Fisheries Committee on Dec. 7th, 2017

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

I have a further question, and I apologize to our colleagues. Again, we want to give this legislation its full due when we're considering this. It is an important piece of legislation as we move forward. So to fully understand this, if we have fishing such as bottom trawling or exploration that has been ongoing, or could be deemed as taken place in the year previously, that could be prohibited due to the threat to the ecological integrity. Am I understanding this with this amendment?

[Jeff MacDonald]

I think with regard to the subamendment we're talking about the regulatory-making powers of the minister. So, when the minister proposes to the Governor in Council a marine protected area, the package must refer to one of the reasons under subsection 35(1). With regard to the question on fishing activity, that's in the context of the other part. That's part of Bill C-55, which is the “freezing the footprint” concept that is related to a ministerial order. The ministerial order is not intended to be the final MPA. It's the Governor in Council MPA. By this subamendment being one of the reasons, it would be part of the reasoning for a package submitted to the Governor in Council.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Just to remind everybody, Ms. May is asking for withdrawal of PV-4, which is page 20, to be replaced by PV-01. What I am doing now is seeking unanimous consent to do just that. Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

(Amendment withdrawn)

We have two similarities here based on “ecological integrity”, and I think Ms. May may have touched on it earlier. We now have PV-01 as well as NDP-4, which is on page 22, both dealing with “ecological integrity”.

We are trying to clarify the similarities between the two.

Ms. May, go ahead.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

For what it's worth, Mr. Chair, when I said we're through with PV-4, it was because I am not a member of the committee, and I don't think I can put forward amendments that are that similar. I think Mr. Donnelly's amendment NDP-4 and this first one, which I now understand is PV-01, are not conflicts that would require that his not be considered if mine passes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

They are not conflicts.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

They are not conflicts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

That's right, so his will be considered when we get there. There's no doubt about that.

Now, we're off to the races once again.

That being said, on PV-01, Ms. May.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

I think I got to submit it, and I think we got to debate it before unanimous consent, so I'm just going to sit here with my fingers crossed.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

You are a treasure this morning. Thank you very much.

Mr. Hardie, go ahead.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

On this amendment, again, drawing attention to the fact that this bill would allow the minister to designate interim protected areas, as an interim protected area, the intention is, for the most part, to allow pre-existing activities to continue.

If I look at PV-01, and if we apply the conditions that you have in new proposed paragraphs 35(1.1)(a), (b), (c), and (d), the only way I could see this being used as criteria for the minister to designate an interim protected area is if it's a portion of the ocean where nothing is happening.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Hardie, I hate to get all game show Jeopardy! on you. Is this in the form of a question?

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Yes, it is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

For whom?

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I was going to ask Mr. MacDonald to comment on that. Is this a plausible rationale for indicating an interim protected area? Are there situations where the minister would want to protect an area where currently nothing is happening?

[Jeff MacDonald]

Mr. Chair, certainly there would be circumstances where the minister may want to do that, especially if we're talking, for example, about areas of the ocean that we may have discovered have important ecological features where there has not yet been any human activity.

One of the examples that I think we spoke about when we were presenting the bill was when the minister was here, he was explaining the Hecate Strait marine protected area. It was discovered to be a significant ecological treasure for quite some time. There were no human activities affecting the corals, so an interim protection order could protect that area as an interim measure while the final Governor in Council regulations were being established.

There are perhaps other areas of Canada's oceans that have not yet been explored. Some of them are covered in ice. That would be an example where you could use ecological integrity as a reason for creating an interim protected area.

My understanding, though, in terms of the interim protection MPA, is that Bill C-55 gives the minister the authority to freeze the footprint. However, ongoing activities would continue to be allowed, so it would only be in the context where, as you say, there are no ongoing activities currently.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Mr. MacDonald.

Mr. Hardie.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

To just finish off the question, the application of ecological integrity is an option but it's not mandatory.

[Jeff MacDonald]

That's correct.

When we propose a regulatory package, either through a ministry order—because that's a regulatory instrument—or through a Governor in Council regulation, the package has to refer to subsection 35(1) of the Oceans Act and say that we are creating this regulation for this reason. So proposed new paragraph 35(1)(f), in this case, would become one of the reasons that the minister could use.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, gentlemen.

Mr. Arnold.

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

Mr. Chair, I would request that either Ms. May or one of the expert witnesses here define “ecological integrity”. For example, I don't think there's anywhere in the world that hasn't been touched by human activity in some way, so what would be the definition of “ecological integrity”?

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Are you asking Ms. May, or...?

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

I'm asking either-or, or both.