Fisheries Committee on Nov. 18th, 2025

[Alexis Deschênes, Bloc, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC]

From what I understand, the department received your report on that situation, as well as the result of your investigations conducted by private investigators.

Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

There's just time for a very short answer.

[Colin Sproul]

We shared what we can while still protecting the integrity of our legal case, but we certainly shared a ton of information with the department now. The UFCA has been in existence for nearly six years, and in all that time, we shared the information with law enforcement and repeatedly urged them to act.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Deschênes.

That finishes our first round.

We go to the second round.

Mr. Small, you have five minutes.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

Mr. Sproul, what would say is the biggest threat to owner-operator and fleet separation in today's fishery in Atlantic Canada? Similarly, what's the leading cause of growth in vertical integration that you're seeing right now?

[Colin Sproul]

Certainly, corporate takeovers/vertical integration is the biggest threat to the independent fishery. From the UFCA's perspective, we're most concerned about nominal indigenous ownership of fishing licences. Proposed changes to communal commercial fisheries and to the act would see the department begin to issue fishing licences to indigenous companies and corporations, and not just to first nations themselves. This is a very ominous thing, and we know that it's already taking place. We know that some of the vertically integrated companies that have been violating owner-operator policy have been transferring their licences to indigenous entities and, then, signing long-term lease agreements to fish the access back from the first nations. That's certainly the nexus of where we see the problem, but that's not to ignore the problem with non-indigenous vertical integration. It's certainly an issue as well, but the new frontier of violation of owner-operator policy is the indigenization of the access.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Thank you.

Mr. Chapman, you mentioned the damage that could come to the fishery if subsection 6.1(1) of the act were changed in favour of submissions made by certain NGOs. Could you give us a quick example or two of how a fishery that's currently functioning well could be harmed by those changes, or a future fishery that could emerge?

[Bruce Chapman]

I actually asked a DFO official this morning about the number of fisheries that are in the cautious zone, for example, and the value of those fisheries. I'm not privy yet to the answer.

To give you an example, in the northern shrimp fishery in some areas that are designated to be in the healthy zone in one year, we have a survey and it drops below the healthy zone for that year. Then the following year, we have another survey and it goes back up to the other. There's variability in surveys and it would be absolutely disastrous to have fisheries open and fisheries close on an interannual basis. That's crazy.

In other cases, you saw recently with shrimp fishing area 6 in Newfoundland that it was in the critical zone for a number of years, but with recognition that the model needed to be adjusted. The model has now been adjusted. The reference points have now been adjusted. The stock is now designated to be in the healthy zone. It would have been closed for a handful of years if there was a requirement to close it, but there was an ability and discretion allowed to have very low exploitation rates during that period.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chapman.

Ms. Sonnenberg, you mentioned the owner-operator and fleet separation that's supposed to be supported. These policies are supposed to be supported by the act.

Do you think that fleet separation and protecting owner-operator is best provided by the act or by the implementation of the act?

[Melanie Sonnenberg]

I think that it is a two-pronged approach. The act has to lay it out, but there has to be something behind it that gives it teeth. That was what we expected with the regulations, which did not pan out the way we hoped. By having it entrenched in the act with stronger wording than we have today and then having regulations that are revised—

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Ms. Sonnenberg, they're handing out $1,000 fines for someone who estimates 200 pounds more codfish in their logbook than what they actually landed when they're on a weekly quota, if they land it on a Monday. Does that make sense to you?

[Melanie Sonnenberg]

No. That's where interpretation needs to be clear and the rules need to be set up in a way that doesn't allow the kind of variability that we've seen from some of these things, like what you're talking about.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Do you think the will has been there since 2019 to implement the act or has the will not been there?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm sorry. I'm going to jump in there.

Ms. Sonnenberg, if you'd like to submit a response in written form, please send that to the committee.

Next we're going to Mr. Morrissey for five minutes.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Ms. Sonnenberg and Mr. Sproul, would you have examples of controlling agreements to provide to this committee?

It has been referenced a number of times—its verbal vagueness. If you have any documentation, could you provide it to the committee?

[Melanie Sonnenberg]

Some of our membership have some versions, and some of them are quite different from one area to another, that have been submitted to the department. I could probably come up with a couple of examples that I can submit to the chair.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

That would be good because clearly that is in contravention of the intent. We want to ensure the intent is not violated.

Just quickly, how would you envisage harvester supply data?

[Melanie Sonnenberg]

I think that we need to sit down with the department and the science and work out a framework that is applicable.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Given the value of the lobster fishery on the east coast and the fact that those fisheries that have been successfully dockside monitored [Inaudible—Editor], I'm curious as to the resistance in moving. We hear everything from cash buying and all kinds of “illegal” activity that's going on. One quick way of getting control of it would be better monitoring at the dock.

To my colleague's question, I didn't really get a good answer from anybody. I know there's a cost, but there's also a cost to doing nothing in this lucrative fishery and have it challenged.

[Melanie Sonnenberg]

I'm going to suggest very boldly that we have to start with some other measures. That starts with enforcement on the water.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Okay. I agree with that.

Our government has extensively increased enforcement. In fact, you would agree there have been charges made in Nova Scotia relating to some of the issues you raised about lobster heading to plants in New Brunswick, I believe, that were coming from sources that were not legally commercially caught. It is yet to be adjudicated in court. I've seen, from my position, a significant change in cracking down on these illegal activities.

Would you agree, Mr. Sproul?

[Colin Sproul]

I would say that the Unified Fisheries Conservation Alliance is very happy and appreciative of the recent change in enforcement that we've seen.

However, we would point out that if the minister had truly had the intent to solve the problem then these enforcement actions would be taken in places like St. Marys Bay, at Saulnierville harbour, or in St. Peters Bay at the St. Peters Canal. They would seize fleets of boats that are fishing without any legal licences or conditions. These boats are openly landing thousands of pounds of lobster every day under the view of DFO with nothing happening to them.

While what's taking place at the fish plants is beneficial, the safest, most effective way for this to be dealt with is at the wharves. Seize the vessels and arrest the people who are breaking the law. That has not happened as of yet.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you

Currently before the House, there's a Conservative member who introduced the private member's Bill C-237. It would change the Fisheries Act, including how we do science from a stock basis to a species basis.

I asked him if he had consulted with any fisher organization on his private member's bill. I didn't get an answer.

To any of you, are you aware of the private member's Bill C-237? Did this member consult with you on the contents of that bill?

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

I think Mr. Morrissey should explain, instead of just giving the number of the bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm sorry, Mr. Small, that's not a point of order.

I paused the time. Mr. Morrissey, you have another minute.