Evidence of meeting #43 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was questions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
I call this meeting to order.
Before we begin our clause by clause, I'm going to give Mr. Weston the floor for a moment to explain a visit by a group of people who may be joining us later.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like my colleagues to welcome the students from the French high school in Zurich who are visiting us this morning. In the group are more than 20 students who are taking part in an exchange. The Canadian students have already visited Switzerland. So it is now the Swiss students' turn to visit us.
I hope we will be on our best behaviour, but not too good. We want to at least make it interesting for them.
Thank you.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
Thank you, Mr. Weston.
As you're all aware, we're here today to consider Bill S-3 clause by clause.
Mr. Cleary.
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Ryan Cleary NDP St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Mr. Chair, I would like to make a couple of points before we get into the clause by clause on the bill.
There are two things I want to say. The first is that we had the minister here last week to discuss the budget and this act. I don't think we asked any questions on the act—or we didn't on this side. I felt that was unfortunate because given the number of issues that were in the budget and issues in general with fisheries, be it the oil spill on the west coast or whatever, there was no time to ask questions on this bill.
That leads me to the second point I want to make. I had questions on this bill that haven't been answered, questions like figures on illegally caught fish. We know that illegal fishing inside the 200-mile limit isn't so much of a problem. We know that our Coast Guard and our military keep on top of it, and they are on top of it. But I have concerns about illegal fishing outside the 200-mile limit in the NAFO regulatory area.
This bill is all about illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, but when we asked questions about illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing in our waters or on the continental shelf outside the 200-mile limit, we didn't get any figures whatsoever on the extent of illegal fishing outside the 200-mile limit.
We know that's going on because you do see citations issued to foreign vessels. How much of that illegally caught fish may be coming into Canadian ports? We have no figures on that either.
From my perspective, the information on some of the questions I asked were just left hanging. We don't know the extent of the problem and most of the information we got were global figures. They weren't Canadian figures. I have a concern about that and I wanted to make it known to the committee.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I understand my colleague's points that he's raising, but just to be clear, this bill is about making amendments to the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act. It's to put us in a place where we can ratify the port state measures agreement as a country. It wasn't a broad treatment of illegal fishing or overfishing on the Grand Banks and all of that.
While I understand his concerns, I think most of the questions relating to the act have been answered, and perhaps as we go forward today, there'll be other questions answered as well.
11:10 a.m.
NDP
François Lapointe NDP Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As my colleague Mr. Cleary pointed out, despite all his requests, he has received no statistics about the problem occurring outside 200 nautical miles. I feel that Mr. Cleary is very well aware of the content of the bill we are studying. His comments are quite correct. He has received nothing that defines the problem outside 200 nautical miles. But that is where the crux of the problem most probably lies.
I am also going to take a moment to point out that a lot of things are happening in the way that committees are managed. The time allotted for the official opposition to speak is very hard to take. According to the order that has been set, we start with the party in power and the official opposition has to wait some time before it can ask questions again.
The last time that the minister appeared, we also saw that she tends not to want to be available for the two hours scheduled for the committee meeting, but for one hour only. We saw how far that can go, which, to me is entirely too far. The official opposition had only 10 minutes in which to ask questions. In addition, we were asked to ask questions two days after the budget was tabled, when our mandate is to hold the minster to account. That is what responsible government is about. I feel that the idea still exists in the minds of most Canadians. So, at a standing committee, we had 10 minutes to ask questions about a bill and about decisions in a federal budget.
In my opinion, this is bad taste taken to the extreme and a shining illustration of the way the committee should not be run. I am taking this opportunity because our session is a public one. I definitely want those comments to be noted.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Ryan Cleary NDP St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm not going to belabour this at all.
11:10 a.m.
An hon. member
[Inaudible--Editor]
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Ryan Cleary NDP St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
No, I don't look at this as belabouring; I look at this as there being a reason that our commercial stocks haven't returned since the shutdown in 1992.
The reason is because our commercial stocks and migratory stocks migrate from inshore to offshore. They don't notice that 200-mile limit in the ocean. They don't pay any attention to that—stupid old fish. They don't. In a lot of cases with our migratory stocks, the reason they haven't regrown since 1992 is that while fishing stopped completely for the most part inside the 200-mile limit, it didn't stop outside. They continued fishing.
It's only been in recent years where the clampdown has really been put on the illegal fishing. The number of citations has gone down. Part of the reason why the number of citations has gone down is that there are fewer fish to catch. In terms of the numbers, the fish caught outside of the 200-mile limit, I'm not belabouring this because this kind of stat is critical to addressing the problem of foreign overfishing. Foreign overfishing is a big reason why our domestic fisheries for groundfish, species such as cod, have not returned.
When we have a bill such as this, which may do something—not a whole lot, but maybe something towards addressing overfishing—I would feel more comfortable with statistics.
The point I'm getting at now is a question, Mr. Chair.
Will we have an opportunity to ask DFO officials again for some of this data? I had no answers on stats when they were here before.
Are they going to appear before the committee? Can we ask questions? Can we put it to them again?
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
The officials are here today as we go through the clause by clause to answer questions on amendments or points that are raised.
You have the opportunity to ask questions of the officials today, I guess is what we're saying.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
Thank you, Mr. Cleary.
All right. We'll move into the clause by clause then.
Clause 1 is postponed pursuant to Standing Order 75(1).
We'll move on to clause 2.
Shall clause 2 carry?
April 28th, 2015 / 11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
It's clause 2 in Bill S-3.
The reason I ask shall clause 2 carry is that—
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
Shall clause 2 carry?
(Clause 2 agreed to)
(Clause 3 agreed to)
(On clause 4)
On clause 4, I have an amendment.
Mr. Kamp.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Yes, I have an amendment to clause 4, Mr. Chair.
After this bill was passed in the Senate and then came to us and some work was done in committee, in the process of developing some regulations with respect to this it became apparent that there were some small gaps, but gaps nonetheless, that could be fixed by amendment. We do have some officials here if we need more technical background on that.
Let me just say by way of overview, if I may, that there is—
11:15 a.m.
NDP
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Let me move the amendment. That might be more proper to do.
I apologize for that, Mr. Chair.
