Fisheries Committee on Dec. 9th, 2020

[Robert Chamberlin]

It was done eight years ago.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

It was eight years ago. At that time, was there inaction? Did the groups all get together and say, “Okay, here are our next steps”? Was there nothing in the Cohen report that was...?

[Robert Chamberlin]

First nation organizations—the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, First Nations Summit and the BCAFN—all passed resolutions supporting the full implementation. Then we've been misdirected by governments saying “we've acted upon”, whereas what they're really saying is “We didn't implement; we just ignored them.” We haven't had a substantive dialogue; we've just had more of what I always call “deny, delay and distract”.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Do you think the denials and distractions by the department have become worse in the last couple of years?

[Robert Chamberlin]

Absolutely.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Okay, why? I would like to know why you think this is all being ignored.

[Robert Chamberlin]

I think it has continued, when you look at the nine science papers and the faulty CSAS process. This is another delay and distraction. When the consultation that I've been involved with for the three first nations on Discovery Island wanted resourcing, they said, “Sorry, there's no resourcing, but maybe there will be in the next round of work that Mr. Beech is going to be taking on.”

Then, in terms of deny, delay and distract, you have DFO saying that sea lice aren't going to a part of the assessment. We found in the documents in 2018 that DFO identified within their science that sockeye are more susceptible to sea lice, yet on their website it says it's the Atlantics. The guy who was part of this paper didn't include either of those in the PowerPoint he shared for consultation.

When I think about that as one small example of how they are contradicting, how can you say that there's conclusive science? If there is an absence of conclusive science, the precautionary principle must be implemented, and part of the problem is that there is simply no policy to guide the implementation of the precautionary principle for aquaculture.

There are so many things I'd like to say, but I know we have a time limit.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Yes. The other—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

The time is up, Mr. Mazier. Five minutes aren't long going when you're hearing interesting testimony.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

We will now go to Mr. Battiste for five minutes or less, please.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

[Member spoke in Mi'kmaq]

I just want to thank you all for opening up with your indigenous languages. As a Mi'kmaq language speaker, it's always great for me to hear other languages.

I also want to thank you for your continued advocacy in speaking of UNDRIP. Many of you may know that my father was part of the initial UN indigenous working group that drafted UNDRIP.

I'm going to ask two questions. I'm going to open it up to the floor, because you probably all have recommendations on this.

Do you think that implementing UNDRIP is a good first start in achieving reconciliation and a recommendation for this committee to look at?

Second, in 2017, the Liberal government announced $25 million over four years to support the indigenous guardians pilot program, and with it sunsetting in 2021, I'm wondering if you think that it has been effective. Do you believe that when indigenous nations are able to co-manage the resources, that is one of the best practices?

I'll leave that open for you guys to answer, with short answers if you could, so that I can hear from everyone.

[Clifford Atleo Sr.]

I'll open it up.

I think UNDRIP can be helpful, but it really needs to be unlike the existing legislation in the federal government. It hasn't mattered that there are laws that actually prevent the kinds of things happening that we're talking about. They happen anyway. UNDRIP really doesn't mean anything without a strategy to actually implement what it says and what is intended. I'm happy to hear that the provincial government and the federal government are actually tabling a piece of legislation, but it remains to be seen what kind of action follows.

I'll just leave it at that.

[Robert Chamberlin]

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is critical. We need to see that go forward. We need to see it enacted in a broad way. We can't wait until everything is finally in place and then we're going to be able to move forward. We have to identify the areas where there's opportunity to implement components of it, especially in situations like the critical state of Pacific salmon.

In doing so, we're going to bring the Canadian public along about why not to fear what “free, prior and informed consent” can represent, because we've seen across this country and around the world the need for more stringent environmental considerations, and that's something first nations have been struggling to advance for generations. I think we could then start to exemplify to the electorate that this is beneficial and it's a quicker path to certainty.

[Chief Tyrone McNeil]

I'd encourage everyone not to look at it so much as implementing the declaration as a whole. I'll draw your attention to this. Let's implement article 18, for example, which is our right to be involved in decision-making that affects our rights, and article 19, which is about seeking our “free, prior and informed consent”. If we did those two articles, we'd move the system a long way. I'd encourage you to think of that context so that it is something real in front of us, not something big and broad.

