Evidence of meeting #37 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 licence.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:50 p.m.
President, Unified Fisheries Conservation Alliance
I think the question that begs answering is why 49% of a Canadian resource should be allowed to be owned by a foreign entity. I think that we should explore the history of how that came to be in Canada and why it can't be changed.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Mallet, did you have those concerns raised with you at your association by fishermen in the region—about Royal Greenland this year and the previous year?
5:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Yes, and I mean.... We have to say that in New Brunswick it's not much of an issue at this point because they've been mostly doing their progression in Quebec and Newfoundland, but they have been extremely aggressive in the past 10 years, acquiring over the years many quota shares and plants. In the case of Newfoundland, our colleagues from the FFAW would be better placed to state how it has really affected their capacity up there to have an appropriate price for their fish because they have created such a monopoly.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
5:50 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My thanks to all the witnesses for joining us today.
I think there is a concern about this issue. Earlier, we talked to people in the department, and they didn't see what concerns we might have about the situation and how the regulations can be twisted to put companies under foreign control. So I'm glad to hear the testimony of the witnesses, which shows the opposite. In fact, it is worrisome, but we must find solutions, as Mr. Mallet mentioned. We have to find strategies to counter what is happening now. We are very aware of that.
I have questions for all the witnesses, but I'll start with Ms. Canet, who talked about the lack of socio‑economic knowledge and understanding on the part of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
Ms. Canet, could you elaborate on the negative impact on our coastal communities, on food sovereignty, and on our resources, as Mr. Cormier mentioned?
5:50 p.m.
Project Officer, Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie
Thank you for the question.
At no time in the last few years have we been aware of any socio‑economic impact studies conducted by DFO on decisions they may have made, whether it be, for example, in the management of the right whale—where our regional county municipality (RCM) lost $9.5 million when the fishery was closed—or the exclusion of communal licences from owner‑operator protection, or even vertical integration agreements, such as the one with Clearwater.
The impact is indirect, but it will happen and it will affect the prices paid to fishers. For example, in the lobster market, we can't negotiate our prices right now. Fishers land their catches and a week later they find out how much they will be paid. When you have a buyer's monopoly, where companies like Clearwater and Champlain come in and take control of the purchases, the fishers, who are supposed to have full power to independently reap the benefits of operating a fishing licence, are in a position where they can no longer reap those benefits because they have no power.
The DFO has never examined this socio‑economic aspect, which is an integral part of operating a licence. The DFO has no knowledge of the socio‑economic environment in which fishers operate their licences.
5:55 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Ms. Canet.
Earlier, we talked about an economic sector in our communities potentially disappearing in favour of larger companies and foreign companies. I am concerned about that as well. I have to tell you that I find the government very unresponsive to all the studies we conduct in this committee. Public servants report to the government, of course, but I think the same applies more or less. My observation is that the government is not proactive either.
Mr. Mallet, you talked about a strategy. If it's not up to the departmental officials, who are not concerned at all, and it's not up to the government, then who is it up to? What do you suggest?
We are parliamentarians, and some of us are in government, but some of us are not. What can we do on our side to go further and faster to better meet the needs of the sector?
I addressed my question to Mr. Mallet, but of course Ms. Canet and Mr. Sproul can answer as well.
5:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Clearly, the departmental officials who gave the presentations before us are not equipped to look at the value and the socio‑economic importance of our fisheries to our east coast and west coast regions. They are not equipped to work with the provinces and deal with the foreign interests that are buying up our processing capacity in our small coastal regions.
How do we solve this problem? I don't think it can be done today, when we are just beginning to address it and open the discussion. A panel of experts definitely needs to do a thorough study of the issue, the problems and the potential solutions. As Mr. Sproul mentioned, this must, of course, be done transparently and in full co‑operation with the industry.
5:55 p.m.
Project Officer, Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie
Another avenue could be explored, that of giving the Department of Fisheries and Oceans an effective socio‑economic mandate by giving it the means to manage these aspects of the fishery. Since 1993, the DFO has had no real socio‑economic mandate.
Yet inshore fishers are the largest employer in Canada's coastal regions. In spite of that, no department has jurisdiction to study and manage this largest employer. The fishery is still worth over $7 billion in revenue to Canada, but neither the DFO nor any other department has a mandate in this area. If a department were to take an interest in the socio‑economic aspects of the fishery and what the sector represents, it would be a big step forward.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Madame Gill.
