Fisheries Committee on March 9th, 2017

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

It will be studied each time one of these things is done.

It's a collaborative process, Mr. Chair, in the sense that with the consultations that happen with the fishing industry, with indigenous groups, with provinces, one of the main things that we discuss is exactly that. However, I would also offer the hypothesis that if we don't do this properly for Canada and for the world, there will be a long-term economic impact too if we mismanage species and marine ecosystems. We see the successful implementation of these marine protected areas as a very important economic policy as well.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

With your very aggressive.... Again, I'll also hearken back to our Conservative government. We were in favour of increasing our MPA targets, but also wanted to do a measured approach, not as aggressively as what you've set out.

My question would we this. We want to make sure that those economic impacts are studied prior to announcing anything. On your 5% target by 2017, is the plan in place today on how you're going to achieve that? Have the funds been allocated to mitigate any negative economic impacts, and if so, in which budget?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Yes, we have a plan to meet those targets, obviously. We're on track and believe we will even hopefully exceed the target for 2017 and work toward 2020.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Have you announced that plan?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

No, because it's part of an ongoing conversation that we're having on every coast with partners, indigenous groups, provincial governments, provinces. I'm seeing the Premier of Nova Scotia this evening. He'll want to talk about one that we're working on with him. We can't announce the plan until we have the elements nailed down.

With respect to your question, though, Todd, and through you, Mr. Chair, on whether we have allocated the funds around the economic impact, Fisheries and Oceans Canada will not and cannot allocate individual funds to anticipate what may be claimed as a particular economic impact. It's one of the struggles we need to reflect on. We are conscious of economic impacts. These areas will be created in a way that minimizes those impacts.

We will endeavour to offer other economic opportunities where there is a displacement. To achieve this, people have a responsibility, and it's not reflective of anybody sitting at this table, but with respect to one particular case in British Columbia—maybe it was our first exposure to fake news—I saw some people offering an economic impact analysis that was totally and completely disconnected from the evidence we had and that our partners had. Part of arriving at a consensus that Canadians want us to achieve with respect to these areas is to be as responsible as we can. As I said, I'm not speaking to anybody at this table today in this room, but we need to be careful not to imagine or exaggerate the economic disruptions. We are working all the time on those issues, and try, with our partners, to agree on a very precise set of facts.

Mr. Chair, the deputy would like to add something very briefly.

[Catherine Blewett, Deputy Minister, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

Just to augment a little bit, the minister is quite right; there is a very active plan engaged, as you might imagine. I just want to let you know that earlier this week I had a call with all of my provincial and territorial deputy minister colleagues—all provinces and territories—and walked through the plan and approach. We're actively sharing the material, because it is an ongoing dialogue. The consultations are going on.

Just to tilt this a little, if I may, away from a strictly economic focus, this is a science-based approach. We're looking at the identification of these areas from a science context. We are very carefully looking, though, at the implications of that science and have been fairly direct with industry. We completely understand industry's need for predictability and certainty. I talked to my provincial and territorial colleagues about our role in helping the conversation with industry so that they understand where we're going. We're going to be transparent.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

I appreciate that, and I really appreciate your entering into the conversation.

The challenge we have is that to reach your target, you would have to assume—and you get into trouble when you assume, but it's fairly straightforward to assume or to see—that the north coast of the Pacific is going to be one of the areas that will probably be the hardest hit. The Pacific coast will be the hardest hit area in British Columbia, but it's also in the north. Those are areas where there's shipping, where there are coastal communities that depend on fisheries for their livelihoods.

The concern we have is whether that study been considered. Disproportionately so, British Columbia and northern Canada are going to be the areas facing the hardest impact.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Todd, I may characterize it differently. You may see it as hardest hit; I may see it as receiving the greatest benefit. We really do believe that there are huge economic and environmental benefits to doing this properly, and obviously our intention is to do it properly.

Colleagues, as I noted in my opening comments, you're going to be doing work on this particular issue. I would hope and believe that we could have senior officials who can go coast by coast to provide you with the kind of insight that we're developing with our partners, just to remove that confusion.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

I want to add to that, though.

