Evidence of meeting #2 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Michael Chalupovitsch Committee Researcher
I thank the committee, and the clerk especially, for the compliment.
With regard to the flood control measures in the Fraser valley, a lot of it falls within provincial jurisdiction. There is a DFO component in terms of the effect on the salmon stocks, but the infrastructure and the flood mitigation measures are largely run by the Province of British Columbia.
I don't have all of the information in front of me, but I'm happy to provide anything in writing, if required.
Liberal
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Yes, I think it does.
I'm not sure if you need the amendment stated now, Mr. Chair, but I can do so if you wish.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Could you read it out, and could you do it slowly so that the interpretation can follow it as well?
Liberal
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
My amendment adds “that the committee allot one meeting to the study and that the committee receive testimony from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.”
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
That's correct, Mr. Chair. I didn't read the full motion, but right after “wild salmon runs and the opportunity to address those risks as we recover from the floods and rebuild the flood control infrastructure”, I would add the amendment as stated.
Liberal
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I had a separate matter that I wanted to bring forward, but I understand the amendment is before us, so I'll wait.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
Yes, I was going to speak to it. I wanted to clarify something with Mr. Hardie. His original motion talks about the flood mitigation—
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
Yes. I'm getting to that.
Part of what he said that wasn't relevant is that it is provincial jurisdiction. Part of the problem with the lower Fraser for a B.C. resident is that the State of Washington had done some flood control and caused a lot of the problems for British Columbians, the rivers and the salmon as a result. I don't know if Ken wants to study that. It certainly would need more than one day. One day wouldn't cover it. Maybe we could get some clarity, because if we're going to dig into that, it's going to need an answer from our southern neighbours.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Yes, I do.
Mr. Zimmer raises a great point. There will be international treaties and a few other things involved. That would be separate from this study. When we get into the dynamics of the flooding in the lower Fraser, what was happening in Washington was clearly material, but this is about the DFO having an opportunity—particularly as things are restored or updated on the Canadian side—to have input into measures that will protect salmon. That was the intent or focus of my motion.
January 18th, 2022 / 12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Is everybody clear now on the amendment as proposed by Mr. Kelloway?
Hearing no further discussion on the proposed amendment, does anybody want to propose that the amendment be read out again for clarification?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Tina, could you read out the amendment as proposed by Mr. Kelloway, please?
The Clerk
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The main motion is as follows:
That the committee commit to a short study focusing on the risks flood control/mitigation systems along the lower Fraser River pose to wild salmon runs and the opportunity to address those risks as we recover from the floods and rebuild the flood control infrastructure.
The amendment of Mr. Kelloway adds the following:
and that the committee allot one meeting to the study and that the committee receive testimony from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
I apologize for reading the whole motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
It doesn't hurt to refresh everyone's memory.
We've all heard the amendment. I know Mr. Bachrach wants to speak to the motion itself afterward. Is everybody in agreement with the amendment?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we'll go back to the motion as amended.
Go ahead, Mr. Bachrach.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
There was a brief mention about the geographical scope. Speaking on behalf of my colleague who sits on this committee, there's an interest in broadening the scope to include the Province of British Columbia, noting that there are flood mitigation structures elsewhere in the province that were affected by the recent events.
I propose an amendment. I propose that after the word “systems”, we insert “in British Columbia, particularly”, and then continue with “along the lower Fraser River”. It would simply allow a broader discussion for folks in other parts of the province that have been similarly affected.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you for that.
Mr. Arnold, do you want to speak to this proposed amendment? You had your hand up.
