Evidence of meeting #119 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was communities.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Committee Representative, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
A lot of the areas are impeded by actual land availability in the harbour vicinity. You only have small uplands so you can't develop the area as such, right there. The facility's already there. You do have impediments in place to hinder that progress.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Okay.
Out on the west coast, we sense quite a variety of approaches. We were out there touring small craft harbours about a month ago now. The amounts being paid, for instance, by recreational boaters seem to be quite modest in terms of the money coming in, at least for operating the small craft harbour. Have there been some discussions about what a reasonable contribution would be from what is a fairly well-heeled industry in many cases, the recreational boating society?
Are they actually paying their fair share for the services they're getting?
Committee Representative, Pacific Regional Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
In most harbours I would say yes. There are some harbours where obviously some work can be done. I want to say that with the small craft harbours, we don't run the luxury moorage that some marinas offer with the services at the harbour. I think our recreational rates are in the order of 80% to 90% of the local marina traffic, so I believe they're a fair rate, and we review them at least every couple of years to ensure that we're in that ballpark.
Obviously, the control of the number of boats in the small craft harbour is determined by that, and we certainly would increase the rates if we didn't have the room.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
I have one final question for you, Mr. Mauro.
The commercial fishing industry is under stress, I think, in British Columbia, and certainly they would be looking for investments in small craft harbours, again, to obviously support their industry.
An ongoing concern we have is that the financial benefits of the commercial fisheries don't necessarily stay in the communities so much, because of the transferability of quotas out there. We see an awful lot of the revenue going to people who rent quotas, and they can be from anywhere and don't necessarily reside in the communities where the action is taking place.
Committee Representative, Pacific Regional Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
That's certainly a concern.
I have to tell you that's not really my area of expertise. I'm looking at providing a service, and I think there are fishing associations that really could speak better to that than I could. I have concerns that money spent by small craft harbours does not go to improving the harbours and the facilities for fishers. I believe, though, that we do our very best to do that.
Mr. Ken McDonald (Avalon, Lib.)
Thank you, Mr. Hardie.
We'll go now to Mr. Doherty on the Conservative side for seven minutes or less.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to our guests for being here.
To both of our guests, with regard to the testimony that we've had over the last few days or weeks on this, it's interesting to hear the value of product that's coming through the wharves in the harbours versus the income or revenue generated by the harbour authorities. There's quite the difference in value. Would either of you like to comment on the potential opportunity for harbour authorities to perhaps see a percentage of the value of that marketable product that's coming across the wharves and harbours?
Would that help in some of the issues that we're seeing—a revenue share?
Committee Representative, Pacific Regional Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
I guess the value of the product is an impressive value. I think, though, that there are many costs that must be attributed: the costs of running and maintaining a fish boat and paying a crew. It's wages that are local, so a lot of that money does end up staying in the local community. I just want to say that it certainly would require significant analysis before you ever embarked on it, to see the profit and loss statement for the operation of the fish boat and what the net income actually is after that. It's another expense for them.
Committee Representative, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
A lot of the small craft harbour facilities are on federal government land, and a lot of the harbours are class C harbours. I think 70% of the asset base in Canada is made up of class C harbours. There could be like 15 boats and so on in remote communities, and this is the only federal presence in these communities. These facilities are more or less regarded as highways to the sea. In the community, you have a community mind that this is part of the government infrastructure and part of the whole program as a country as a whole.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
My understanding, though, is that in Newfoundland, fishermen pay a fee per pound landed. Is that correct? Does that go to the harbour authorities?
Committee Representative, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
Each harbour authority is different. I'm not sure what's done in the Newfoundland region. I know that in the Maritime and gulf region, each harbour authority sets up its own model to meet the terms of the lease as set out by the federal government, and to meet its day-to-day operational costs.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
On DFO's website, there is a listing for the small craft harbours program. The objectives for this program state, “Our goal is a sustainable national network of safe and accessible harbours that are: fully operated, in good working condition, managed and maintained by self-sufficient harbour authorities who represent the interests of users and communities”.
In your opinion, are they living up to their mandate?
Committee Representative, Pacific Regional Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
I believe that's true, that they are living up to their mandate. I just want to say that the fishers do pay moorage. It's less than the recreational boat moorage fees.
Yes, I think that they do live up to their mandate. Here in B.C., there are a few issues, as I've identified, but I think we provide a good service to the fishers. We need improvements in loading and unloading product because of the lack of distribution facilities for the product and of required transportation, but yes, I believe that the mandate is being met and that problems are being identified and addressed.
Committee Representative, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
I'd say that they're being met. There's considerable strain on the staff, though. Looking at it from my side, looking at the staff, you can see that there are stresses upon them to try to deliver a program with limited funding because the strain that dredging is putting on the whole program is astronomical. It's in the numbers. You have a deteriorating asset base, so they have to pick and choose as to where the funding goes to fix up different structures. Yes, they're meeting the mandate, but it has to be a struggle.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
Have either of your associations done any work on what the cost would be for a complete divestiture of core harbours?
Committee Representative, Pacific Regional Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
We have not in the core harbours. Non-core harbours, yes, there has been a study and there is a committee looking at that.
Conservative
Committee Representative, Pacific Regional Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
I don't have that cost in front of me. I'm sorry.
Committee Representative, Pacific Regional Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
I would have to get that.
Committee Representative, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
I don't have it either, sir. I know about the divestiture program in regard to the non-core harbours. Some 200 or 300 remain in the inventory to divest, which requires significant funding because a lot of those facilities are dilapidated and need to be transferred to local municipalities or community-based organizations that wish to develop them in aspects other than the fishing industry.
November 8th, 2018 / 12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
In DFO's own words, the program needs to transfer ownership of designated harbours to a third party, such as those that are derelict, low activity or recreational. In their own words, they would be looking to transfer those harbours that are derelict and in need of repair.
Committee Representative, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
Yes, they have a non-core group of harbours that aren't core to the fishing industry, and those harbours are scheduled for divestiture, but they do not have adequate funding to divest those sites.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
Okay. There has been a study on what that cost would be, is that correct?
Committee Representative, National Harbour Authority Advisory Committee
I'm not sure of the actual number, but I can find it and I can return it to you.