Fisheries Committee on March 1st, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I'm getting ahead of myself. I try to rush things along, unfortunately.

We do have another witness, of course. Christina Callegari is the sustainable seafood coordinator of SeaChoice.

I apologize for trying to skip over you. You have five minutes or less, please.

[Christina Callegari, Sustainable Seafood Coordinator, SeaChoice]

Good afternoon.

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before the committee.

SeaChoice is excited to see the committee conducting a study on improving seafood labelling and traceability. It is critically important to provide transparency to consumers, ensure sustainable seafood production, and protect the long-term viability of the seafood sector.

SeaChoice is a Canadian partnership among the David Suzuki Foundation, the Ecology Action Centre and the Living Oceans Society. We've been working together since 2006 to improve the sustainability and transparency of seafood.

Today I'd like to focus on three main reasons Canada's seafood labelling and traceability standards need improvement, and to provide our key recommendations.

First, Canadians deserve to know more about their seafood, but Canada's seafood labels do not allow consumers to make an informed choice to buy sustainably or support domestic producers. There's very little information required on a seafood product, including the common name and country of origin. As we've heard, even those pieces of information often don't help the consumer.

In 2019, SeaChoice conducted an extensive review of the CFIA fish list. This is a list that provides guidance for the accepted common names for seafood sold in Canada. We found numerous examples of generic common names, such as shrimp, used for 41 different species. We also found, for example, that red snapper was used to identify a species of rock fish, an entirely different type of fish.

The country-of-origin label that's required on imported products simply refers to where the product was last processed, not where it was caught or farmed.

We also know that Canadians want more transparency. SeaChoice's survey from November 2021 shows that 91% of Canadians think it is somewhat to very important that traceability laws require companies to track information such as what the species is and how and where it was caught or farmed.

Second, Canada's traceability regulations do not currently allow for accurate and important data to be passed from the point of harvest to the end consumer. Although it's required by DFO that information such as the species or gear type be recorded in log books, depending on the fishery, this information is not then entered into the supply chain, because our federal food regulations don't require businesses to do so.

Canada also lacks robust import requirements, leaving us at risk of importing products associated with illegal, unregulated or unreported fishing, or mislabelled seafood. This especially puts Canadian businesses, such as major retailers, at risk by allowing illegal or critically endangered species to go unnoticed and be sold to consumers.

We also continue to fall behind other countries. Recently, the United States were looking to strengthen their import monitoring programs to include all species of fish and shellfish, and also have proposed to extend their domestic traceability requirements to establishments like restaurants.

Finally, a standard, government-regulated traceability and labelling system would provide a level playing field for industry. Seafood is not immune to greenwashing, an issue that most Canadians are concerned with. In fact, 83% of Canadians are somewhat to very concerned about greenwashing. Detailed product labelling and traceability are important tools in making sure that companies can back up their environmental claims.

In 2019, SeaChoice conducted a study that found that of the self-declared claims on packages such as “sustainably caught” or “responsibly sourced”, 41% had no evidence to back them up. A standard system would ensure that businesses that don't invest in traceability and better labelling can't undercut those that do.

To repeat those three reasons that we need improvements: one, our seafood labels are not detailed enough; two, we lack the systems to ensure proper traceability of a product and its associated information; and three, a government standard would provide a level playing field for industry.

I will now go to our recommendations for the committee members.

First, we recommend developing stronger import requirements and a traceability system that tracks information for all seafood sold in Canada.

Second, we recommend improving seafood labelling standards to require the scientific name, whether it's wild or farmed, its harvest location and the harvest method.

Third, we recommend that the government implement proper measures to ensure data verification and enforcement.

Finally, we recommend that the government establish an interdepartmental committee to ensure that all relevant departments, as well as stakeholders, can work together on this.

Thank you for your time, and I'm happy to take any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that. You were almost dead-on for your time, after I tried to jump over you and not have you speak at all. I apologize again for that.

We'll now go to our questioning by the members, for six minutes or less, beginning with Mr. Perkins.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair; and thank you again, witnesses, for your presentations on this important study.

My first question is for Ms. Callegari. I found your submission to the government on the seafood labelling interesting. It seems to be supported by some of the other testimony we've heard here, from the Oceana study through to some of the academic studies.

In it, you said your studies have found that retailers are doing a relatively good job of telling Canadians whether their seafood is wild caught, a less good job with labelling their products as farmed, and a very poor job of including on the label the actual species, the country of harvest and whether the product was caught or farmed.

I think that's a bit of what your process indicated. You also mentioned that the U.S. is strengthening things.

Therefore, what would you do specifically, in terms of either the optional things that are in our CFIA regulations now and making them required, or the list of things that you would like to see made mandatory on the consumer packaging?

[Christina Callegari]

SeaChoice has been working for many years on encouraging better seafood labelling regulations. Specifically, we would like to see the scientific name, an indication of whether the product is wild or farmed, the gear type used or harvest method and, of course, the true geographic origin, not just the “product of” declaration, that being the country of origin. That's what we would like to see.