In terms of the guardians program, we used to have a guardian program here in Stó:lo country, and we did a really effective job not only of managing others but of managing ourselves in a way that nobody else could manage us.

Also, absolutely, that $25 million over five years needs to grow and to build more programs. It shouldn't be only about fish; it should be about wildlife and conservation writ large as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you.

Mr. Adolph, did you have a comment?

[Arthur Adolph]

Yes. Actually, what I was going to say is that it would be one step towards reconciliation, but I think the ultimate step with regard to reconciliation is to really take a look at why we are in this predicament we're in. It is all because of the doctrine of discovery of Pope Alexander VI in 1493, when he drafted up this doctrine of discovery and referred to indigenous people as “heathens” and “infidels” who didn't have a soul; thus, we weren't people.

This is what government used and this is what the courts used throughout the court case: terra nullius, that the land was empty. I think that for us to move forward with regard to reconciliation, the government must get the Vatican to retract the doctrine of discovery so that we can move on equally, but with the doctrine of discovery we are held down as “heathens” and “infidels” and we aren't people, and thus the Indian Act.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Battiste. Your time is up.

We'll now go to Mr. Arnold for five minutes or less, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chamberlin, in 2019 the federal government announced an Atlantic seal task team. They have yet to announce anything similar on the Pacific coast. Recently I learned that there is a hypothesis out there pertaining to steelhead, which are in dire trouble in the Thompson and Nechako systems. The hypothesis is around the predation in the inshore areas. It was estimated that a doubling of the survival rate from predation in the inshore areas could lead to an almost 500% increase in return rates.

What are the views of the First Nation Wild Salmon Alliance on the pinniped populations on B.C.'s west coast? Do B.C. first nations have a history of harvesting pinnipeds?

[Robert Chamberlin]

I've heard from many first nations concerns about pinnipeds—it's kind of a fun word to say, actually—but you can see the prevalence around them. I've seen video footage of them being within herring nets and causing a lot of damage and so forth. We're focusing on the 1% to 4% that actually return, in this line of questioning, and I think we need to identify the areas where we can ensure that a vast amount of smolts get to the ocean so that the 1% to 4% that come back are extremely meaningful in comparison with what we have today.

I know that our people have harvested them in our past. They're part of our regalia-making. Certainly, we're always open to exercise our aboriginal rights in whatever manner that may be.

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

Thank you.

Ms. Morten, I'm sorry for earlier mistakenly thinking that you were with one of the first nations bands. It was the way the meeting notice sheet was printed off today. I misread it.

[Zo Ann Morten]

It's my husband's side.

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

Okay.

In 2012 the previous government introduced Canada's first national standards for wastewater treatment. They were to be fully implemented by the end of this year. When the current environment minister, Minister Wilkinson, was the fisheries minister, he himself stated that untreated wastewater was the largest source of contamination in the Salish Sea. The Cohen report warned that effluents posed threats to salmon stocks.

Now that Minister Wilkinson is deferring the implementation of treatment standards down the road, what he's doing is delaying the protection and conservation of aquatic habitats like the Fraser River estuary that fish stocks need to survive. As a streamkeeper, what are your perspectives on the need for national minimum standards for sewage and wastewater treatment?

[Zo Ann Morten]

I can't imagine that we would allow sewage into our wild spaces, but it happens every day. In North Vancouver our sewage treatment plant was going to change from tertiary and go upwards. It was one of our local streamkeepers who led the charge on getting a substantial increase in the amount of debris that would be taken out of the water before it entered our wild spaces.

We cannot count on dilution any more to be the solution. We can be the solution by taking out the pieces that we know about.

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

Thank you.

I'll stay with you for this one as well. We saw the Cohen commission come out of the record-low salmon returns in 2009. In 2010 we saw record returns of Fraser River sockeye. Again in 2014, the numbers were high. To me that indicates that in-stream habitat conditions are there to still produce those record numbers of fish.

Do you see that the interior or freshwater habitat has changed dramatically in that time, or would you think that there may be other factors at play in the marine environment that may be having more effect?