Fisheries Committee on Nov. 25th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 130 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. This meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders.

Before we proceed, I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of witnesses and members: Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. Those in the room can use the earpiece and select the desired channel. Please address all comments through the chair.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 8, the committee is resuming its review of the Fisheries Act.

Welcome to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department of the Environment. Thank you, officials, for being here today.

From the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, we have Miriam Padolsky, acting director general of ecosystems management; Gorazd Ruseski, director general of indigenous affairs; Bernard Vigneault, director general of the ecosystem science directorate; and Todd Williams, senior director of resource management operations.

From Environment and Climate Change, we have Jacinthe David, director general of the industrial sectors and chemicals directorate.

Thank you for taking the time to be here today.

You will have five minutes or less for your opening statement.

Mr. Williams, you have the floor.

[Todd Williams, Senior Director, Resource Management - Operations, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Good morning, Mr. Chair and committee members.

My name is Todd Williams, and I am the senior director of resource management operations at Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

My colleagues and I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee on behalf of the department regarding the study of the 2019 changes to the Fisheries Act.

I would like to begin by acknowledging that the land on which I speak is the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe.

I would also like to acknowledge the diligent work conducted by this committee more than five years ago in reviewing the act. Your comprehensive report recommendations, coupled with the extensive consultations conducted by the department with thousands of people across the country, played a pivotal role in informing the creation of Bill C-68 in the 42nd Parliament.

I would like to express my appreciation for your continued dedication to protecting and conserving Canada's fish and fish habitat for future generations. The current examination of the act will help inform directions on how we can continue to advance efforts to protect and sustain Canada's fisheries, maintain vibrant coastal communities, continue to advance reconciliation and promote the long-term health of our aquatic ecosystems.

I want to highlight some of the key changes that were put in place in 2019.

First, we expanded the scope of protection to all fish and fish habitat to make it clear that commercial fisheries productivity was inextricably linked to a healthy aquatic ecosystem.

Next, we removed the prohibition against serious harm to fish and reintroduced the previous prohibition against the “harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat”. We also prohibited causing the death of fish by means other than fishing.

The 2019 amendments initiated early steps to advance reconciliation, including requiring that indigenous knowledge in fish and fish habitat be taken into account in decision-making and that opportunities be offered to explore how indigenous law may be deemed equivalent to provisions of Fisheries Act regulations.

The 2019 amendments also introduced the fish stocks provisions, which established Canada’s first legislative requirements to manage major fish stocks at levels necessary to promote sustainability and to develop and implement rebuilding plans if they become depleted. This significantly strengthened our fisheries management framework.

In April 2022, we listed the first group of 30 stocks under these provisions and also set out regulatory requirements for rebuilding plans for those stocks among the 30 that required a plan. I am pleased to note that this past spring 11 rebuilding plans were approved and are now being implemented by the department.

We are pursuing a regulatory process to list more stocks over the long term, including the recent proposal to list another 65 stocks through the publication of the Canada Gazette, part I, on October 12, 2024. The 2019 amendments also helped to ensure that the economic benefits of fishing remain with licence-holders and their communities by enshrining regulations regarding owner-operator requirements and fleet separation in Atlantic Canada and Quebec to support the independence of inshore harvesters.

I would like to thank the many owner-operators who were instrumental in the passage of the amended act.

Finally, the updated act phases out the practice of keeping whales and other cetaceans in captivity for display purposes, while providing exceptions for rescue and rehabilitation. Clear prohibitions against the import and export of shark fins that are not naturally attached to the carcass were also introduced.

The passage of Bill C-68 marked a significant step forward. However, we recognize that there is always room for improvement.

In this spirit, we are looking forward to hearing from the witnesses who will be appearing before this committee and welcome the committee's final report and recommendations. Your expertise and commitment to Canada's fisheries and oceans will be crucial in guiding our efforts to improve the Fisheries Act and ensure it continues to serve the interests of all Canadians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Williams.

We'll now go to Ms. David for five minutes or less, please.

[Jacinthe David, Director General, Industrial Sectors and Chemicals Directorate, Environment and Climate Change Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

I am the director general of the industrial sectors and chemicals directorate at Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee to discuss the Fisheries Act and Environment and Climate Change Canada’s role in its implementation.

I would like to acknowledge that I'm speaking to you today from the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe nation. I am often reminded of the work we do related to fisheries and water protection that helps to make us all better stewards of the land, an important value held by indigenous people.

Let me start by describing the role that Environment and Climate Change Canada plays in the Fisheries Act.

Environment and Climate Change Canada is responsible for the pollution prevention provisions of the act. This is one of the most important pieces of legislation to protect Canada's fisheries resources and waters from pollution.