In my presentation, I also mentioned that right now, unfortunately, some of this data is collected but is just not being passed along through the rest of the supply chain. We'd like to see more harmonization and data being carried from the point of harvest all the way to the consumer.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you.

When you say “point of origin”, do you mean both caught and processed, separately, because they can be separate?

[Christina Callegari]

We mean where it was caught or harvested; for example, if it was farmed, the location of the farm.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Okay. I want to follow up on your comment that 41% of the labelling that claims sustainability doesn't have evidence of that, and I think we've heard that figure from other witnesses.

This is going from memory, so it could be wrong, but if I recall correctly, we heard from CFIA that the only requirement they have on sustainability is whether the country has regulations, not whether they're enforced or the level of regulations.

What is your definition, and perhaps Mr. Hayne's as well, of “sustainability” in terms of the labelling?

[Christina Callegari]

The CFIA's regulations actually don't have a specific definition for “sustainability” in terms of it being on a package. That's one of the issues we have identified when companies are making these claims on packages without any evidence to back them up.

We would define “sustainability”, in terms of it being on the package, as having those three or four key pieces of information, providing information on where it was caught, how, and what species it is, as a way to then use that information to look up its sustainability status. That could be using, for example, the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch ranking system to look at those pieces of information and say whether that product was harvested or farmed in a sustainable way.

I'm sure my colleague Kurtis can also touch on the sustainability piece from a certification perspective.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Okay. Thank you.

I think Mr. Zimmer has a question.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm referencing Ms. Callegari.

In regard to your report on IUU fishing, that's one concern. I've represented anglers many times; I've fished with them along the banks of the Fraser, and so on. They are always asked to do less and fish less because of the threatened stocks, yet we still see gillnets getting drawn across the water, catching fish that we simply don't want to catch.

Most Canadians don't understand the implications and how the IUU aspect of it contributes to organized crime.

What I'm asking you concerns traceability. How would it impact the IUU fishing that's occurring domestically within our borders in Canada?

[Christina Callegari]

In terms of IUU fishing domestically, we of course don't see as much evidence of slave labour or human rights abuses in Canada's supply from domestically produced product. We do see instances of unreported catch or illegal catches in a different regard. For example, you see instances of high-grading. In some of our fisheries that are....

I'm sorry, I'm getting some feedback.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Ms. Callegari, my time is very short, so maybe I'll just ask you this more specifically. I mentioned it in previous—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Actually, your time is up.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Okay. I guess that's it, then.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

You weren't shared a big lot.

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

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

My question is for Ms. Aylward.

In your opening comments, you made reference to the fact that all fishers must be reporting all their catches and government must be active in ensuring sustainability. Could you expand on that for the committee? Are fishers reporting all their catches in all species currently?

[Molly Aylward]

I guess we feel that it should be consistent that all fishers report their catches on a consistent basis.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Would you recommend to the committee that consistency be applied?

We've had some alarming testimony given to this committee on this study and previous studies about the growing practice of unreported and under-reported seafood, primarily with lobster and crab, which are high value.

[Molly Aylward]

I would invite my colleague, Mr. Ian MacPherson, to weigh in on this question as well.

[Ian MacPherson]

Thanks, Mr. Morrissey.

Yes, it is a concern. As you know, in many fisheries there are logbook requirements and there are quota fisheries, but due to the fairly significant escalation in the value of seafood over the last few years, we are hearing of incidents of unreported catches seemingly increasing.

Certainly, the e-logs will provide more real-time data. It's a concern to the industry, particularly on Prince Edward Island, because we're so exposed in terms of our dependency on lobster. We would like to see some of those other species bounce back, but at the end of the day, we have to protect these valuable resources the best way we can.

Thank you.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Mr. MacPherson or Ms. Aylward, do you see the growing practice of unreported landings in lobster and crab undermining the MSC certification that we depend on so much in international marketplaces?

[Ian MacPherson]

As we mentioned in our opening remarks, preserving our international sustainability certifications is exactly what we're referring to there, Mr. Morrissey. Yes, we want to avoid being put in that position. I think it's a situation that we can get a handle on.

At the end of the day, we have a stellar international reputation out there, not only for our preservation of the resource but for the quality of our seafood, and we want to make sure that is maintained.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

You're appearing before the committee on the issue of proper seafood labelling, but the study has also touched on the area of unreported and under-reported. You represent, as you stated, over 1,200 independent fishers in Prince Edward Island.

What recommendation would you make to the committee for the government to move on to get a better handle on eliminating what could be considered a growing practice of unreported and under-reported landings?

[Ian MacPherson]

We haven't discussed at our board level what would happen after the catches hit the wharf. As I mentioned earlier, one reason the PEIFA has invested extensively in the e-log is to have a mechanism for real-time data and accurate reporting of catches. We feel that's an important first step.

Perhaps that is a topic the committee may look at more extensively down the way.