Evidence of meeting #81 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 may.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Darren Goetze  Director General, Conservation and Protection, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Jeff MacDonald  Director General, Oceans Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Philippe Méla  Legislative Clerk

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Mr. Donnelly.

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

Mr. Chair, I can't support this one as well. The concern I have right now, given DFO's current assessment of the environmental impacts of what would even be considered “sustainable aquaculture”, is that it would allow open-net finfish aquaculture, which at this point could then be allowed in MPAs, and I can't support that.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Seeing no discussion, shall CPC-9 carry?

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

I'll ask for a recorded vote.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Before we proceed with PV-2, I just want to point out something. The Standing Orders now dictate, as in recent years, that we allow more independence of people from the unrecognized parties to have a say in committee business. Part of that is that, as you witnessed earlier, they can participate in the debates. As well, when they submit amendments to the committee, they are deemed moved. It's automatic.

That is why we're going to vote on this. If you want to discuss it, by all means do. However, I see—and I'm not allowed to say this, but I will—that Ms. May is not here. Therefore, it's deemed moved. The only thing they cannot do is vote. This is just so everyone is clear.

On PV-2, Mr. Donnelly.

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

I'm not sure which official to direct this to, but in the proposed paragraph 35.11(e), could I get a comment on “the passage of Canadian and foreign ships” and the implications of allowing that in this amendment? Just to let everyone else know, I'm quite fine with (a), (b), (c), (d), and (f), but I am concerned about (e).

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Which page?

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Ms. May, we'll get to you in just a quick moment, but we beg your forbearance now to allow the officials to answer the question.

In the legislation itself, it's page 3.

Mr. MacDonald.

10:45 a.m.

Director General, Oceans Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Jeff MacDonald

I may also defer to my colleagues, if they have some knowledge of this. I'm not an expert in the law of the sea, but given that the regulatory-making authority applies not only to Canada's territorial waters, but also to the exclusive economic zone, I'm not sure if this would create a conflict with the rights of innocent passage.

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Mr. Donnelly, go ahead, please.

10:45 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

We're just hearing our officials aren't clear. Is there anyone from the department who could answer this question?

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

By a show of hands, Mr. MacDonald, you seem to be eager. Go ahead.

10:45 a.m.

Director General, Oceans Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Jeff MacDonald

Our department might not be able to answer that question. I think it would be more appropriate to ask Transport, Justice, or Global Affairs.

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Okay.

Ms. May.

10:45 a.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Chair, I'm sure committee members recall that I mentioned earlier the motion that every committee passed with identical wording that says I have an opportunity—which isn't really an opportunity; it's the coercion that makes me show up at clause-by-clause instead of having rights. But for the motion you passed, I could be moving these motions at report stage, which is why I had to run out of the room to get to Bill C-57, where I'm also going through a clause-by-clause.

I don't know if my amendment was defeated. I ran back before finding out, but I at least was able to present on Bill C-57. So I apologize for being out of breath and late for PV-2, which is now the third one I've been able to present, for which I thank you.

I've heard the discussion, so I guess we're well into discussing this. There already are provisions, of course, that the minister may prohibit any activity that is not part of a class of activities set out in the permitted areas of activities. My amendment attempts to create greater precision. There are things the minister may choose to prohibit pursuing these regulations, and may prohibit, and then the items are listed (a) through (f): hydrocarbon and mineral exploration; renewable energy infrastructure; marine finfish aquaculture; bottom trawling fishing gear; the passage of Canadian and foreign ships—and I gather you were just discussing that—disposal of or causing to be permitted the disposal of a substance.

These recommendations come from a lot of the testimony that you heard before this committee. We know that polling by the World Wildlife Fund says that 80% of Canadians believe that marine protected areas should not allow oil and gas activity; 87% believe marine protected areas should not allow bottom trawling. We did see quite a public outcry when right after the announcement of the proposed Laurentian Channel MPA, there was what many Canadians regarded as incompatible news that oil and gas activities were still permitted.

This is not a mandatory responsibility of the minister. Again, I want to stress that to make regulations to prohibit these kinds of activities, and I would imagine, of course, with regard to the question for which no one here has an answer about how this would affect rights of innocent passage, the minister would be mindful of all such concerns on a case-by-case basis and would not put forward a regulation that was not enforceable within Canada.

I'm quite confident that this is within all four corners of Canadian law, and again, I'd urge you to consider it as one that meets a lot of public concern, even though it's merely an option for a minister and it's purely discretionary.

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Thank you, Ms. May.

Mr. Donnelly.

10:45 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

Mr. Chair, I'm assuming we're going to look at NDP-3 as well, because we've done that just recently. These are almost identical, with the exception of the one that I just asked about, which is paragraph (e), the passage of Canadian and foreign ships. Essentially, NDP-3 is the same as PV-2, with the exception of that paragraph (e).

Mr. Chair, I'm asking you if I should speak to this, if we're going to discuss this at the same time, because I think the format you chose for the previous one should apply here.

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

They're not consequential. We don't have them linked officially.

Staff are saying that there's obviously a stark difference and enough of a difference to have debates on both.

10:50 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

Okay.

If this one is approved, what are the consequences for NDP-3?

10:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

That depends until we get there.

10:50 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

I hear that, but essentially everything in there will be passed except for the one paragraph that will be added. I'm assuming we won't need to vote on it, because it will all be passed.

10:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

We will have to vote on it, yes. It's scheduled to be voted on.

10:50 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

Okay, so my question stands. How do you vote on something—

10:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Scott Simms

Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt, Mr. Donnelly, but I'm going to ask William. Do you want to finish your statement and then he can explain why.

10:50 a.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

That was my statement, to get that explanation.

Thanks.