The department leads the administration and enforcement of these provisions, except for their application to aquaculture and the control and eradication of aquatic invasive species and aquatic pests. Those areas fall under the responsibility of Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

ECCC administers these provisions in two ways.

The first is by administering and enforcing an important provision on water pollution. It prohibits the release of substances that are deleterious to fish in the water. It is a broad requirement that applies to all Canadian fisheries waters. There are only a limited number of ways to allow for the release of pollution under the act.

This leads to the second way in which the pollution prevention provisions are administered, which is by developing and enforcing regulations that allow the release of deleterious substances to water frequented by fish. Current regulations under the Fisheries Act authorize the release of deleterious substances for industrial or municipal activities under strict conditions. These regulations provide environmental protection while allowing socially or economically important activities to take place.

Since regulations authorize the release of pollution, they establish systematic oversight and scrutiny of pollution releases to monitor the effluent quality and understand the impact of the authorized release. To date, seven such regulations have been developed, including regulations for the metal- and diamond-mining sectors, the pulp and paper sector and municipal waste water.

ECCC is responsible for several activities related to the implementation of the prohibitions and regulations. These include verifying compliance with the requirements, providing effective enforcement to ensure those who violate the law are held accountable and conducting compliance promotion to inform stakeholders of their obligations, as well as providing science-based advice to prevent, prepare for, respond to and recover from environmental emergencies.

Now I would like to quickly review with you what the 2019 amendments meant for our department.

The 2019 amendments to the act did not significantly alter the requirements of the pollution prevention provisions. This means that the prohibition on the release of pollution and the regulations making authorities were largely unchanged. Nonetheless, some of the changes made elsewhere in the act have influenced the department’s implementation of the act.

The 2019 amendments provide that the minister must consider any adverse effects that a decision may have on the rights of indigenous peoples in Canada. For example, in 2021, the Crown‑indigenous working group on oil sands tailing ponds water was established to serve as a mechanism for collaboration on the development of the potential oil sands mining effluent regulations.

Environment and Climate Change Canada is committed to protecting Canada’s environment in ways that benefit future generations while supporting today’s growing economy.

I look forward to hearing your views and recommendations as you undertake this review of the act.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that.

We'll now go to our rounds of questioning.

We'll start with Mr. Arnold for six minutes or less.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for being here today.

You started speaking about the regulations that were developed from the changes. Can you explain a little further how those regulations are rolled out and provided to proponents of projects so that they understand what is expected of them?

I'm not sure who would be best to answer that.

[Miriam Padolsky, Acting Director General, Ecosystems Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you. I can answer that question.

Since the amendments to the act were made in 2019, DFO has rolled out a number of policies, tools and guidance documents to help explain to proponents and others what the requirements are. For example, we developed and published six policies and 17 guidance documents for staff and proponents, as well as a number of codes of practice and standards.

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

Thank you for that.

We recently heard from some hydro proponents and others from the mining sector that the application process is still so onerous. There's no process to proceed with minor works without inspections. There are incredible delays in getting inspections or applications processed.

Can you explain why that is, and how you're going to change that?

[Miriam Padolsky]

Thank you for the question.

Mr. Chair, we appreciate hearing the feedback from stakeholders and others. We are looking forward to receiving any recommendations from the committee about how we can improve our processes.

We have been working to streamline our processes and make them clearer and more predictable for proponents and others. As I mentioned, we developed a lot of guidance documents, hoping to make the process clearer. We also developed a couple of plain-language tip sheets, such as a tip sheet related to applying for a Fisheries Act authorization.

We have service standards set out in the regulations. Regarding our regulated service delivery standard for determining whether authorizations are complete within a 60-day time limit, we have a 92% compliance rate. We are in 100% compliance for processing those applications within the regulated 90-day time limit.

That being said, we recognize there's always room for improvement. We welcome feedback and hearing recommendations about how we can further improve.

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

Thank you.

The feedback we heard is that the processes are extremely slow and onerous and are holding up significant projects, and even minor projects that really should be approved under minor works.

I believe both of you who presented talked about the reconciliation component of the changes to the Fisheries Act.

Has the reconciliation component been defined, and can you describe how it has been communicated to non-indigenous harvesters and the industry sector out there so that they understand what that section means to them and their work?

[Todd Williams]

Perhaps I'll respond first, then pass it over to Mr. Ruseski for further comment.

With respect to reconciliation and managing the fisheries, ensuring that we have open and transparent communication with all harvesters and licence-holders is critical. We engage all fishers through our advisory committee processes. We work with groups and first nations to ensure we can advance the goals of reconciliation in a meaningful way.

Perhaps Mr. Ruseski wishes to add to that.

