Fisheries Committee on Oct. 7th, 2024

[Adam Burns]

Mr. Chair, I think the member is referring to the inshore fishery.

My understanding, from the reporting that I've seen, is that the fishery was very productive with high-quality fish and high catch rates. It is true the inshore fishery did reach its quotas. There remain other quotas within the—

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

That's far from year-round employment, though.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Arnold.

We'll now go to Mr. Morrissey for five minutes.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

Could you, for somebody who wouldn't understand, expand on the statement you made, “robust consultation process”?

[Adam Burns]

Sure. This is a normal practice that we would undertake for any fishery, but clearly, given the unique nature of this particular potential reopening, we started with an atypical groundfish advisory committee, a cod advisory committee, last fall, to begin the discussion with stakeholders. It would include representatives of the FFAW, the offshore, the processing sector, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as environmental groups. We began a discussion of what their vision of a reopened commercial fishery might look like.

We had further consultations once the winter science advisory process was completed. We knew what the advice would be, so we consulted on what the tax should be, what the distribution of the quota should be.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Everybody had some sense of where this was going.

[Adam Burns]

Yes, that's correct.

Indeed, during those consultations, the majority of views expressed—certainly not from environmental groups, which wouldn't be expected, but from the harvesting sector—were very much in line with an increase in the quotas.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

You referenced that it's a travelling stock.

[Adam Burns]

The stock is largely present inside Canada's 200 nautical-mile-limit, but some of this stock is present in NAFO division, primarily in NAFO division 3L.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Based on that, how important is it that Canada participate in NAFO and be part of those decisions? What would be the impact if we simply packed our bags and went home?

[Adam Burns]

By working with NAFO, we were able to secure an international rules-based framework outside of Canada's 200 nautical-mile-limit, which is binding—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Is that very significant to the future of this key stock?

[Adam Burns]

It is. Were we not to have—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Was it present in the past?

[Adam Burns]

NAFO certainly did have those measures in place in the past as well, but not with the same level of robust “flanking measures”, as we call them, related to the very specific—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Would your negotiation process lead Canada to have an agreement with more teeth in the enforcement of it?

[Adam Burns]

It did, and to a very limited quota.... Indeed, other than the European Union, the other contracting parties of NAFO only have access to 19 tonnes.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

How does that compare if we look before...?

[Adam Burns]

I don't have the full quota key in front of me, but certainly, it was much more significant than those quotas. The historic catches, in particular, of Russia for example, were much higher.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Was Canada a big winner on the current negotiations that led us to where we are?

[Adam Burns]

Yes. We believe the decisions taken by NAFO defend Canada's management of the fishery and implement very robust conservation measures for those foreign fleets.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Is this the same decision as before? One of my colleagues raised this. Could you outline to the committee how this decision we arrived at now compares to other decisions?

[Adam Burns]

Are you...?

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

I'm referencing stock.

[Adam Burns]

Certainly. In terms of stocks that are in the cautious zone, as this stock is, it is typical for us to have a commercial fishery. The exploitation rate, the TAC level, that would be established is based on the science advice and the management framework that's in place for a given stock. Certainly, it would be very atypical for us to not have a commercial fishery on a stock in a cautious zone.