Fisheries Committee on May 22nd, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

Mr. Donnelly.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I would like to add my support for this motion.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

Therefore, NDP-24 is stricken.

(Clause 30 as amended agreed to on division)

(On clause 31)

We have amendment PV-14.

Ms. May.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Chair, this is going into the question of the list of regulations to be determined by the Governor in Council. The amendment adds that the regulation-making power would include:

prescribing standards establishing the conditions under which the quantity, timing and quality of water flow to a fish habitat would be sufficient to not constitute a harmful alteration, disruption or destruction;

(Amendment negatived)

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

We're on NDP-25. If NDP-25 is adopted, PV-15 becomes moot, as they are identical. Also, if NDP-25 is defeated, so is PV-15, as they are identical.

Mr. Donnelly, on NDP-25, please.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Chair, this adds a new paragraph calling for consultation with indigenous peoples of Canada to define “traditional knowledge”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

Ms. May.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Chair, I will grab this opportunity, since if this is defeated, obviously my identical amendment would go down.

The term “traditional knowledge” is of concern for indigenous peoples, and I think we have an obligation under the Constitution to consult thoroughly on what we mean by that. Indigenous ways of knowing extend to something beyond what we might think of as traditional. I've heard concern from indigenous peoples that their knowledge of ecosystems in the context of this bill, of what's important for fish habitat and fish productivity, is not merely those things that come down through the ages, like a mason jar full of stuff that's preserved and that's your traditional knowledge. The traditional knowledge evolves.

The way in which it's defined is going to be critical for indigenous governments and indigenous peoples across Canada, which is why both the NDP amendment and the Green Party amendment attempt to have a regulation that further teases out what we mean by traditional knowledge, and that regulation will be made after there's a consultation process with indigenous peoples.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

PV-15 is also stricken.

Next is LIB-8.

Mr. Hardie.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Again, this just harmonizes with Bill C-69.

I would note, Madam Chair, that the usage we're gravitating to is indigenous knowledge as opposed to traditional knowledge. I will make the comment that in addition to the indigenous communities, there are non-indigenous communities up and down our coasts. I'm going to be going back looking for community knowledge, or perhaps we can use the term “traditional knowledge” to apply to the non-indigenous people, but I think that has to be reflected in here somewhere. I would ask staff if, in fact, non-indigenous knowledge by non-indigenous people is factored into the decision-making process.

[Mark Waddell]

That is an area that's identified within the considerations section of the bill, for the minister to consider community knowledge as well as traditional knowledge.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

Mr. Donnelly.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I'd just ask, along the same lines, if traditional knowledge is defined in the act or will be defined.

[Gorazd Ruseski, Senior Director, Aboriginal Program, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

The intent would be to define it through policy over time, in the course of the implementation of the act.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

On LIB-9, we have Mr. Hardie.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

There's really no comment on this. This just offers some clarification.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 31 as amended agreed to on division)

(On clause 32)

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

We have NDP-26. If NDP-26 is adopted, PV-16 and CPC-20 become moot, as the provisions would already be adopted.

Mr. Donnelly.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Chair, I hope this one can go through, especially proposed subsections 43.3(3) and (4).

The setting of new marine biodiversity areas being by regulations in proposed section 43.3 is a good thing, and the minister will be able to impose fisheries closures to protect the marine environment, which is also a good thing. Other governments want fisheries closures for their MPAs, like the Province of B.C. and also indigenous MPAs. There are first nations on the Pacific coast that have declared their own areas and want commercial fishing out. This amendment would allow for that. It would also amend the bill to specify that provincial and indigenous governments may request the imposition of long-term fisheries closures. It creates a duty for the minister to respond to such requests within a specified time, and provides reasons for his or her decision.

I so move this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

Is there any discussion on NDP-26?

Mr. Hardie.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Madam Chair, again, I have a question for staff, on proposed subsection 43.3(3), which says, “The government of a province or an Indigenous governing body may make a request to the Minister”, etc. Does this provision already exist somewhere?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

Mr. Burns.

[Adam Burns, Director General, Fisheries Resource Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

I guess the answer would be not specifically, although nothing would preclude a government from making such a request to the minister in a non-legislative way.

[Nicholas Winfield]

I would just add that for fisheries closures, the minister may do so through a variation order.

[Adam Burns]

Currently that's how the minister does it, yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernadette Jordan]

Is there any more discussion on NDP-26?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We are on PV-16. If it is adopted CPC-20 becomes moot as they are identical. Also, if PV-16 is defeated, so is CPC-20 as they are identical.

Ms. May.