Evidence of meeting #36 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 dfo.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Staff Counsel, West Coast Environmental Law
Excuse me. I haven't finished.
Streamkeeper groups are very concerned about how the law works.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
I'm afraid this is my time as a member of Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Staff Counsel, West Coast Environmental Law
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Do I have time to finish my answer or not?
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Madam, to be honest, each member has seven minutes. I apologize if you feel you're inconvenienced, but it's up to our members here to use their time as they wish.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, if the witnesses are being asked a question, they should be allowed to answer the question.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Keep in mind that the seven minutes belong to you as a member. You can proceed as you see fit. If someone feels that is rude behaviour—
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
—then I apologize, but it still belongs to the member at the end of the day, which I have to uphold.
That being said, I'm going to return to the clock.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
The reason I ask that is I've had the pleasure of working directly for a forest company, not representing them, not being a consultant to them, but working for a forest company where I ran a wastewater treatment plant in the environment programs.
One of the things environmental activists never give industry credit for is the fact that best management practices are implemented at all times in every industry.
I know, Mr. Langer, you talked down about the business of making money. The fact is big business, and industry, and natural resources companies use that money to improve environmental standards all the time. One only needs to look at Sudbury, the air quality improvements there, and the wastewater treatment plants in all forest companies now.
Mr. Langer, you made a point. You said there has been a rapid net loss of habitat. Can you give me some specific examples with numbers attached under the new act?
4:05 p.m.
Fisheries Biologist, As an Individual
We just have to look at the Petronas LNG project in the Skeena River estuary. It's a relatively pristine estuary, and we've learned from the Fraser River, the Squamish estuary, and many others that this is not a place where you put industry. You have to site in an alternate location.
No one in DFO is against industry and the economy. At times, 80% of the solution is placing the right industry in the right location. Here we have a project in the middle of a virgin estuary. That's a tremendous setback. In the Fraser River, DFO seems to have disappeared, and we're allowing supertankers of jet fuel to come up into the Fraser River estuary, turn around in a narrow waterway, and build a giant terminal for 80 million litres of jet fuel. That was rejected in 1988, but it's approved now.
This goes on and on.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
It's interesting that you both use the Fraser River as an example.
Ms. Nowlan, your example stopped in 2009, which was admittedly a very low year, but wonder of wonders, in 2010 the sockeye sprang back, and in 2014 there was a record sockeye salmon run of 20 million fish, so I think it's important to complete the story here.
It's obvious the Fraser River system is currently capable of producing millions of fish even under the new Fisheries Act, and perhaps even because of the new Fisheries Act.
I found it interesting, when we changed the Fisheries Act, we focused on production of fish. Fish production is quite important.
I'm going to ask you a question, Mr. Langer. In prairie Canada, a number of reservoirs have been built over the last 40 or 50 years. There's something you're familiar with as a biologist called the reservoir effect, in that the fish population, the fish production, just boomed dramatically to the great benefit of local communities.
Was the building of those reservoirs and the admitted changes in fish habitat, which caused an incredible boom in fish production, good or bad for fish?
4:05 p.m.
Fisheries Biologist, As an Individual
I'm not aware that reservoirs have created a great boom in fisheries. Generally, downstream areas are affected greatly by reduced flows or altered flows. We just have to look at the Nechako River, and the Kenney Dam that was built there, and the damage that it has done, including the temperature.
I don't know where you get your information from, but probably—
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Fisheries Biologist, As an Individual
—the greatest impact to fishery runs in Canada and the world is the building of dams and reservoirs. Certain fish could be introduced into a reservoir, and they will do well there, but that does not include the salmon that have to spawn in that area, and get flooded out, and get blocked by the dam.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
I'd like to bring you to my constituency to see the Lake of the Prairies reservoir and the significant walleye fishery that has developed because of that reservoir.
Ms. Nowlan, one thing I find consistent among the environmental activist groups is the desire to reduce the ability of the minister to decide public policy. The World Wildlife Fund said that before us, and the Ecology Action Centre said that before us.
On page 5 of your brief, you say, “limit the Ministers’ regulatory powers”. What is it about environmental activist groups that they want to remove the powers of elected officials to make decisions on behalf of citizens who vote? To me that's a recommendation against democracy. Can you explain that?
4:10 p.m.
Staff Counsel, West Coast Environmental Law
Yes, I'd be happy to. I'll refer to the Supreme Court of Canada, and I'll quote from them:
Though discretionary decisions will generally be given considerable respect, that discretion must be exercised in accordance with the boundaries imposed in the statute, the principles of the rule of law, the principles of administrative law, the fundamental values of Canadian society, and the principles of the Charter.
In the Ahousaht case from 2014, the then minister of fisheries and oceans wrote a handwritten note beside the science advice from her advisers, who advised not to reopen a herring fishery. She wrote beside it that it should be reopened, and she gave a direction to do so. The judge in that case in Federal Court admonished the minister for “fudging the numbers” and said that it seems that once the minister and the DFO depart from science-based assessments, the integrity of the fisheries management system is harmed.
There is never absolute discretion for elected officials. That is a misunderstanding of the law.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
