Evidence of meeting #44 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 wharves.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Cormier.
There are only about 15 seconds left. You won't get a chance for the question, let alone an answer.
We'll now go to Madame Desbiens for two and a half minutes or less, please.
1:45 p.m.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Obviously, Quebec was less affected by that storm, but the rising sea level is staring us in the face. Where I come from, for example, in L'Isle-aux-Coudres, there are times during the day when cars and ambulances or other emergency vehicles can't even get across, because the water level gets higher than the wharf and so the ferry can't load and unload the cars. So people are negatively impacted by the disorganization of the emergency services caused by climate change.
If we add in the fishery-related problems that you encounter farther away in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, in the Maritimes and in the Îles-de-la-Madeleine, it is obvious that we have to adapt to climate change. We have just come from COP27, where we heard that Canada did not put on a good showing when it came to the environment and fighting climate change.
Do you think we should simply mitigate, or do we need to launch a massive attack against investment in fossil fuels, for example? Do you think we should take strong action on both fronts?
1:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
We have to invest now in infrastructure that can stand up to the types of storms and climate we are going to see in the coming decades. It is going to cost us a lot less than waiting to find ourselves in situations with wharves and entire infrastructure facilities disappearing because of a storm. Even though these new facilities are still going to suffer minor damage during storms, it will be cheaper to repair them than to have to replace an entire wharf.
1:45 p.m.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Is the fight against climate change also a factor that we cannot ignore in this future that is already at our door?
1:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Absolutely. The two things go hand in hand. However, we are now in a situation where we no longer have any choice but to learn and start to adapt, as human beings, to the climate change that is happening now. We are living in it.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Madame Desbiens.
We'll now go to Ms. Zarrillo for two and a half minutes or less, please.
1:45 p.m.
NDP
Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm hearing a common theme here that an ounce of prevention might be a pound of cure. Hopefully we can get some data on that.
Mr. Mallet, you mentioned a rapid response. Is there is a rapid response protocol in place now? If not, what would an effective one need to look like?
If there is some time, I would also like to ask you to expand a little bit more on federal investment plans on wharves. What was effective in the ones you spoke of, and what could be modified or changed to be a little bit better?
1:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
I'll answer the first question by saying that there is no rapid response as of yet to the climate change crisis or any type of situation with wharves of the magnitude that we just saw.
We should, and I like Mr. Cormier's suggestion of having a strategic committee or group focused on putting together some kind of a strategy for all of eastern Canada and all of our coastlines, including the west, the Atlantic and the Arctic. We need to deal with it now. As I mentioned, if we don't, then the costs are going to be a hundredfold later on.
1:50 p.m.
NDP
Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
On the second question, you mentioned that the federal wharf investment plans had been effective. I was wondering if you could expand a bit on that. Let us know what was effective and if there were any gaps or things that could be modified.
1:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Luc, do you want to take that one?
1:50 p.m.
Fisheries Advisor, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Sure.
What was particularly effective was raising seawalls. I stress again that what really causes a lot of damage is less the wind and more the storm surge, so the idea behind protecting wharf infrastructure is beating back this storm surge. To me, the most important piece of infrastructure in a port is the seawall. Doubling them is a very good idea. Making them higher is a very good idea—thicker as well. Then, after that, raising the level of decks on wharves is a good idea because, as Madame Desbiens underlined, the water levels are rising, and if a wharf is submerged, it's practically useless.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Ms. Zarrillo.
We'll now go to Mr. Arnold for five minutes or less, please.
November 25th, 2022 / 1:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll start with Mr. Mallet.
Mr. Mallet, in your organization's dealings with the DFO, how significant is resilience of fisheries infrastructure in the DFO's actions?
1:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
That's a good question. We're not privy to the internal discussions that are being held within the DFO in terms of what types of planning they have towards this climate crisis. However, there are some conversations being held, especially between the DFO, small craft harbours and the port authorities, especially in our case, over the past 10 years, I would say.
There is some planning there, but again, I think one hurdle that we've been seeing time and time again—and it was mentioned earlier—is that millions of dollars can only go so far. We're talking billions of dollars here in investments if we really want to have an impact on all of our infrastructures that are important across Atlantic Canada and Quebec. This is just the way ahead. If we don't do it, it's just going to cost much more, or at some point we just won't have any capacity to go out fishing anymore.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
I'm trying to come back to the question. Has the DFO identified resiliency as a primary objective in its wharf rebuilding or structuring program?
1:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Again, I can't answer for sure.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
It hasn't made that clear, in other words.
What level of resilience have you seen in work so far in the DFO's investments, in the millions that have been spent so far?
1:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
As we just mentioned, I think that the wharf infrastructures that have been renovated have been renovated with the idea that the sea level will be increasing and the intensity of storms will be increasing as well.
Luc mentioned earlier that the main costs of these renovations were raising the seawalls to make them higher and wider, and also increasing the height of the wharf decks.
Also, the material used for the new wharves is really important. The old wharves, especially those that were knocked out by this storm, were made out of wood pilings, and in many cases when these wood pilings are hit directly by wave action, it just breaks them up.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you.
I'll switch to Mr. MacLeod now.
Mr. MacLeod, you mentioned that the testing lab was closed due to Fiona, the storm. What caused the lab to be closed?
1:55 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Shellfish Association
We had no power. The power was out in Charlottetown there for the better part of a week, so the lab didn't really get opened until the following Monday after the storm. The CFIA didn't require any tests for some reason or other. Any other time, they would be testing everything right to the nines, but in this case, they didn't require tests. The buyer that I was selling to wouldn't buy because he didn't have his oysters tested, and when he did get them tested the following Monday afternoon, they failed, so he couldn't ship.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Would an auxiliary power source have enabled the lab to stay open and allowed that testing to take place so that you could have moved your product?
1:55 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Shellfish Association
I would think it would have. Really and truly, I'm on the side of safety. It kind of puts the whole shell fishery in jeopardy by.... They were letting product be shipped without being tested. I can't figure that out. I really can't figure out why that was done, but anyway....
Yeah, auxiliary power probably would have gotten that lab up and going. The product should have been tested. That was a pretty high tidal surge, and the water was pretty coppery-coloured. It should have been tested, but anyway....
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you.
Mr. Mallet or Mr. LeBlanc, I believe you mentioned an assistance program, more of a long-term program. Can you elaborate a little bit more on what you think that might look like? Would it be following the agricultural insurance programs or something along those lines?
1:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Maritime Fishermen's Union
Yes, maybe one option would be to look at the model that was used just recently with the COVID crisis, when there was some access to a loan program with part of it being forgivable as a grant.
The difficult thing here is to try to gauge the actual need per harvester. Every harvester has a different situation to address, and in some cases, such as in our case in LFA 25, where the fishery was going on during the storm, some fishermen on the eastern part of that zone had very little damage to their gear, whereas most of our fishermen on the western side of the zone were very affected.
In some cases some of the lobster traps being used were new or were just a few years in. Usually they have a five- to six-year lifespan, but with this storm, even if harvesters recuperated their equipment, the lifespan of their equipment was shortened by a few years already. Therefore, they'll have to reinvest in their equipment much sooner than was anticipated, and that was not part of their business plan, I would say.
Access to loans or access to some support like that so that they can reinvest in their businesses is very important moving forward.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Arnold. You'll owe me over a minute on your next round of questions.
I'll go quickly to Mr. Kelloway to finish out this round.