Fisheries Committee on May 2nd, 2017

[Linda Nowlan]

I think the government is taking too long if it takes seven years on average to create one MPA. That's a really long time. In Australia, the grandfather of all marine protected areas, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park—

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

Ms. Nowlan, regardless of the local impact, do you believe the government should be speeding up their process on the MPAs?

[Linda Nowlan]

No, I didn't say that.

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

You kind of did.

[Linda Nowlan]

No. I said seven years is too long. That's what I said.

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

Mr. Cox, I'm going to change my line of questioning away from MPAs.

You and your colleagues studied northern cod. We're very proud of the great study this committee did. My colleague Mr. McDonald referenced it. I'm curious. Did you or your colleague, through the course of your study, study the northern cod's food source as well, the capelin?

[Prof. Sean Cox]

No.

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

It's just out of curiosity because it's one that we've talked about that perhaps—

[Prof. Sean Cox]

As part of the study that we were working on, there was a group out of the St. John's office that was studying links between capelin and northern cod. It's an interesting—

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

Is it possible to get a copy of that, by any chance?

[Prof. Sean Cox]

I could look it up for you, yes.

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

That's great. Thank you.

I'm going to turn the rest over to—

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

I have two minutes.

I have a question for Ms. Nowlan, and then Mr. Morlock to answer afterwards.

Why is there such a strong foreign interest in Canada's MPA process?

[Linda Nowlan]

I'm not sure I would agree with the premise of that question. In terms of the foreign funding, I think that a lot of extremely large charitable foundations in the United States—and there are a lot of them, way more than we have in Canada—are interested in protecting the environment over the entire globe.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Why Canada's environment and not the U.S. environment?

[Linda Nowlan]

The majority of the Gordon and Betty Moore funding goes to the U.S.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Why are they spending so much on Canada?

[Linda Nowlan]

They spend their money globally. They have a lot of money to spend. Gordon Moore was one of the founders of Intel. He has a lot of money, just like a lot of the other big U.S. foundations. The Rockefeller brothers are selling their oil. These are big sources of money. They pick health care; they pick the environment; they pick public education.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

You happened to mention U.S. oil. Thank you.

Mr. Morlock, can you answer that? Why is there so much foreign interest in Canada's MPA process?

[Phil Morlock]

Over my career, I've seen Canada used as a test case by U.S. environmental and animal rights' organizations many times. It started with the seal hunt on the east coast by the International Fund for Animal Welfare, out of Yarmouth, Massachusetts. We saw that expand to the animal cruelty legislation that was just defeated in second reading in the House of Commons here last fall. It was the same proponents.

We've seen it in bear hunt campaigns where Ontario was the test case, and then it was exported back to Montana, Maine, Alaska, New Jersey, Maryland. We've seen it in issues around lead: lead ammunition, lead sinkers. as though the sky is falling due to thousands of loons dying from that. There's no scientific evidence to support that. That was attempted in Canada and then exported back to the U.S. states and so on.

We've seen example after example. If you look at this over a timeline, dominoes connect and there's a common direction here. I think the end game, with regard to the MPA scenario, and I would say the agenda-based MPA scenario as opposed to science-based, is to get all the recreational and commercial boats off the water.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

We'll stop there.

We have a bit of time, and this discussion is so interesting. With the committee's indulgence, if you'd like to ask a few more questions, we'll give three minutes to each party starting with the Liberals, and then Mr. Donnelly, and then the Conservatives.

Is everybody okay with that?

Go ahead, for three minutes.

[Pat Finnigan, Liberal, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

It's just a quick question, Mr. Morlock. Do you think decisions should ever be made tied to the economy? Do you think that should ever be the reason to put an MPA in place or not?

[Phil Morlock]

Yes. I think that's part of the equation. Certainly, with the PNCIMA example, one of the reasons we're so concerned with that is that according to DFO, that's the template for the rest of the water in Canada, including the Great Lakes. Twenty-five per cent of the recreational fishing in Canada occurs in the Great Lakes. If those agendas go forward the way they were implemented in California, it'll pancake the whole industry and the related economies that go with it.

Yes, there should be a consideration for that in all cases, not just for recreational fishing but for the other economies that are affected as well. That's responsible management.

[Pat Finnigan, Liberal, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Mrs. Jordan.