[Gorazd Ruseski, Director General, Indigenous Affairs, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

I would like to add a little bit of flavour to my colleague's response to your question in terms of some of the other engagement that's gone on over the last few years with non-indigenous industry around advancing rights and reconciliation in the fisheries.

Over the last few years, in my experience, in the engagement that's taken place at more of a national level—and there's always engagement that goes on at the local and regional level with some of my regional colleagues, local harvester associations and the like—we have undertaken various workshops with the likes of the Canadian Independent Fish Harvester's Federation, less with an orientation around the specific provisions of the Fisheries Act than with regard to the intentions behind rights and reconciliation, some of the past Supreme Court decisions and other directives that the government has been implementing. Those workshops took place a few years ago, and the discussions at the national and regional levels are continuing on an ongoing basis.

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

They're still lacking or not as—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Arnold.

We'll go now to Mr. Cormier for six minutes or less, please.

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The new measures in the Fisheries Act have been very beneficial to the fishing industry in our regions, but I have a few questions about the owner-operator provisions.

People in the industry are telling us that despite the new owner-operator regulations, there are still some concerning loopholes that allow entities or plants that aren't even in the region to buy licences at very high prices, sometimes using nominees. As I'm sure you know, in recent years, the cost of fishing licences, whether for the crab fishery or the lobster fishery, has skyrocketed in our regions. I think you've heard about the famous case of a young lobster fisherman in P.E.I. who bought a snow crab licence for over $10 million.

How do you ensure that these transactions are done properly and in accordance with the law? We still see suspicious transactions. What kind of checks do you do in that regard? When I was 24, I was still borrowing $50 from my parents to buy a pack of smokes and a few beers for the weekend. How did a young 24‑year‑old lobster fisherman get a $10 million crab licence?

Are there any laws or strict rules that make it possible to know where that money comes from? That's the number one concern of stakeholders on the ground, despite the changes to the Fisheries Act.

[Todd Williams]

Certainly the provisions within the Fisheries Act strengthened the existing policy that we had with respect to owner-operators. Fisheries and Oceans Canada is committed to providing and promoting viable and independent operations and harvesters in the inshore fishery in Atlantic Canada.

I can tell you that we do have a robust regime in place that does look at the acquisition of licences and licences that may be subject to controlling agreements. To be clear, not all agreements for financing are controlling agreements; it's only ones in which the beneficial benefit is transferred.

I will add—

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

On that, I want to make sure.... Let's say I want to buy a crab licence. It's $15 million. I go to the DFO and say, “Look, I want to buy this crab licence. It's $15 million.” Do you look at my bank account at all? Do you look at all those things? What do you look at? This is what I want to know: What do you look at before I can actually have my name on the permit?

It seems a little bit odd sometimes that a person can buy a crab licence for that much money, and with high prices.... What are you looking at in terms of investigation, if I can say it that way?

[Todd Williams]

Thank you very much for the supplementary question.

With respect to this type of investigation, we have a number of tools. Certainly, if we are made aware of something, or if something does look oddly suspicious, we can in fact request further information—and we have—from those harvesters, which can be the paperwork that would look at whether or not this was a controlling agreement.

Since these provisions have been put in place and the regulations have been adopted, 3,600 questionnaires have been completed, and we've looked at those questionnaires for these licence-holders. Of those, which we would classify as administrative reviews, we required additional information from 1,600 of the 3,600, and for 220, we worked with those individual harvesters to take them out of those controlling agreements. We consider that a success.

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Okay.

Before my time runs out....

One of the problems we have with the sale of licences is the differences that exist between provinces. In the case I mentioned, for example, a person who wants to buy a licence in New Brunswick can be authorized to do so after living in that province for only six months. To buy a licence in Quebec, you have to have lived there for two years.

Are you aware of this problem? Why are we still unable to change these criteria?

We are told that it is up to the associations to request a change to the criteria, but the associations will certainly never ask us to do so.

I think we should add some standardized criteria to the Fisheries Act, because the purpose and spirit of that act is to keep licences in our regions so that neighbouring communities can benefit from the economic spinoffs. However, in my province, we see permits going to Quebec or other provinces because the residency criteria are not the same.

Are you aware of this problem? Also, can these residency criteria be easily changed?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Mr. Williams, if we could get an answer in writing—

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Yes, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

—it would be good, because the time has expired for Mr. Cormier.

We'll now go to Madame Desbiens for six minutes or less, please.

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

I can still give you 30 seconds to respond to Mr. Cormier, if you wish, Mr. Williams.

[Todd Williams]

Thank you very much.

In short, we would add that yes, as a regulator, we do—

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

He's answering your question right now, Mr. Cormier.