Fisheries Committee on Nov. 18th, 2024

[Chloe Dubois]

That's a great question. I think some of the red tape we are facing is the length of the consultation period to find the owner. We've heard here today that finding the owner can be very difficult and then, on top of that, when we find the owner, sometimes it's a negotiating process with that owner to then have them agree to have their vessel removed, even though it's causing risk to public health and safety. It would be good to have the vessel somehow assessed and to be able to remove some of that consultation process around the vessel once it has been identified.

Just quickly, even when a vessel is reported as abandoned, there is very little that can be done until that vessel is sinking. Even when we try to prevent the issue from occurring and prevent the vessels from sinking, there are no mechanisms in place for us to do that until that vessel is either under water or sinking in its own right.

There needs to be some kind of mechanism when these vessels are reported as abandoned, almost like a fast track, in order to remove them from the water before they sink—to prevent very costly removal efforts—and then, when they are under water, to fast-track them to get them out of the water.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Hardie.

We'll now go to Madame Desbiens for two and a half minutes or less, please.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

I have two minutes, Mr. Chair.

I think that my question is more for Ms. Bowman, but perhaps Ms. Dubois can respond too.

So two aspects require attention. First, the boats that already lie at the bottom of the water must be removed, especially if they pose a threat to the environment. Another aspect is managing the registration of these vessels.

Should the committee treat these two aspects separately and consider suitable distinct funding, which means providing more support for the removal of hazardous vessels with one budget and setting up a functioning and reliable registration system with another budget?

Ms. Bowman, we can start with you.

[Roberta Bowman]

Yes, I think that dividing the two would be good. They are both so important. We've seen here today that dealing with the ones that are sunk is critical, and the management of the registration and licensing is also critical to mitigate future issues. Yes, I believe that dividing the two for the funding would be a good suggestion.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll stop here. I went over my time in the previous round.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Okay, we'll now go to Ms. Barron for two and a half minutes, please, or less.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Ms. Dubois, I didn't get to mention at first: Thank you for being here and, of course, for all the work that you do in this area.

I wanted to ask, Ms. Dubois, for you to expand a little on the constricted grant writing and how that impacts the ability to clean up these vessels or prevent them from sinking in the first place.

[Chloe Dubois]

Oftentimes, the grants that we're applying for are on an annual basis, and those grants are not reoccurring or committed to annually. We need long-term, committed, annual funding that we can then use to perform survey work as well as conduct removal efforts that are not constricted by the end of year for March fiscal—say the end of government fiscal. We find that as we're doing the work, we want to do meaningful consultation with first nations communities; we want to have community engagement, and these things take time to complete in a meaningful way. We would like to see longer-term funds, available over a multi-year period, that we can then utilize to continue to fund and do the work in a longer way.

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

Thank you so much. Yes, they are all very good points and very important for us to put forward in our recommendations.

My final question is for you, Ms. Bowman. Do you have any thoughts around how important it is that we see federal leadership here, that we see a strategy that's put in place? You talked about the importance of a national approach being taken. Can you share a bit? You talked about the onus of responsibility and the response that you get more locally. How important is it to local chambers of commerce, to local communities, that we see federal leadership on this issue?

[Roberta Bowman]

I think it's important because it's Canada—it's federal; it's our top tier. It's where our leadership starts, and then it goes down to provincial and then down to our municipal. I think if there was collaboration from the top down, that would be a really good representation of leaders across the country—federally, provincially, municipally—working together to address this issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Bragdon for five minutes or less, please.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for appearing here today and giving very insightful testimony. Thank you for the work that you do on this.

I wanted to start off by asking both of you a question. I can maybe start with Ms. Dubois, and then we'll go to Ms. Bowman. In your opinion, has the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act achieved its stated purpose? In your estimation, do you believe it is accomplishing what it set out to do?

I'll start with you, Ms. Dubois.

[Chloe Dubois]

I believe that, yes, it is accomplishing its initial intent. However, I think more obviously needs to get done in terms of the removal work and the resources available to do the work.

Thank you.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Ms. Bowman.

[Roberta Bowman]

Yes, I believe that what has been put in place is a good start. As we are seeing increasing numbers of boats being left derelict and abandoned, I think that there is more to do.

Just to give an example, in the last two weeks, two more boats sank, one in Dogpatch and one just on the outskirts of Sydney and Victoria. Both were abandoned vessels, so I believe there is a lot more work that can still be done.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you.

With that in mind, we've heard testimony on this here, and I'd like to get your perspective on this as it relates to what we call the traditional jurisdictional ping-pong that oftentimes happens when it comes to this. It's, “No, that's federal response,” but, “No, no, that's provincial,” or, “No, no, that's municipal.” Oftentimes, the people closest to the ground or those doing the work, the organizations like yours that are closest to it, say they just wish it was clearer and more succinct, so they know exactly who they need to be contacting, how they can start the process when they discover one of these vessels, how it gets prioritized and what the greatest risk is. Have you found in your experience that this is a big challenge that needs to be resolved—the jurisdictional ping-pong, as it were?

If you want to comment on that, I'll start with you, Ms. Dubois and then you, Ms. Bowman.

[Chloe Dubois]

We have one hundred per cent experienced the ping-pong effect. That trickles over into even derelict aquaculture removal. There are often many different permitting bodies involved. Often, it gets batted around in terms of who needs to pay for it. That's really what it comes down to. When there are large dollars at stake or a large amount of resources needed, nobody really wants to foot the bill for that. We have definitely been through that experience of being passed around.

I will comment quickly that there is a new strategy being developed on the west coast of British Columbia, called the coastal marine strategy. It's the first time in history that a 20-year coastal marine strategy is being planned, co-written, by coastal indigenous first nations. This could be a really great opportunity to bridge all levels of government in collaboration, working together through this 20-year management plan to ensure that derelict vessels become addressed in this plan and that the bridge is formed between provincial and federal levels.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

It's called the coastal marine plan. Is that correct?

[Chloe Dubois]

It's called the coastal marine strategy. It's currently being developed through the province, through the Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you.

Ms. Bowman, do you want to comment as well about the jurisdictional ping-pong?

That's probably going to be the end of my time. I'm seeing the chair look at me here.

If you want to say something quickly, you go ahead.

[Roberta Bowman]

Really quickly, yes, I totally agree.

I think the growth of Dogpatch is a good example of that. The municipality is saying it's not its problem. The province is saying it's not its problem. The federal government is saying it's not its problem. I feel like we need to bring all of the parties together to the table to discuss who needs to meet. They need to work together, ultimately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Bragdon.

We'll now go to Mr. Weiler for five minutes or less, please.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to pick up on a number of comments that were made earlier.

Ms. Dubois, you mentioned the need to have long-term, ongoing funding for some of the work of removing vessels.

Ms. Bowman, you mentioned, as part of your recommendations, changes that you'd like to see on the fees for boats.

One thing the federal government has proposed is the creation of a vessel remediation fund, whereby when boat owners register their vessels, they would be subject to a small fee that would go into this fund. It would in turn, over time, provide a sustainable source of funding to do this type of work.

First Ms. Dubois and then Ms. Bowman, I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether you think this is the right approach to be able to ensure that there is that type of ongoing funding to do this work.

[Chloe Dubois]

I definitely agree. I was trying to convey that earlier, in response to another question, in terms of putting a small fee, levy or tax on the procurement of the vessel and then have that go into a bit of a slush fund that's available for remediation and restoration activities across the coast. I think that's low-hanging fruit in terms of solutions to put in place. I totally agree with that direction.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Ms. Bowman, I'm curious about your thoughts as well.