Fisheries Committee on Nov. 25th, 2025

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

We're going to have time for an abridged fifth round for two and a half minutes for the Conservatives and the Liberals.

Then the Bloc Québécois will have two minutes.

We're going to go to Mr. Dawson for two and a half minutes.

[Mike Dawson, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Graham, what ongoing or planned consultations has DFO had with New Brunswick fish harvesters regarding MPAs or OECMs in New Brunswick waters?

[Kathy Graham]

I would have to defer to my colleagues in the Maritimes region.

[Mike Dawson, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Okay, I'm having a difficult time. You're the director general of marine planning and conservation. I've asked you three questions today with no response, no information. It keeps going back to you having to defer the question to somebody else. Why is there no one here to answer the questions? I've asked a question over there, and I think I've asked you a question, and we can't seem to get an answer about New Brunswick. Is there any reason why we can't get an answer about New Brunswick?

[Kathy Graham]

I'm happy—

[Mike Dawson, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

We have 10 people sitting at a table here.

[Kathy Graham]

I'm happy to be able to provide a response in writing.

[Mike Dawson, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Well, that would be great.

I'll defer the rest of my time to Mr. Gunn.

[Aaron Gunn, Conservative, North Island—Powell River, BC]

I have a question for the commissioner.

A new scientific study on MPAs has just come out, which was recently conducted off the coast of California, that showed zero benefit to biodiversity, zero benefit to climate resilience and no evidence for increased regional availability of fishery abundance. What would your response be in the face of such evidence? Is this plan to create a network of underwater parks or marine areas just an exercise in virtue signalling? What does it accomplish, other than risking the collapse of the entire fishing industry, if studies like this are indeed accurate? If they aren't, what evidence do we have before carrying this out that the marine protected areas were actually based in science?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I'm not familiar with that particular study, but the point is an important one—let's not focus entirely on the numbers game, as has been talked about today, but also the qualitative elements. Is it contributing to the halting and reversing of biodiversity loss? To do that, you can't just create an arbitrary percentage and put it on a map. You need to put together a system that's “well-connected”, “ecologically representative”, “of importance to biodiversity” and “of importance for ecosystem functions and services”. Those are summarized in paragraph 31.

I would add to that to also keep in mind the socio-economic, as well, not just the environmental...so these are initiatives that contribute to the long-term sustainability of those whose livelihoods depend on marine resources. That holistic view, looking at the quality and not just the quantity, would, I think, benefit not only the—

[Aaron Gunn, Conservative, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Is there a—

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to stop you there. We're out of time here. We don't have time for another question.

With that, we're going to go to Mr. Klassen for two and a half minutes.

[Ernie Klassen, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I'm going to Mr. DeMarco.

I was pleasantly surprised, when I was doing some research here, to see that the U.S. is actually further ahead than Canada is in identifying marine protected areas. I believe there are 190 countries that have signed on to the 30 by 30. I'm just wondering where Canada sits in relationship to these other countries. Do you know the percentage of the U.S. marine protected areas?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I don't have it in front of me in this binder, but I did have a look at that. The U.S. is slightly ahead on marine protected areas than Canada.

The 30 by 30 and the 25% by 2025, for that matter, are the product of international negotiations. The vast majority of countries agreed with them.

Is it pure science that goes into the 30 by 30? No, it's a negotiation. There has been a recognition that the lower percentages that have been agreed to in the past have not yet succeeded in halting and reversing biodiversity loss. There's been a ramping up or an increase in ambition.

I would have to get back to the committee in writing as to where Canada sits if you ranked all of the countries. I believe you may be able to get that information from the secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. I believe it has an inventory of that information.

[Ernie Klassen, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Ms. Graham, I was happy to hear what Mr. Millar mentioned around the impact of the closure of fisheries.

Would you also talk about the impact the marine protected areas are going to have on the local communities and fishing abilities?

[Kathy Graham]

In terms of ensuring that the fishing industry is impacted the least, we work very closely to understand those conservation objectives in an effort to make sure that any measures that are applied are strictly applied to the fishing activities that pose the greatest risk.

Boundaries often shift and change through the conversations and consultations that we have with the fishing industry. The overall objective is to design marine protected areas that allow us to advance conservation but also minimize any economic impacts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much.

We will conclude today's meeting with Mr. Deschênes, who has two minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Mr. Millar from Parks Canada.

You heard the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development say that your department lacked transparency by not providing the right information so that Canadians could know what progress was being made.

Why did you do that?

[David Millar]

Our goal is always to share the best information with our colleagues, partners and stakeholders. That is what we always try to do. If we can do more, we want to—

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

Were you there when the communications people decided to hide information so that Canadians could not really have a good idea of the progress that was being made or not being made?

[David Millar]

Lori, would you answer this question, please?

[Lori Macadam]

It is possible to obtain information by consulting each of our websites. Anyone can ask us for information by email.

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

You are not answering my question.

Why have you not been transparent enough to really inform people about the progress made, as the commissioner is now recommending?

[Lori Macadam]

I think what the commissioner was talking about was informing Canadians of the progress being made in establishing the protected sites, so that people know exactly where they can or cannot go fishing. Right now, we are in the process of informing Canadians of the progress made at Parks Canada sites.

For sites located near indigenous and non-indigenous communities, we make sure they are aware of exactly what we are doing in the oceans that border their communities.