Fisheries Committee on April 17th, 2018

[Mark Waddell]

That was a pan-Atlantic consultation—all of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, P.E.I., and Quebec—with regard to vessel length policies in Atlantic Canada. Through those consultations, we did derive 10 principles whereby we and industry representatives both agreed to entertain modifications to vessel lengths for certain fleets.

Those principles include: conservation, fleet capacity, self-adjustment mechanisms, vessel safety, enterprise viability, fleet shares, core members, readily enforceable mechanisms, consistency with licensing policy and objectives, and the taking into consideration of the multi-licence nature of fishing enterprises in Atlantic Canada. Since that time, we have had some incidents, as we testified to back in February, of fleets coming forward, working within these principles, and seeking modifications to vessel lengths for that fleet. We have accepted those.

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

For Newfoundland and Labrador fisheries, apparently the rules don't apply there. Can you explain how this is the case?

[Mark Waddell]

The rules do apply there in terms of these principles and what we would take into consideration in order to do a change as requested by a fleet.

Jackie just put up her hand. I'm not sure if she wishes to jump in.

[Jacqueline Perry]

Yes. Is it okay if I intervene at this point, Mr. Chair?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

Please proceed.

[Jacqueline Perry]

Thank you.

I did want to add a comment on the 2003 process that was referenced. In 2007 we did a region-wide extensive process in Newfoundland and Labrador that resulted in some changes to the vessel modification policies in our region only. That was done in consultation and in partnership with the provincial government, and it also involved a significant change to our policy regime that implemented the combining policy. With the expansion of vessel capacity that this policy change encompassed, we also included a significant policy that included rationalization in association with that. That was subsequent to the 2003 exercise that Mark described, and it was specific to Newfoundland and Labrador only.

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

I guess I'm confused, then. Do the rules apply to Newfoundland and Labrador or don't they?

[Mark Waddell]

They do apply.

[Jacqueline Perry]

The rules apply in Newfoundland and Labrador, but we also have the latitude on a region-by-region basis and a fleet-by-fleet basis, as Mark has signalled, to entertain the specificities that may exist in particular regions in particular fisheries.

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

Do those apply in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick as well, those separate conditions you're talking about, or only in Newfoundland and Labrador?

[Jacqueline Perry]

The policy changes that were made in 2007 apply only to Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

Okay.

[Mark Waddell]

Based [Technical difficulty—Editor] 2010.

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

Okay. I want to go back to the TSB for a second. We've had TSB officials in front of the committee as well. They referenced British Columbia and talked about B.C. On the west coast, things are different. How is it that we have these separate conditions or sets of safety rules for one coast versus the other? In other words, what they were recommending or suggesting is, why not apply these safety recommendations on the east coast as well?

[Mark Waddell]

On the west coast, we have a different licensing regime, in that licences are tied to vessels rather than individuals. That is a by-product of decisions made back in the 1960s and an evolution thereof. When we're trying to ascertain vessel ownership, we check vessel registration to ensure that the individual we are talking to has the authority, has ownership of the vessel, and that we are dealing with an owner who can make licensing decisions with regard to fisheries management.

On the east coast, all of Atlantic Canada, and the balance of Canada, licences are issued to an individual. As soon as we have ascertained your identity, we know that we are dealing with the appropriate individual. One recommendation that the TSB made before this committee recently was to consider porting, I guess, for want of a better word, the operational policies on the west coast to the balance of Canada, and that is something we are looking to explore to update our operational policies.

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

Okay. We heard one witness say that 90% of crab fishers don't want the vessel replacement policy changed. That was Mr. Keith Smith. Obviously there are a few who do, and we're hearing from them. There's a real emphasis.... I think you mentioned that one of the principles is fleet safety.

Again, how do we square this circle? There's a large percentage of fishers who are fine with the vessel length, it seems—or it's a so-called claim—and there's a small percentage who aren't. Is there a difference between inshore and those who want to go farther out? Is there some testimony we could hear or some comments about why there's a difference between the fishermen in terms of that alleged small percentage who want the change in vessel length?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

In 25 seconds or less, please.

