Fisheries Committee on Oct. 7th, 2024

[Adam Burns]

Yes, that's correct. We do think that we have a robust regime now in place.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Could you describe who is fishing the Canadian share of the offshore?

[Adam Burns]

The ultimate entities that will fish will depend...There are rules available to offshore companies to transfer quotas amongst themselves, based on their own individual corporate harvesting plans.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Have those been part of the management of the fishery for some time?

[Adam Burns]

That's a standard approach that's used for all groundfish fisheries.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

When you say standard approach, could you expand?

[Adam Burns]

The enterprise allocation approach that exists amongst offshore groundfish harvesters is such that there are regular and ongoing quota trades between licence-holders in order to enable maximum efficiency in terms of the economic output of the fishery.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

To qualify, if the minister hadn't made a small allocation to the offshore, how would that have impacted Canada?

[Adam Burns]

Given the stock is in the cautious zone, it's very likely that NAFO would have taken a decision to reopen a fishery.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

We're clear on the record, if the minister didn't allocate the offshore, would NAFO have used that to increase its allocation?

[Adam Burns]

That is possible. It would have had foreign vessels fishing in the NAFO zone without Canadian vessels present.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to carry through a little more on Mr. Morrissey's questions.

You stated that, had Canada not provided the offshore opportunity, NAFO could have.

Did NAFO make any efforts to encourage Canada to open an offshore fishery?

[Adam Burns]

NAFO has paid close attention over the last several years—since 2006—to the stewardship fishery. Every year, it asks questions around the management approach in place and looks at the Canadian science advice.

We were very strong at the NAFO table to ensure we defended the fact that this was, indeed, a Canadian-managed fishery. NAFO paid close attention to how we were managing this.

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

Did they indicate they would be looking for an offshore NAFO fishery?

[Adam Burns]

Certainly, as soon as science advice came out that showed the stock was in the cautious zone, there was increased interest among NAFO's contracting parties. That occurred after the last annual meeting. There wasn't a meeting in which such pressure occurred specifically.

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

There is no official record of any NAFO request for an offshore fishery, then. These are all off-the-record requests.

[Adam Burns]

The NAFO measure that was in place indicated that, once there was a commercial fishery in Canada, it would open within the NAFO regulatory area. It specified some high-level quota distribution.

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

If it had remained a stewardship fishery....

Would NAFO have no claim to an offshore fishery?

[Adam Burns]

It would have been very unusual for there to not be a commercial fishery on a stock in the cautious zone. NAFO has jurisdiction over the waters outside of Canada's 200-mile limit and could have taken a decision to reopen that fishery in the absence of—

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

You said, “could have”, but they gave no official indication that they would move in that direction.

Is that correct?

[Adam Burns]

NAFO itself—

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

Is that correct?

[Adam Burns]

I need to explain that NAFO itself is an organization made up of 13 contracting parties. NAFO, as an entity, wouldn't have that kind of perspective. It would be a decision taken by the 13 contracting parties.

Indeed, the European Union sought, intersessionally—outside of a regular meeting—to move a motion by email vote to reopen the commercial fishery in NAFO over the course of the summer. Canada was successful in having them withdraw that motion so it could be discussed more completely at the annual meeting.