Would the minister today, then, commit to allowing the committee to commence the study of MPAs prior to making any further announcements on MPAs on the west coast or in northern British Columbia? Allow us to do that study, because you have to admit that doing the study while the government is going ahead with your MPA program and with announcements would make the study redundant.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Would I “permit the committee”? I wouldn't have used those words, Todd. The government doesn't “permit” the committee to do anything; we look forward to your work and would work with you in any way we can. I don't propose to determine or permit or deny permission to any work you're going to do.

I will meet the targets. We committed to Canadians in an election campaign very solemnly that we would achieve those targets. We won a historic number of seats, including in your province, and won every seat in Atlantic Canada, so there should be no ambiguity as to our desire to meet the targets we have set. There should equally be no confusion around our commitment to work openly and transparently with provincial governments, indigenous groups, and this committee.

I can't say that we're not going to proceed to do the work we were elected to do because a committee is or isn't doing a piece of work. We will benefit from your work, and I would be happy to collaborate with you as you do it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Minister.

I'm going to go to Mr. Donnelly for a seven-minute-plus intervention.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I thank you, your parliamentary secretary, and your department officials for being here today. I appreciate you coming to the committee to answer our questions.

I want to talk first about salmon disease. Earlier this week, I had an opportunity to ask you how you were planning to protect wild salmon now that the deadly disease of HSMI has been confirmed in B.C. salmon farms.

Minister, you responded, and I quote:

The member knows that we believe that middle-class economic opportunities on both coasts depend on aquaculture and wild fisheries, and we think the two can coexist safely together.

The Cohen commission and numerous studies, including a recent study and a study published in Marine Policy, concluded that B.C. salmon farms present a greater than minimal risk of serious harm to wild salmon due to the transfer of sea lice and disease. Both of these studies confirm the findings.

I have a few questions for you.

Do you really believe that wild fisheries and aquaculture can coexist safely when the science has proven time and again that they can't?

What is your plan to protect the wild Pacific salmon industry from this deadly disease, which has the potential to destroy not only farmed salmon but the wild salmon economy?

Will you heed the advice of salmon advocates like Alexandra Morton and scientists like Dr. Kristi Miller, who are asking that this research team be allowed to continue their important work?

Do you agree that they must do this work and that it must be continued in the interest of all Canadians?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Fin, for your questions. I'll offer a few brief comments, and then I think Terry wants to add something. Trevor is in the best position to provide specific answers for you and for the committee with respect to the scientific aspects of the disease concerns you raised in the House of Commons.

You asked if I believed that wild fisheries and aquaculture can coexist safely. My view is yes.

Some people disagree with that. I respect that and understand that, but that is not our position. That's certainly not the position of our government.

We recognize that for every scientific voice that raises concerns, we need to double down and do the research in a transparent and open way that is accessible to Canadians to ensure that the protections and the measures in place are in fact effective.

I note some of the scientific advice or comments you referred to. We also have others who have a different perspective. We'll continue to be guided by the best scientific advice we can get, and to share it with Canadians.

I fundamentally believe that middle-class economic growth depends on successfully managing both aquaculture....

Over 50% of the fish and seafood consumed in the world comes from farmed operations. It's farmed fish, and it comes from aquaculture. We need to do it in the best way possible. We need to be global leaders in doing this safely. We can be inspired by the work of other countries that have frankly, in our view, done a good job at it.

We'll continue to do that—to be transparent and open, and to make changes as needed to ensure that we're reaching the level of safety and rigour that Canadians expect.

With respect to Ms. Morton herself, there's an ongoing litigation case that is yet unresolved, so I don't want to comment specifically on her views or her specific issue, but I recognize that she represents a perspective shared by many others.

Terry—

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Minister, I appreciate your answer.

I would like to ask a few questions that I would like to go to you, if I could.