[Mark Waddell]

I think that wherever we've had consensus within a fleet the department has accepted those proposed changes and has worked with the fleet to advance those changes. Where individuals bring forward proposals for their own interests, those, when we consult with the fleet, are not supported.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

Perfect. He had five seconds left, so good job.

I was remiss in not introducing our colleague, the member of Parliament for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, Mr. Albas.

Thank you for joining us today. I appreciate your sitting in.

With that, we will go to Mr. Morrissey for seven minutes, please.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

My question will focus on this point as a follow-up to my colleague from Newfoundland on squaring the circle. No disrespect, but when officials from DFO come in and appear before this committee, we get a view and we get testimony that “we're consulting extensively and we're working entirely with the industry for their best interests”.

When I meet fishers on the harbours and the wharfs, and when we heard from fishers before this committee, they did not see it that way. They do not view the department as consulting with them. Their view is that the department talks to them, but does not consult with them. They do not get input back. I'll use a couple of points to illustrate that.

In Prince Edward Island, the boat size is restricted to 45 feet, I believe, within the lobster fishery. The lobster fishery is totally managed by capacity. If the fishers were fishing at about 48 feet it should have no impact, if they want a safer vessel. At the same time, the department and the industry are advocating for more quality. The use of a fishing vessel has changed dramatically over the last number of years as quality has been driven by the marketplace back to the fishers. They're putting more equipment on board the vessel to hold the fish they catch, so they need a larger vessel.

I'll get to this point. In the tuna fishery in my riding, each tuna fisher is issued a tag to catch one fish. That fish has to be monitored; it's a monitored fishery. If you don't hail DFO monitors when you come in, they will seize your fish and the Receiver General will get the money for it. If a fisher decides that they want to go and fish on a Saturday, they have to get permission to fish in another boat or they cannot do it. On Saturdays, there are not many offices open within DFO. This is the complaint I get.

They ask what you are really managing. You've already determined what they can fish. They have to check it in. Why does DFO have to approve their request to fish from another vessel? If they want to go out in a canoe, they say, they should be able to do it, because it has nothing to do with regulating the fishery. It's those types of policies.... It's the same thing.

The evidence we heard on the buddy system was to the contrary. In fact, the testimony that was given was that fishers want to do more of the buddy system, but they're frustrated by DFO, which will not allow it. As well, there's the case of a fisher who had to use four separate boats because he could not fish his allocation on different ones.... He was forced to use that.

I fail to see the logic of some of the regulations within DFO when it comes to some of these fisheries that are managed in numerous methodologies other than the size of the vessels. Could you speak briefly to that? The industry is very frustrated, and they do not have the view that DFO consults with them. I'm using that in a broad sense.

[Mark Waddell]

I'll start with the consultation piece, I guess. DFO does consult broadly and with a wide range of stakeholders across the full suite of its program activities.

Now, with regard to fisheries management, that means we engage with national or pan-regional sorts of organizations, such as the Canadian Independent Fish Harvesters Federation, the Canadian Council of Professional Fish Harvesters, the Fisheries Council of Canada, the BC Seafood Alliance, and the like. Then, as we work down into regional organizations, we engage with the P.E.I. Fishermen's Association, the Maritime Fishermen's Union, the FFAW in Newfoundland, and similar sorts of organizations to get a pulse for what the industry stakeholders are looking for.

If there are disconnects between what we're hearing at those tables and what members are telling those organizations, that is one thing, but we also engage with—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Could I stop you at that point? I've heard that rationalization numerous times by officials: that the disconnect is between the organization you're talking to and the fishers. That's been raised a number of times, but if you're not reaching the fisher groups and you suspect there's a disconnect, why are you continuing to use the same consultation process that continues to lead to frustration from the rank-and-file fishers?

[Mark Waddell]

We are shifting away from that type of consultation. We saw recently in Newfoundland, for example, that they did a multi-city tour, a town tour, across the province to engage directly with harvesters. We also work through our advisory processes whereby we engage with harvesters and licence-holders.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Have you changed anything as a result of that more direct consultation process?

[Mark Waddell]

Jackie, have we...?