it all together into one, so they're bringing the ecological aspect, the social responsibility, the quality, into one label.

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

When you say “they”, do you mean MSC?

[Nadia Bouffard]

I mean the people who are involved in trying to flesh out what the FAO guidelines are, so countries. But as well, there are processes that the WWF has triggered, bringing in all sectors of the aquaculture industry, including governments. What they're trying to do is create a comprehensive process to look at all the issues, but it also makes it more complex and difficult to arrive at a conclusion.

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

Sure.

Just adding to that question, there's a lot of talk about climate change and the impact of everything. Is carbon footprint being considered in terms of the boat-to-plate concept?

[Nadia Bouffard]

It certainly has hit the corporate boardrooms. There are currently no labels associated with carbon footprints. I understand when a lot of the large retailers are looking at developing their green policies, they are also looking at the carbon footprint. But there are no certifying organizations out there right now focusing on the carbon footprint.

The fishing industry tells me, and I'm sure they could tell you in more detail, that while the eco-certification trend, based on environmental impacts and environmental considerations, sustainability, is continuing despite the recession, the carbon footprint is frozen right now or delayed because of the recession. However, Loblaws, Wal-Mart, all these other organizations are looking at their green policies and considering the carbon footprint with packaging, recycling, and seafood sustainability.