Fisheries Committee on Nov. 27th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Deschênes.

That finishes the first round.

We're going to move into the second round of questioning, starting with Mr. Dawson for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to take a moment to thank Ms. Rogers for being here today.

What are the most common types of Fisheries Act violations we have identified in Atlantic Canada? Has there been any change in the trends of the violations over the last five years?

[Hannah Rogers]

I can't give you specific statistics at this moment. I'd be happy to get back to you with more detail.

We generally take action related to the section 36(3) provisions of the Fisheries Act, which apply to deleterious substances being added to fish-bearing water or the prospect of them going into fish-bearing water. A number of our cases are related to the general prohibition.

There are also seven regulations, as I said, under the Fisheries Act. A fair number of those in Atlantic Canada would likely be related to the waste-water regulations and to pulp and paper regulations.

I can't tell you whether I have seen a major change over the last five years. I'd want to go back through our statistics to identify whether there are trends. Again, we can get that for you.

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

Thank you.

Are there any specific internal mechanisms that exist in your department to ensure consistency in the enforcement decisions across the various regions of your department?

[Hannah Rogers]

There are, absolutely. Thank you for the question.

One of our major principles is consistency. We follow the compliance and enforcement policy. Our officers follow that.

We also have a database that we use on a regular basis to analyze how things are being completed. If we notice that something is potentially happening more in a particular region and less in another region, we address that immediately.

We have five regional directors across the country who are responsible for their enforcement teams, and we meet regularly to talk about consistency to make sure we are doing things consistently across all of our regions.

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

Are any of the cases you've identified common along New Brunswick's coast, especially along the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the Bay of Fundy?

[Hannah Rogers]

I would have to get back to you with specifics on that.

Maybe I can ask for a little clarification. It's common law....

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

I said, “common along the New Brunswick coast”.

[Hannah Rogers]

Oh, it was “common along”. Thank you.

I will get back to you on whether we can give you specifics about the coast of New Brunswick.

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

Okay.

How does your department ensure the accuracy and completeness of publicly reported enforcement data, such as the annual enforcement summary and enforcement notifications?

[Hannah Rogers]

We have a database where we maintain statistics on the actions that enforcement officers take. Every year we go through it. We have a team of data scientists as well as other analysts who make sure the data is accurate. If there are any concerns, they reach out directly to our officers to make sure those are complete and correct.

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

Does ECCC track long-term environmental outcomes associated with its enforcement actions, such as improvements in water quality and habitat recovery?

[Hannah Rogers]

That is also a very good question.

I represent the enforcement side of things. We definitely work with our colleagues across the rest of the department who are responsible for things like monitoring and cumulative effects.

What we could tell you potentially is whether there's a level of recidivism. We're not the experts in whether the actual environment has specifically changed. My colleagues in other parts of the department can answer that question.

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

How does your department assess risk to sensitive habitats in Atlantic Canada, such as estuaries, eelgrass beds and salmon rivers, when planning enforcement activities?

[Hannah Rogers]

Again, most of the actual scientific analysis is done by other parts of the department. There are biologists and other experts in the department. We certainly work with them. We look at the greatest risk to the environment and human health when we make our enforcement decisions.

We have done a number of studies, threat risk assessments and analysis, again with our data scientists, to determine what substances and what regulations and laws we should enforce to make sure we have the greatest impact.

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

How much time is left, Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

You have 30 seconds.

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

All right. I'll go in the next round.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Absolutely. Thank you very much, Mr. Dawson.

Next we will go to Mr. Klassen for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses for being here today.

Ms. Rogers, do you think the penalties in the Fisheries Act are justified? Should they be changed at all?

[Hannah Rogers]

I understand that the penalties were last changed in 2013. I cannot provide my opinion at this forum, but my understanding is that there will be a process going forward to establish whether penalties and fines across various pieces of legislation are sufficient.

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

In your opening statement, you talked about the number of penalties that were handed out. I'm just wondering whether there's any kind of penalty where the person who has broken the law would be part of reconciliation or part of restoring whatever the impact has been of breaking the law.

[Hannah Rogers]

That's a very good question.

Most of the fines and penalties that are collected as a result of prosecutions, as well as administrative monetary penalties under our other legislation, not the Fisheries Act, go to the environmental damages fund. That is run by ECCC as well. It's a separate part of the department. It basically provides money to communities to restore ecosystems and for the impacts of pollution. The funds from one particular infraction may not always go to exactly the ecosystem that was harmed. Sometimes they do, but they almost all go to restoration projects and community projects.

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

Can you give us an example or two of restoration projects that the monies have been used for?

[Hannah Rogers]

I will give you one example. I believe some funds were provided to the Ktunaxa people in the Elk Valley of British Columbia relating to some prosecutions that took place there.

I could get back to you with my colleagues from the environmental damages fund to give you more specific examples.