Evidence of meeting #15 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 meeting.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Nancy Vohl

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

I will now call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 15 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of Monday, January 25, 2021. Members can attend in person in the room or remotely, using the Zoom application.

The committee is considering committee business and future business. With respect to the routine motion adopted by the committee, the meeting is in public. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. The webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.

Given the ongoing pandemic situation and in light of the recommendations from health authorities, to remain healthy and safe, all those attending the meeting in person, if any, are to maintain two-metre physical distancing and must wear a non-medical mask when circulating in the room. It is highly recommended that the mask be worn at all times, including when seated. Of course, they must maintain proper hand hygiene by using hand sanitizer provided at the room entrance.

As the chair, I will be enforcing these measures for the duration of the meeting. I thank members in advance for their co-operation.

Today's meeting is also taking place in a new webinar format. Webinars are for public committee meetings and are available only to members, their staff and witnesses. Members have remarked that the entry to the meeting was much quicker and that they immediately entered as an active participant. All functionalities for active participants remain the same. Staff will be non-active participants only—attendees—and can therefore only view the meeting in gallery view, but not participate.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants and attendees at this meeting that screenshots or taking photos of your screen is not permitted by the House.

For those participating virtually, I'd like to now outline a few rules to follow. Members and witnesses may speak in the official language.... I don't think we need to go through that today because we don't have witnesses. There are only members.

I think we all know the rules when it comes to the “raise hand” function and keeping track of it. Raise the hand if you want to be recognized or if you have a point of order. Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, please click on the microphone icon to unmute yourself. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled, as it normally is, by the proceedings and verification officer. A reminder that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair.

When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute. With regard to a speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can to maintain a consolidated order of speaking for all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person. Please try to make every effort to use the “raise hand” function.

We can now discuss committee business. I have a few points to cover.

We have a letter from the Board of Internal Economy. We need members to use the proper headset provided by the House. We did have some problems with that prior to the Christmas break. When somebody didn't have the proper headset, there was trouble and it made translation very difficult and impossible in some cases.

With the added requirements with our new Zoom webinar system, and considering the letter sent to us from the Board of Internal Economy and the Liaison Committee, there is a need for witnesses to be contacted at least a week ahead of time to permit the delivery of a proper headset whenever possible—72 hours—and to permit proper testing to be done before the meeting.

We need to be courteous of our committee staff and the work they need to do to allow us to hear witnesses, so it is imperative that we respect these timelines as we go forward and schedule our meetings in this session. As the chair, I will be making every effort to schedule committee meetings two weeks in advance. This means the committee should have an idea of future plans and it should not be done meeting to meeting.

When starting a new study, it is important that we set a deadline for submitting witnesses, stick to the list of witnesses and avoid suggesting last-minute additions to a study's witness list, as they won't have the proper equipment, as required.

I would like to suggest to members that we set a precedent going forward. In the event we find ourselves wanting to hear from a witness and we don't have one week to schedule them—and the committee doesn't have any further time allocated to hear witnesses on that study—we request that the witness send the committee their testimony in writing, and that it then be distributed to the members of the committee to be considered for the drafting of the report.

Next week, February 1 and 3, we said we were allocating a certain number of meetings—I think it was four, when we amended the motion—for the Pacific salmon study. Witnesses were invited, so we have two more meetings to do. One meeting is on indigenous knowledge, and one meeting is with other witnesses left on the list plus 30 minutes of drafting instructions.

The week of February 8 is constituency week, and the House is not sitting.

February 10—suggested by the analysts for optimal work—is the proposed deadline for members to send to analysts the supplementary drafting instructions and recommendations to DFO for the draft report on the Pacific salmon study.

That brings us to Monday, February 15. The House is not sitting. It is Family Day in several provinces, so it is not a meeting day.

On Wednesday, February 17, we propose to do version one of “moderate livelihood”. The document should be distributed in early February so that you will have time to read it.

On Monday, February 22, it is the continuation of version one if needed, or a new study to be determined today.

On Wednesday, February 24, we will have the continuation of version one if needed, or a new study to be determined today.

Now, of course, we have to hear from the committee on what to do next in regard to a study. I know we have several that have been passed as studies.

Mr. Bragdon.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Richard Bragdon Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Happy new year to everyone.

I know we've already had discussions on potential studies for us to tackle, and I think there's been quite a bit of agreement around those studies moving forward.

One would be the IUU study in regard to fisheries. I think we would like to have that established as the next study we take on, followed shortly thereafter by Mr. Morrissey's and Madam Gill's proposed study regarding the pinniped issue. I think another priority we would like to have laid out is the recreational fishery study that was proposed as well.

Those three we would certainly like to have put on the table as the next studies that we take on. I'm wondering if there would be agreement with moving in that order.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Thank you, Mr. Bragdon.

Mr. Johns.

5:25 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Chair, how many meetings did you say there were left for the Pacific salmon study?

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Two.

