Evidence of meeting #12 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fishery.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Hutchins, and thank you, Mr. Bragdon.
We'll now go to Mr. Morrissey for five minutes or less, please.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
I would like to go back to Melanie to elaborate a bit more on Mr. Bragdon's question—which was quite good—because you represent the industry.
There was a reference that we need to find common ground. What would be your advice to this committee on those areas in which you feel there is common ground between the commercial industry and the first nation community?
5:30 p.m.
President, Canadian Independent Fish Harvesters Federation
Judging from some experiences I have had in my time in the fishery, our common ground is that the people who have access to the fishery want to earn a living. For those who are exercising either that privilege or that right, the common ground is to bring home a lobster so that you can make a livelihood, whether you be indigenous or non-indigenous. I think that's one thing.
When we get to the wharf, Mr. Morrissey, the operational side of it, it is very clear that everybody is working off the same kind of platforms, and there are a lot of commonalities that can be looked at. People generally bond over those things.
I think some of those things are really important. We tend to spend a lot of time looking at the negatives we've heard in the press. Really, though, when we go into communities and to the wharves, there's a lot to be seen and heard and learned from the people who are living this every day.
That might not be a strong answer, but it's the best answer I have tonight.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Thank you.
Here is a new question to Mr. Hutchins.
Mr. Hutchins, you were in the enforcement and regulatory field for some time. What do you see as the challenges that would come into play in enforcing a livelihood fishery?
5:35 p.m.
Retired Detachment Supervisor for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, As an Individual
That is very simple. It would be another fishery, and if it's at another time of year, other than the commercial—
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
5:35 p.m.
Retired Detachment Supervisor for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, As an Individual
Well, then, we have a greater access and a larger number of people participating in a fishery. That takes more time, more effort, more equipment. Simply, it takes more dollars. Unless we have a plan in place to move forward so that we can enforce all fisheries equally, fairly and justly, then I think we're putting the cart before the horse, sir.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
You would agree, then, would you, that the key decision that has to be made is to ensure that there is a regulatory regime in place that fairly protects the fishery and has clear parameters for those who are participating in it? That should be the fundamental premise we would look at to go forward. Am I interpreting you right?
5:35 p.m.
Retired Detachment Supervisor for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, As an Individual
Yes, absolutely. We cannot proceed without that, because as I testified, in my experience in the FSC fishery, we've never been able to enforce it properly, and that's a disservice to the indigenous people and the people of Nova Scotia.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
You raised a point that has been touched on at the periphery. You've been in enforcement, so it's important for me to ask you this question. Is there lobster caught under the food and ceremonial fishery that is making its way into commercial sales?
5:35 p.m.
Retired Detachment Supervisor for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, As an Individual
Ninety per cent of it is. We know that's the case through years of investigation, and there are a number of buyers in Southwest Nova who are buying lobster and haven't hidden it from any of their community members. They are buying it and selling it, and we've been trying to track it for years. I've been involved in several cases. In the last one, charges were laid and a conviction was upheld, and that was because they were buying indigenous lobsters and selling them.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
You say a charge was laid and a conviction was upheld. Who was the charge against, the buyer or the seller?
5:35 p.m.
Retired Detachment Supervisor for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, As an Individual
It was against the buyer.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
I want to thank the witnesses.
To Mr. Belliveau, that was an intriguing observation you made on the sale of Clearwater—really intriguing, and most interesting. To have an opportunity to have a partnership between the commercial industry and our first nations community here on the east coast is a great concept. Thank you.
5:35 p.m.
Retired Fisherman, Former Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture of Nova Scotia, As an Individual
I hope I have a few seconds to respond to that.
I hope you and your committee members have the opportunity to reflect on that word “partnership”. I can go into great detail about how that fishery was established. It was from, I can assure you, the commercial sector.
I'd like to have some time to expand on that. It was brought about by the commercial sector's historical attachment, but we have not even had the opportunity to be involved in this possible sale. Just the word of a partnership with the Mi'Kmaq in that sale would go a long way and get a lot of people thinking, right across Canada, that we're on the path of resolving this.
I can conclude my remarks here with the common ground that the early witness talked about. We have people in P.E.I. in district 33 who are fishing commercial licences as we speak, in the same seasons. After the dust of this is all settled, both sides—Mi'Kmaq and the commercial sector—have to live in the same community.
This was the overall impact back 21 years ago. That was what everybody agreed upon—that yes, we have our agreement, but we have to live in the same community and we want to live in peace and harmony.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Morrissey.
I want to again reiterate, with all my colleagues, a big thank you to Mr. Hutchins, Mr. Dadswell and Ms. Sonnenberg for coming back this evening, and to Mr. Belliveau for being here as well. It has been a very interesting committee meeting.
I'll allow the witnesses to leave now before we close the meeting completely.
5:35 p.m.
President, Canadian Independent Fish Harvesters Federation
Thank you, Mr. McDonald.
5:35 p.m.
Retired Detachment Supervisor for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, As an Individual
Thank you, Mr. McDonald and all the committee members. I appreciate your time.
5:35 p.m.
Professor of Biology (Retired), As an Individual
Thank you very much.
5:40 p.m.
Retired Fisherman, Former Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture of Nova Scotia, As an Individual
Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members.
I wish you all a very early Christmas. Take care of yourselves and be healthy.
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Chair, do we have technical issues? Should we go into another meeting or not?
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Actually, there are technical issues, but the other issue is that we only have about 30 minutes left. By the time we sign off from this one and go on to another one, I don't think it does justice to our analysts to be able to hear what the committee members want to instruct with regard to drafting instructions. I think it would be better for us to reschedule that to possibly at the end of the next meeting, if we can do it at all. Doing one set of witnesses for the salmon and then going into drafting instructions might be a better choice.
There were technical issues. They may be straightened out now, but I'm afraid to go in even for 30 minutes and have it fail, and then we lose everything we're doing.
I just want to say, on one of the statements earlier, that everybody's time is their time. What you do with that time is up to you. I try to be as generous as I can at times to allow witnesses to finish an answer, but when it comes to getting unmuted or being heard, that's on your time. Everybody has to be aware of what they're doing as the time rolls around to their particular questioning slot. That way there'll be no time lost in it.
I did allow some free leeway on that this evening, but sometimes it takes away from being able to get to all the questioners. Then we'll have another member probably upset with the chair for allowing others to go over, and they don't get a chance to speak with their questions. I try to be as fair as I can, and I'll continue that, but I would ask everyone to be aware of when their time is up and when their time is about to start. Basically, that's it.
I thank everybody for their co-operation again this evening. Thank you to Nancy, the analysts and all the staff and the interpreters for putting up with us again this evening. I know we're later than usual, but votes were the biggest cause of that.
Again, we'll see everybody Monday evening.