We'll now go to Mr. Johns for six minutes or less, please.
5:55 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Thank you, as well as to all the witnesses for their really important testimony.
Maybe I'll start with you, Mr. Mallet. You heard the previous round, I take it, from the bureaucrats at the DFO. It seems that they're just passing the buck when it comes to any sort of federal authority on the processing. They're washing their hands of it and saying, “Hey, this is provincial.” Do you think that they should be let off the hook, or do you think that the federal government actually has a role to play?
5:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Oh, absolutely, I think the federal government has a huge role to play, especially where.... I mean, these international corporate interests are within federal jurisdiction when it comes to protecting our national interests in the fisheries or agriculture, or whatever industry that we want to delve in. I think it has a responsibility to move on this. It has a responsibility to build the foundations that are needed to collaborate properly with the provinces. The minister or the PMO needs to give the department the mandate, if that's the problem, that it needs to do the work that's needed.
6 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
I really appreciate that.
I think you also touched on other countries, as I did in my earlier round with the department, and Ms. Canet, as well, touched on that. Can you think of another country that sells out its fisheries like we do in Canada?
6 p.m.
Project Officer, Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie
If I may, I've lived in New Zealand for 14 years in the South Island.
In 2000, there was the beginning of a process of granting greater access to fisheries to Maori groups, and rightly so. What I have seen, however, is that within 10 years is that all of the licences were then held through a Maori corporation, which was then bought at 50% by the Japanese. All of the fish now fished by the biggest New Zealand fishing corporation goes to Japan. Though I was living in the second biggest city in New Zealand, I could not get one fish that was fished here in New Zealand, and the cost of it was prohibitive.
6 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Thank you. That's just another example of foreign companies preying on countries where they have lax rules.
Mr. Mallet, can you speak about the importance of the Government of Canada working in collaboration with the provinces and taking a whole-of-economy kind of socio-economic approach to looking at our fisheries, identifying any leakages and doing everything they need to do to close those leakages?
6 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Absolutely. The responsibility needs to be shared with the provinces, but as I mentioned earlier, there needs to be a mandate because if there's no mandate, we'll get the same response in a year or in 10 years from now with the next generation of bureaucrats. This is a clear and present danger now. It was mostly on the west coast for the past 30 years, but it's now on the east coast, with the example of Royal Greenland in particular, which is flagrant. It is completely unacceptable here in Canada to have this going on, but it's as if the sky is blue and the sun is shining over us right now when you talk to these bureaucrats.
6 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Do you think it's the government's role and responsibility to protect coastal communities to ensure that it does everything it can to make sure the profits stay in our communities? When you hear of $52 million in profits for Royal Greenland, I mean, that money is coming out of the hands of fishers. Do you not see and agree with that?
6 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
At the end of the day, if we want to have small coastal communities that are vibrant and survive into the future, we need to have these fishing industries thriving in these areas and the benefits of the resource going back into these areas to the benefit of the coastal provinces that need these fisheries. That has to be done in collaboration with the provinces, and again, I think that a proper study should be done. It may take a little bit of time, but it needs to be done now before it's too late.
6 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
I guess my question is whether the government is making this a priority.
Mr. Sproul, you've obviously heard about sharing risks and benefits on the west coast. We made a simple request of the government for a public registry of foreign ownership of quota, and we can't even get that. It's been two years. All that we keep hearing from the government is that they're taking a look at it. Do you think the government is really serious about taking this on?
6 p.m.
President, Unified Fisheries Conservation Alliance
I think it's important to recognize that companies like Premium Seafoods are at the core of the destruction of coastal communities in British Columbia, and the conglomeration of fishery access into the hands of a few corporations has really damaged coastal communities. The government certainly has a duty not to follow that path in Atlantic Canada.
I think there's a bigger question, Mr. Johns, and it's that this deal is not economically, socially or environmentally just, and the comments previously that inshore fishermen are not capable of accessing these grounds belie the truth that there is an amassed fishing fleet on the line that divides the inshore from Clearwater's offshore monopoly, and those fishermen can see Clearwater's offshore lobster fishing vessel from that point. There is the potential here for moderate livelihood integration on this deal, and it needs to be examined.