Evidence of meeting #147 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 s-238.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Paul Gillis  Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Doug Forsyth  Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Carolina Caceres  Manager, International Biodiversity, Canadian Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Okay, because if there is no market for it, then all we're really saying is that they have to bring in the whole shark, which may make it totally uneconomical if the origin is China or Hong Kong, for example. Even if there is a market for that, if the rest of the shark is going to be wasted anyway, I wonder what net value this initiative will have.

I would get the impression that if we require the importation of the whole fish—the whole shark—from Asia, it's going to make it highly uneconomical, unless there is some kind of market for the other parts of the shark.

This will do one of two things: It will either spur a new line of business for somebody, or it will make it really quite uneconomical to import whole sharks just to get the fins. Is that a fair assessment?

3:40 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

Yes, that could be an impact.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Okay. Thank you.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Thank you, Mr. Hardie.

As a point of clarification, you said that a fisherman can bring it in if it's part of a bycatch. Do they need any special licence if it's part of a bycatch? I know that if some fishermen are fishing cod in Newfoundland, for example, and they catch halibut as part of a bycatch, they are not allowed to bring it in. Whether it's dead or alive, they have to throw it back in the water. Really, there's no licence needed, but if they do catch a shark, they have to bring the full one in.

3:40 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

Unfortunately, my colleague from fisheries management wasn't able to be here today with me, but my understanding is that through the licensing policy....The main fishery that the bycatch comes from is a longline with a hook, like a swordfish fishery, and part of that licence for the swordfish fishery is that they are allowed to land and bring back certain species of shark.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Thank you.

Now we go to Mr. Doherty for seven minutes or less, please.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our guests for being here.

I will direct my question to Mr. Gillis. I believe he would be the person who can, hopefully, answer this question.

Previous iterations of Bill S-238 have come before the House and have not passed. That would be Bill C-380 in the 41st Parliament, Bill C-251 in this Parliament and now Bill S-238. Would you have studied the previous iterations of the ban on shark finning, and if so, could you tell us primarily where the difference between those—

3:40 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

Unfortunately, that predates me. I'm not able to respond to that question.

Can we follow up with you on that?

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Sure, absolutely. Thank you.

Our colleague across the way could probably tell me.

It's just interesting to know what the differences and little nuances were in the previous pieces on this issue.

Mr. Gillis, you mentioned in your presentation that shark-fin imports have declined over 50% since 2005. What's the primary driver of that decline? Is it public perception? Is it a turn in the public...?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

I'll turn to my colleague from Global Affairs Canada to speak to that.

May 27th, 2019 / 3:45 p.m.

Doug Forsyth Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

I think it's fair to say that all of those have had an impact on it. There are a number of factors, but I think you have certainly highlighted the primary ones.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Going back to the question that our colleague asked—and forgive me, but I didn't have my earpiece in place, so I missed a good portion of what you were saying—we know that Bill C-68 has adopted a lot of this bill's content.

How much of Bill S-238 has it primarily adopted? Did I hear you correctly that subsections 32(1) and 32(2) of the Fisheries Act have been amended completely?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

Proposed subsections 32 (1) and 32(2) have been implemented verbatim, as well as clause 3, which is proposed new section 6(1.1), and clause 4, which is proposed new paragraphs 10(1.1)(a) and 10(1.1)(b), with the exception of the term “or any derivatives of shark fins”.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Okay, so they didn't include any derivatives.

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

No, the derivatives element was not included in Bill C-68.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

I'm going to be very blunt and just ask the question.

In your opinion, is Bill S-238 needed to bring this up?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

Is it needed to...?

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Is it needed to bring us up to international standards?

We've said that Bill S-238 has been primarily adopted by another piece of legislation. Is it failing in any areas? Is Bill C-68 failing in any area that is captured by Bill S-238?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

I'll use the term that I used at the outset. I think that the policy intent of Bill S-238 has been adopted in Bill C-68, and that Canada now has among the best practices when it comes to deterring shark finning.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Okay, so the intent of Bill S-238 has been met in other pieces of legislation.

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

In my opinion, yes.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Okay.

I think you captured that this would also not impact any Canadian fishery. Is that correct?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

No, it will not.

Again, there have been no exports of shark fins from Canada in years. The markets for Canadian-caught shark meat will still be available to Canadian fisherman.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Okay.

Does the shark-fin industry—again, pardon my ignorance—have something like sustainable cod?

Fogo Island is an area of Newfoundland where they line their cod in. It's now sustainably caught. Does the shark industry or the shark finning industry have a sustainably caught product? Is there a way that this product could come into Canada through a loophole because it has been sustainably caught?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Paul Gillis

I am not aware of an industry practice that could prove that the fins being imported were sustainably and responsibly harvested.