5:25 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

I think we need a couple more than that. I think we would need four meetings to complete the study. There are still a lot of witnesses we haven't heard from around that study, and I thought we had agreed to do a set amount....

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

I think, and the clerk can correct me if I'm wrong, when the motion was amended, it was amended to do four more meetings.

Two of those meetings we have already done.

One of them is for indigenous knowledge and the other is for witnesses. Two have taken place, and there are two more. One is for the indigenous knowledge part, and one is for witnesses and drafting instructions.

5:25 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Okay.

What Mr. Bragdon put forward, and I think we all agreed, is that the Conservatives were going to be putting forward a motion. We support the IUU, and Madam Gill was going to be putting forward either pinnipeds or the sport fishing. I think that would be right.

We're also going to be bringing something forward. We're hoping that the NDP would be considered in a motion after that, because we haven't had a study on something from the NDP. We have a few ideas that I think everyone will support. We're just working on that right now.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Thank you, Mr. Johns.

We will now go to Mr. Arnold.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to support what Mr. Bragdon put forward about the illegal, unauthorized and unregulated fisheries, the IUU fisheries. That study motion was actually put forward in the first session of the 43rd Parliament. It has certainly been on the books for quite a while. I hope there is full support to move ahead with that study, as it would have an impact on all coasts in Canada, as well as across the world. The seal predation issue seems to be a common study on all coasts as well, maybe not so much in the north but certainly on the east and west coasts.

We want to make sure we are doing, as a committee, what is best for the fish and the fishermen out there. Those two studies I think will have an important impact on Canada's fisheries.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Thank you, Mr. Arnold.

Mr. Hardie.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am a little concerned about the Pacific salmon study. It has been broken up quite substantially by the things that have been going on. We have not yet heard from the scientists or the department on that study. Now, we accepted an additional meeting for Gord to cover off the indigenous knowledge, which is very valuable under the circumstances, but if we have only two meetings left, that's not very much time to cover a lot of ground.

I'm wondering if Nancy could give us a sense of the witnesses who would be available to us for the remaining meetings on Pacific salmon. If we're not going to cover off the science and the department, we will need an extra meeting at least.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

I don't know, Nancy, if you want to comment on this. I don't know if anybody submitted the departmental officials as potential witnesses for either one of the meetings that are left.

5:30 p.m.

The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Nancy Vohl

To be honest with you, very few witnesses were actually submitted before Christmas. We had a first meeting. The witnesses were from the Conservatives: BC Salmon Farmers Association, Canfisco and the Sport Fishing Institute. Then we had a second meeting on the indigenous knowledge.

If we go back to the list, not many witnesses are left. We actually have two from the Conservatives, and one is the same for the Liberals. Then you have witnesses who were invited and agreed, with very few left. DFO officials were not invited again; it was not submitted, at least. I would remind the members, however, that when you adopted the motion, you adopted all the testimony heard in the past session; that was also readopted as part of this session.

Does that answer your question?

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Well, I don't know; it should go without saying that we hear from the department. Normally we hear from the department first off. We thought that the better strategy was to hear from all of the other witnesses so that we would have better questions to ask of the department when it came in.

I know that I put forward Kristi Miller as a witness, again for the science. Are we expecting to hear from her in the meetings that are available now?

5:30 p.m.

The Clerk

The plan is for this witness to be invited for the second meeting, not the next one but the one after.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

We have gone fairly far in this study, but it would not do us well to stop short of the people we need to hear from. If it was not assumed that the department would be on the witness list, that is an assumption that we made and that was a mistake on our part. It's not a mistake that should get in the way of a good study and a good report.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

On that point, Mr. Hardie, didn't we hear from the officials earlier on the salmon study?

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

No, I don't think so, Mr. Chair. I think we made a deliberate decision to leave them to the end so that we would hear from the other witnesses and then be better informed on the questions we would take forward to the department.

I'm going back through my notes.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Nancy, can you clarify if the department officials appeared on the salmon study that we readopted or brought forward information that we already had?

5:30 p.m.

The Clerk

DFO officials were not on your list of suggested witnesses this time around in 43-2, but they were in 43-1. When the committee adopted the motion to readopt the study and continue the study, it was specified in the motion that all testimony heard—and the DFO were heard on March 10 and they were heard later on Big Bar—would be considered as part of having been heard, as part of the study in 43-2.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

I think the problem here is that we've conflated the Big Bar study with the salmon study, but if we heard from the DFO, it was all about Big Bar. It was not about the real substance of the salmon study—

5:35 p.m.

Bloc

Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC

I'm so sorry, Mr. Chair and Mr. Hardie. There has been no interpretation for a few minutes.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

We'll suspend for a moment to get that straightened out.

Thank you, Madam Gill.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald

Mr. Hardie, if it's the will of the committee to add more meetings or another meeting or whatever, it's up to the committee to decide that.

Go ahead, Mr. Morrissey.