Evidence of meeting #13 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 rivers.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
President, Atlantic Salmon Federation
No, our committee did not.
I'm sorry, Greg, I was waiting for you to jump in.
5:05 p.m.
Chair, Minister's Advisory Committee on Wild Atlantic Salmon, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
We did make an effort to note that many of them are not money recommendations. We don't want it to be lost. We just don't have the resources. Something can be done now without additional resources.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Yes, absolutely, and agreed.
Mr. Taylor, would you consider it appropriate and does the evidence suggest the government should designate areas in which aquaculture development should be prohibited—for example, where wild salmon populations are given COSEWIC endangered or threatened status?
5:05 p.m.
President, Atlantic Salmon Federation
I would agree with that statement.
I would add that we should be looking at areas like the Miramichi and areas in Newfoundland and Gaspé where there are very healthy or relatively healthy populations of wild Atlantic salmon where aquaculture does not exist in open-net pens now and make sure that it never goes there.
The inner Bay of Fundy, the outer Bay of Fundy, areas of Nova Scotia, and the south shore of Newfoundland are the areas where a lot of Atlantic salmon are in the most trouble. It's not that open-net pen aquaculture was the cause, but it is one more added threat. Wherever there is a proliferation of open-net pen operations, wild Atlantic salmon are in very serious trouble.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you to our guests.
That concludes today's hearing. On behalf of the whole committee I want to thank Mr. Roach, Ms. Nodding, Mr. Taylor, and of course Dr. Hutchings for their contributions today.
We have committee business to attend to for about five to 10 minutes. I'm going to quickly take a break, and Mr. Donnelly has a question.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Before we go to a break, Mr. Chair, I submitted a motion. I was wondering if I could ask that the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans hear from witnesses on the issue of adjacency and the policies regarding owner-operator fleet separation, specifically as it relates to the impact on the Canfisco plant closure in Prince Rupert.
I've given notice and I'm wondering if we could call the question just before we go to break and go in camera.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
We're going to call for it now.
Is there any input on this?
Seeing none, we're calling for a vote on Mr. Donnelly's motion.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
You want a recorded vote. Okay.
Would you like the motion to be read again? I can do that if you want.
Submitted by Mr. Donnelly:
That the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans hear from witnesses on the issue of adjacency and the policies regarding owner operator and fleet separation specifically as it relates to the impact of the Canfisco plant closure in Prince Rupert.
Go ahead, Mr. Strahl.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC
In terms of the motion, I don't like a motion that singles out a specific company or a specific plant. It's clear this is about owner-operator fleet separation. We want to have a comprehensive study on how that should be done on both coasts. I understand the motivation here, but quite frankly, I think we have a work plan in place already that will take us to the end of this session and into the fall. I think the timing on this is poor, and we already have an agreed-upon work plan, so we won't be supporting this motion.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Mr. Chair, is there a specific time frame you're looking at? I take Mr. Strahl's point about our calendar. What time frame are you looking at?
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I'll let Mr. Donnelly respond to that, and then we'll go to Ms. Jordan.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Just to clarify, the motion doesn't call for a study. It just calls to hear witnesses. I think one committee would be sufficient, and before the summer recess.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Bernadette Jordan Liberal South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Mr. Donnelly is talking about one committee meeting. Do we have time in one committee? We haven't gotten to committee business yet and we still haven't figured out what our schedule is for the next six weeks.
I would have no problem with this if we have time to do it. My concern is that we vote on it and say yes, and then we don't have time to get to the other things that we want to address in this session.
Can you tell me if time would actually allow for this in this session?
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
There are—I'm trying to do the math in my head—meetings for June, and there are still a few meetings in May. That's pretty much all I can tell you right now without conducting committee business. I don't want to do committee business on the spot here just myself.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
I'll just add one other comment. This is an emergent issue, but if there isn't time to fit in one committee meeting by the end of June and it has to be pushed to September, I don't think that's an issue.