Evidence of meeting #142 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 climate.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Obviously, a motion to adjourn is not debatable.
All those in favour of adjourning?
I am calling the vote.
Are you moving to adjourn debate on the motion, or to adjourn the committee?
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
First of all, Mr. Chair, you have to make a ruling. I don't want to tell you how to do your job, but we should have a ruling from you as to whether or not the motion is in order. If it is in order, then Mr. Doherty's motion to adjourn the debate on the motion Mr. Rogers just moved would have been, I think, the procedure.
In fairness, Mr. Chair, could we have a ruling from you on whether or not the motion from Mr. Rogers is in order?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I believe the motion is in order, but I would like to delay the vote on the motion until after we question our witnesses and move into committee business, if the committee is satisfied with that.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Because he's moved the motion, we are now debating his motion. If it's in order, then we either have to start debating his motion or we have to table it or somehow adjudicate that motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Then I'll move that it is in order. We've debated it to some degree, so I guess we'll call the question on the motion made by Mr. Rogers.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
There is a motion that has been moved and halfway voted on. We have to finish that.
Liberal
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Chair, in fairness, you had clarified Mr. Calkins' question, so it was in order. Todd's motion was in order. We need to finish.
You were just clarifying. I was under the impression as well that it was moving to adjourn the committee, and it was clarified that it was for debate.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Those in favour of adjourning the debate?
(Motion agreed to)
Now we're back to questioning our witnesses.
Mr. Rogers, go ahead for the time remaining, please.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
I want to focus on the management practices I just referenced.
Mr. Lansbergen, how satisfied are you that DFO's stock assessment process is following this precautionary approach, with limited reference points and so on as part of the principles they're using? They talk about how the academics and industry and other groups get together and then they go out to communities and spread the message about this approach. Harvesters tell me they're not being consulted and they're not being listened to. How confident are you that they are following an approach that is acceptable to the harvesting sector in this industry?
President, Fisheries Council of Canada
As you alluded, our sector is quite fragmented and we don't always agree with each other. If you ask different people in the sector the same question, I think quite frequently you'll get different answers. I don't know how we can necessarily get around that, but I think one of the issues is how many resources the department has for the stock assessments of all of our commercial fisheries and whether they have kept them up to date. For some that they have not and for others that they have, do they have the time to undergo consultations with the stakeholders and the harvesters to the extent that will meet their expectations? That's part of the challenge.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
I guess the point I'm getting at is whether people are really listening to these harvesters. The consultation pieces are being done with different sectors and so on. You have harvesters who have major differences of opinion compared to some of the science. A perfect example from the area where I live is that harvesters this year are experiencing extremely good catches, much faster than they've had in the last three years, but the science was proposing a 30% cut to the stocks. Fishermen are at a loss to explain why that is the case. Many of them have already fished and have their quotas caught by this time, which is out of the ordinary.
President, Fisheries Council of Canada
On that particular case, I don't have enough knowledge and information of the specifics to really answer the question. I'm sorry.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
I appreciate that. I just wanted to know if you might have a perspective on that, because there seems to be a major discrepancy between what the people who have been fishing for decades are saying about the state of stocks and what science is saying, and I didn't know if you might have an opinion.
Mr. Wahle, would you be prepared to comment on that?
Research Professor, School of Marine Sciences, University of Maine, As an Individual
Just to clarify, as far as I know, the Canadian stock, like the American stock, is at its maximum level of productivity, at historic levels right now. That's not to say there aren't areas that are suffering. I pointed out the examples of southern New England in our part of the world. There are also parts of Atlantic Canada that may be more vulnerable than others, such as the Northumberland Strait near P.E.I. in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence. Because of its shallow nature, the summer warming can be extreme in that area.
To my knowledge, and in conferring with my Canadian colleagues at DFO, at the University of New Brunswick and at Memorial University, in the past 20 or so years, all stocks have been up by anywhere from 50% to 100%.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
Thank you, Mr. Wahle.
What time remains, Mr. Chair?
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
Okay.
I just wanted to put that point out there, because I am not expressing my frustration as much as the frustration of the harvesting community, in particular in Newfoundland and Labrador, versus what the scientists are saying, and get your and Mr. Lansbergen's perspective on how you see things.
I appreciate your comments.
President, Fisheries Council of Canada
Whenever the science is presented to the harvesting community, whenever it suggests there should be a cut in the allowable catch, the emotions and reactions are going to be way stronger than when it's up. That's when we see arguments over which area should be cut more than another. Then you get questions about the science being correct and any gaps. People very quickly point to the gaps in the data that's used for the conclusions.
