Fisheries Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2024

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

Through you, Chair, to Mr. Pelletier, can you please confirm that you'll be moving forward with the de-staffing of lighthouses at Carmanah Point and Pachena Bay starting this Friday?

Can you please confirm that?

[Mario Pelletier]

It is within a number of days or weeks. It's not in a month from now because we want to have the people out before the winter season. Whether it's this Friday or next Friday, I can't confirm, but they are moving.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you.

Can you please confirm if you've received emails, correspondence, phone calls or letters from members of the community asking to halt this removal of staff from the lighthouses?

[Mario Pelletier]

I didn't personally receive emails. I was aware that our office did receive a few letters to date.

That being said, the safety of our employees is my first priority. In order to protect their safety, I had to remove them from there.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you.

What consultation has occurred with those you are referencing—those whose safety you are worried about?

What consultation has happened to speak with them about their concerns and how to best move forward?

[Mario Pelletier]

It has been ongoing since we received the 2024 report. We sat down with the employees and made sure that we were able to find them work somewhere else and provide them with...how the transition would be made.

Once they are removed from the hazard, then we'll look at the next steps.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you.

I've also heard that a light station review committee has been established.

Is this true? Who's on this committee?

[Mario Pelletier]

In the Senate report from 2011 that you quoted, it also asked to review this on an ongoing basis. That's something we haven't done systematically.

Light stations are part of the broader aids to navigation system. We have a requirement that every five years we review all the systems. Light stations are part of that.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

This is the last question I want to get in.

There was money that was allocated specifically to the Pachena Bay.... I believe there's a duplex there that money was supposed to be allocated to for the mitigation of the concerns that you were talking about. I'm being told that money was never used, that those mitigations were not made. Are you familiar with this?

[Mario Pelletier]

I think the mitigation, there's a—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I would ask for an answer in writing, please. Ms. Barron has gone over time. I have to get to another couple of questioners.

We'll move on now to Mr. Perkins for five minutes or less, please.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr Chair.

Thank you, witnesses.

My first question is for the commissioner of the Coast Guard.

The polar class 1 icebreakers announced in 2007 at a cost of $700 million, the first vote, still do not have, all these years later, a design approved. The Parliamentary Budget Officer put out a report in 2021 and updated it this year.

When you were here last time, before we had the update, you agreed that the cost estimates were right there, but you said that we would be on time and on budget. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has updated that and actually says at the current estimate now, it's actually $1.2 billion more than it was just a year ago, and that it will be $260 million in additional costs for every year before steel is cut.

Do you agree with that assessment and that what was said to the committee a year or so ago was incorrect in that it won't be on time and on budget since it's already yet again not on time and not on budget?

[Mario Pelletier]

A year ago, I communicated the information we had.

We continue to work with the shipyards to make sure we have timely delivery of ships and reasonable costs. This is an ongoing process.

As for the PBO report, we've already publicly said that we agree with their findings.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

You said that the first ship would be in the water by 2030, but that's clearly not going to be the case now. In 2030, that will be over 20 years to get this done. Isn't that a little excessive?

[Mario Pelletier]

There have been some delays in shipbuilding and to put in place the NSS. That one was announced before the NSS was put in place. There's the NSS and now the negotiation with the shipyard, providing the time for the shipyard to ramp up their capability. Other priority vessels were put ahead as well, too, such as the science vessel. They were built ahead of time.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you.

This is for Mr. Burns or whoever is appropriate.

In 2022, the B.C. Supreme Court in the Mowi aquaculture case ruled that the minister could not make decisions that didn't come up as one of the policy recommendations from the department. Did the department comply, or did the minister comply, with that court ruling in making the elver fishery decision that she made recently? In other words, did the department recommend this as one of the options?

[Adam Burns]

Specifically, which of the decisions are you referring to? The consultations that are—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

It's the consultation letter to take away 75% of the quota from licence-holders.

[Adam Burns]

Yes, those consultations are under way. They're the result of a minister's decision.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

No, I didn't ask if they're under way.

Did the recommendation from the department include that as a recommendation? The court requires that to happen for the minister to be legally doing this.

[Adam Burns]

The minister's decision is certainly a legal one to undertake these consultations. I can assure you of that. In terms of the results of these consultations, decisions for 2025 haven't been taken.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Well, I don't know how it would be legal since the court also ruled that reasons had to be provided, legitimate policy reasons, in the consultation. This letter that went out contains no reasons. There's not one reason about why it's being done. That's your consultation: in writing, a one-page letter, “We're considering doing this. Tell us in two weeks what you think.” That's not a real consultation. It doesn't say anywhere in that letter the reasons, so you're, once again, on that level in breach of the B.C. Supreme Court ruling.

[Adam Burns]

Again, this is a consultation, and the minister's decisions for 2025 will be taken subsequent to the consultations and informed by the various views that will be brought forward.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

The court-required consultations have reasons. You're not providing the reasons, and therefore it's not a legal letter.

I will move on. How much TAC or how much quota will you be giving each of the 30 individual eel licence-holders? Will that be new TAC, as it was when this was created, or will that be coming again from the existing licence-holders?

[Adam Burns]

Those decisions haven't been taken yet. They will be taken following the consultations. I can't answer that question, because the decision hasn't been taken at this time.