Just in terms of—

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I did not answer your specific question with respect to.... I don't want on the record to have a specific—

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

You did say they could coexist safely, and that's my point.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

But then you went on to talk about a specific disease concern you have with Pacific salmon, and I just wanted Trevor at least to be able to—

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Right, and it is associated with almost every jurisdiction around the world that does salmon farming, including the world leader, Norway, which is moving to closed containment. I think you've answered the question—

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

No, actually, I don't think I answered it at all.

I was offering Trevor up to provide a very concise and specific answer to that question, if I may, Mr. Chair. We did not answer that at all. I'm proposing that Trevor do so, quickly.

[Trevor Swerdfager, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Ecosystems and Oceans Science and Oceans Protection Plan, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

I have a couple of things, I guess.

First, we have a comprehensive risk assessment under way in British Columbia to look at these very issues. It's in its infancy. It is continuing. The new resources that we have through budget 2016 are to augment and expand the disease risk assessment work that's under way now.

The second point is that the level of unanimity in the science community around these issues is, at least in our view, quite low. There is a great deal of debate as to how and when disease arises and how it transmits, and specifically with HSMI, there is quite a bit of controversy and debate in the scientific community about its origin, its passage from farm to wild, or vice versa, and the extent to which it is implicating the industry.

The third point I would make is with respect to the global situation. The strains that we have found in British Columbia of HSMI are genetically different from those in Norway and other European waters. We are very confident that the two disease situations are quite different and we do not have an emphatic conclusion about the future transmission and/or impact of HSMI in British Columbia. We have not detected it anywhere else in Canada.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you for that. I hope the department is correct about their assumption on that for the sake of both industries, both the wild and the farmed salmon.

Minister, through the chair, what funding has been specifically committed to implementing the Cohen inquiry recommendations?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Again, the last time I was here the committee told you about the discussion I had with Justice Cohen, which I thought was inspiring. I had talked about the occasion that I had in Vancouver to talk about what specific Cohen commission recommendations our government had already responded to and what our plan was to ensure that we continue to do that.

In terms of the specific funding elements around different Cohen commission recommendations, I'll offer a brief comment, and Trevor or somebody else might perhaps be able to delineate it more sharply than I can.

One of the things that I mentioned in my opening remarks was that a significant and historic investment in marine science is a key part of being able to respond to the rather thoughtful elements that Justice Cohen raised. We recognized that the department did not have the necessary capacity to do the full scientific analysis that Canadians expected of us, recognizing the iconic nature of those salmon species on your coast, Fin. That was part of our answer, and part of Justice Cohen's report is found in the ongoing and weekly work that the Pacific region and others are doing in our department.

Trevor, do you want to add on the specific funding piece?

[Trevor Swerdfager]

Just a bit, Minister.

For us, we don't tag various program activities specifically related to a particular Cohen commission recommendation. Many of the programs—indeed, the vast majority of them in British Columbia—touch on multiple elements of the Cohen commission, so it's difficult for us to say that action X, Y, or Z and dollar A, B, or C tag to Cohen, and therefore to total it. You won't easily find from us a specific “here's the investment in Cohen” implementation per se; rather, it's across the suite of our programming, with some obvious exceptions.

However, for the most part, the pan-DFO program in DFO Pacific region and in DFO headquarters contributes to various elements of Cohen.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

The Pacific Salmon Foundation is calling for a modest adjustment to the cost of the recreational fisheries conservation stamp, from $6 to $10. The additional funds will respond to additional demand for Pacific salmon conservation, restoration, enhancement, and science through the Pacific Salmon Foundation's community salmon program, consistent with a long-standing contribution agreement with Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

Therefore, Minister, I ask if you support the Pacific Salmon Foundation's call for an adjustment to the cost of the recreational fisheries conservation stamp from $6 to $10.

I'd like to ask another question as well, and preface it with some work that the Pacific Salmon Foundation is doing. They have proposed a renewed commitment to community-based salmon conservation, restoration, enhancement, and science supported by the Pacific salmon endowment fund, an independent non-profit organization. These funds would be allocated to the following activities of the Pacific Salmon Foundation, which would enable collaborative science and restoration with DFO and others to preserve and restore vulnerable coastal marine ecosystems—

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Donnelly, I'm going to have to ask you to hurry this up, please.