Evidence of meeting #115 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was study.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
We can suspend for a couple of minutes, get it on paper and send it out to everyone.
We're suspended again.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
We're back.
I will ask you to read your motion again in French, and translation will translate it for anyone who wants to hear it in English. If they want to hear it in French, they can listen to it.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
I move that, at the end of the first paragraph of Mr. Kelloway's motion, after “on Newfoundland and Labrador”, we add the following: “and Quebec that has repercussions on the St. Lawrence River’s fish stocks”.
I discussed it with Mr. Morrissey, and we believe that the motion could end there, quite simply because the gulf and the river go together.
Liberal
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm not sure I could support that subamendment, because there's absolutely no connection between cod in the Gulf of St. Lawrence estuary and cod on Canada's eastern continental shelf, northern cod 2J3KL. It's technically imprudent. I think the subamendment should stand as is, because scientifically there is no connection between the cod in that part of the St. Lawrence especially and the northern cod.
Thank you.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
That's precisely what the study could tell us or not. Personally, I think it's dangerous to claim that there is no connection. Indeed, I fished cod in the St. Lawrence in my youth.
Is it the same cod or not? Do fishing licences or factory vessel licences have an impact or not? I think the study will help us shed some light on that.
Liberal
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Mr. Chair, I disagree with Mr. Small. In his original motion he keeps referencing how Canadian fish harvesters need to have their voices heard. That's all Madame Desbiens is asking for. With respect to the cod there is a difference, but this study should focus on the scientific and the data. I will speak to that more when I get my turn on the motion.
Adding a reference to cod in that particular area would not take anything from the main focus of the northern cod, but it is, to quote Mr. Small, the Canadian fish harvesters' concerns. He keeps referencing his motion about Canadian fish harvesters being ignored. That's what he's trying to do now by trying to constrain Madame Desbiens' subamendment.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate it because we have cod all around Nova Scotia, and it was impacting the lobster fishery last December as well, because they are back in larger numbers. However, it is the minister's decision that this study is about. It's about the specific move from 13,000 metric tons to 18,000 metric tons in 2J3KL—very specific cod-fishing areas—and the agreement with NAFO that stems from those areas. It's not about the decision and the prompting of the study. Of course, I'm sure government members know that everything that has been discussed in public with the FFAW and all of the processor and other industry groups has been about their concerns around the decision of the minister and her announcement on 2J3KL. It's not about the entire cod fishery all over Atlantic Canada.
I believe that's why...and I would support a broader study beyond this. It would have to be more than four meetings if we were to go to a broader cod study in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Nova Scotia and other parts. I would support that, but we would have to add more meetings to do that. The four meetings specifically, as far as I'm concerned—and the motivation for them—are about that specific decision by the minister. That's why his preamble talked about what the minister did in her announcement.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
With regard to Mr. Morrissey's comment about Canadian fishermen, I think that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are Canadians, so there's nothing wrong with stating “Canadian fish harvesters” in that motion. However, as my colleague, Mr. Perkins, just said, there are many cod stocks in Atlantic Canada and in Quebec. There are probably three or four different cod stocks recognized by science, but this study is to study northern cod because of the terrible decision that was made in June.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Okay. Is there anybody else?
Madame Desbiens, do you want to comment?
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Whatever the decision, I reserve the right to ask questions during our study on cod. That way, I'll get different responses, which may have an impact on cod in the St. Lawrence.
I also want to say that you involve Quebec when it suits you; however, when it doesn't, you don't. It's interesting to hear that.
I still say it's not true that there's no connection. I'm sure there is one now, and there will be one in the future, depending on the decisions that will be made and the report we'll table. If I don't have the committee's consent, I'll abstain and ask the relevant questions that will be appropriate for the St. Lawrence and Quebec at the time of the study. I'll also submit names of witnesses in this regard.
I wish the committee could have recognized that cod swims in water, regardless of the province.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I think we have a good handle on what Madame Desbiens is trying to do and the feelings on it. I think it's time to vote on the subamendment by Madame Desbiens. I'll ask the clerk to call the vote.
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Can you read that out again, please—just her subamendment, one more time? I'm sorry.
The Clerk
Mrs. Desbiens moves to add the following, after “Newfoundland and Labrador”: “and Quebec that has repercussions on the St. Lawrence River’s fish stocks”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I now ask the clerk to do the vote.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
There you go. All right, so that will be part of it.
Now it's on the motion as amended. Did we not vote on the amendment made by Mr. Kelloway?
NDP
Lisa Marie Barron NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. Can I just get clarification?
The subamendment that I brought forward has been passed. Is that correct?
NDP
Lisa Marie Barron NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Okay. Thank you.
Now we're moving on to MP Kelloway's amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Yes, it's on Mr. Kelloway's amendment as amended by various persons along the way.
Go ahead, Mr. Morrissey.