Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, members of the committee.
The more than 60 companies and 17,000 people working in the aquaculture sector whom I'm representing here today are directly engaged in almost all of the issues this committee addresses, so we are grateful for the opportunity to share our views with you. I think it's been many years for us.
For most Canadians, the aquaculture sector is out of sight and out of mind. They enjoy our oysters, our mussels and our Atlantic salmon but rarely link them all back to our farms or the people who work there. However, we are, indeed, farmers, and just like farmers raising cattle, sheep or pigs, we raise our animals from their earliest life stages and feed them, care for them and bring them to markets across Canada and the world. We raise our animals in water, but we are farmers just the same.
Right now, over 50% of the world's seafood is raised through farms. We are the path to growth for seafood production. With the longest coastline in the world, Canada has the opportunity to be a global leader for job creation, affordable food production and sustainable food security for Canadians. In many countries, our competitors operate under the auspices of national aquaculture legislation that provides support and operational certainty for farmers. In Canada, the only reference to aquaculture in a federal statute is in the Bank Act.
No, Mr. Chair, that is not a typo. The Bank Act does actually define “aquaculture”—inaccurately, I might add—and confirms that aquaculture operators may use their infrastructure and fish as security for bank loans. Beyond that, federal statutes are silent with respect to our industry, in a way that is completely out of step with how Parliament considers almost every other part of the agriculture sector and the industry more generally.
This situation presents considerable challenges for our sector. It creates an atmosphere of uncertainty for our operations and investments. It creates an uneven playing field across Canada and puts far too much discretion in the hands of ministers and bureaucrats, and it deprives aquaculture of the support and clarity that the rest of the agriculture sector enjoys across Canada.
This situation needs to change. In the longer term, Canada needs purpose-built modern national aquaculture legislation that is centred on our role as food producers. In the more immediate term, we believe that five minor changes to the Fisheries Act could start the legislative ball rolling and position the government to more effectively support and steward the sector.
First, we believe that aquaculture needs to be properly defined in law. It would be helpful to include a definition in the Fisheries Act along these lines: “aquaculture is a form of agricultural production designed to produce food and/or food products for human and/or animal consumption and includes the rearing of privately owned plants and animals in captivity throughout their life cycle.” This would provide clarity and certainty for the sector and for DFO efforts to regulate it.
Second, we believe the word “aquaculture”, defined appropriately, should be added to the list of topics in section 43, which deals with regulations. This would allow for the design of regulations specifically focused on aquaculture directly, rather than via the current backdoor approach using regulatory structures designed for other purposes.
Third, the act should be revised to direct the minister to develop a precautionary approach policy or framework specific to aquaculture. Unsurprisingly, the act is designed to bring the precautionary approach to bear with respect to commercial fisheries and related habitat concerns. This approach is not suitable for the regulation of the site-based, high-technology operations of our sector. A more realistic and appropriate approach is needed and should be guided by law, not by ministerial or bureaucratic whims or inclinations.
Fourth, given that aquaculture is a form of agriculture, the act should be revised to drive collaboration between DFO and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the agriculture governance system more generally. Ultimately, we would like to see AAFC assuming a mandate for aquaculture in a way that would lead to more effective federal support for the sector and remove the perceived conflict of interest in the current DFO position with respect to our sector.
Fifth, on a note that applies beyond just the aquaculture domain, we strongly believe that the act should be modernized to increase decision-making transparency and transform the current black-box approach the minister and DFO utilize. It's essential that all Canadians and, certainly, our sector are aware of the scientific data and information the minister uses in making decisions with respect to them. A Fisheries Act amendment requiring the minister to publicly share such information would dramatically increase decision-making integrity and credibility and focus debates on real issues rather than political posturing.
Mr. Chairman, our sector is a heavily regulated, technology-driven and ecologically sustainable industry of vital importance to the economic and social well-being of coastal and rural communities across Canada. There is tremendous opportunity ahead, despite the unfortunate and unnecessary headwinds at present. It needs and deserves a more constructive, predictable and fair legislative base than the Government of Canada has put in place to date. Our five recommendations would be important first steps in this regard, and I would of course be more than happy to address any of them in more depth with the committee here today.
Thanks very much for your time.