Fisheries Committee on Dec. 9th, 2025

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Lambertucci.

[Peter Lambertucci]

I have just one point of clarification. We enjoy law enforcement independence. Although I am new to the role, we have enjoyed that law enforcement independence.

I mean no disrespect to my colleague Mr. Lushington. I just wanted to point out that the minister doesn't control our operations, our operational tempo or tactical operations.

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

We know that it's challenging sometimes when it comes to dealing with issues with first nations or even commercial fishers. On the water, things can happen. People have a tendency to have a certain view of how the law is enforced, for example.

Do you think that with first nations, there's enough in the law to make arrests when it comes to first nations not respecting the law? For example, under the law, selling food, social and ceremonial catches is not allowed. Do you feel that there's enough in the law for you to make those arrests, for example?

[Trevor Lushington]

I certainly get your point. I'd go back a bit. Let's go back to 2020, 2021 and 2022. Fishery officers were doing their job. We were actively enforcing the acts and the regulations. Because the matter was coming in, first nations were trying to get a position in a fishery that was fully subscribed. We had to look at our files through a very strict lens to make sure we were not committing any infringements on their constitutional rights.

Going forward, where are we today? We really haven't received a lot of guidance or directions from lawmakers, from the Department of Justice. We would like to see more files progress through the system for two reasons. A file that progresses through the system and is found guilty will help us design our law enforcement operations, and we want those operations to be parallel to people's constitutional rights. If we're a long time getting those directions—if we can call them directions—from the court, in fact, we could be repeatedly infringing on their rights.

To me, your question is very important. Where are we today? We certainly could use more direction. The licence conditions are getting better.

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I've asked this question before, but I'd like to put it to you as well. Do you think the fines are high enough?

Sometimes, we see cases where an individual is charged, they go to court and they're fined, say $250, for the offence. The next day, they commit the same offence, poaching, they get a small fine of $500, and on it goes.

Would it help you in your role as a fishery officer if the fines were higher? Should revoking an individual's licence be an option, to make your job a bit easier, so you wouldn't have to arrest the same people for the same offences day after day, month after month, year after year?

[Trevor Lushington]

You're hitting the nail on the head. We have a lot of repeat offenders. This tells us that we are out there doing our job, but the fact is they're coming back to break the law again, even sometimes during a time of arrest. They're making statements to us such as that they'll see us tomorrow night. It's frustrating for the officers. It's not providing the protection to the resource that we want.

We have to look at the rights for our first nations. If the resources are damaged, so are their rights. We need higher fines and more of a deterrent, and we need to be having conversations about more suspensions and having a conversation about where we could release with restrictions, just so we don't see them there the next night when there is a delay before they get through the court system. In that way, we won't be dealing with multiple repeat offenders.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Cormier.

Now I'll turn the floor over to Mr. Deschênes for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a question for Mr. Lushington and Mr. Thorburn.

Can you hear me clearly, Mr. Lushington?

[Trevor Lushington]

Yes. I can hear you well. Thank you.

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

All right. Thank you.

Do you feel you can testify freely before the committee today?

[Trevor Lushington]

That is a good question. Honesty is what leads me.

I was asked to testify before this committee on December 2. I recall the chief of enforcement offering us an opportunity to testify. In a conversation as a law enforcement officer, when we speak about immunities and testifying, I've learned that I'm a bit of a deer on ice when it comes to being in this room, as opposed to being in a courtroom. I'm just being honest with you.

If I could go forward, I'll say that I learned about the duty to be loyal. As a civil servant, I learned about other things that I was not always thinking about when I was first asked to testify. That was a real challenge for me. In all honesty, it really was.

It's not that I wouldn't extend loyalty to our current minister. I probably would, but when I got myself into a conversation, it was honestly troubling for me. When we began to talk about testifying and the discovery of the need to pay your bills... How would you pay your bills if you had no job? That does worry me.

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

Who said that to you?

[Trevor Lushington]

I'm sorry, but could you repeat the question?

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

You just talked about how important it is to be able to pay your bills. Who said that to you? What was the context of the discussion?

[Trevor Lushington]

The context of the question was helping me. Whether it was out of context or in context, it provided me with what I believed was my responsibility to review my obligations as a civil servant. In coming here today, when I said that I agreed to testify, I put the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth at the top of the line. Again, I'm being honest. It was a challenge for me because this other matter that I was unaware of became—

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

I don't have much time left, Mr. Lushington, but I just want to be sure I understand correctly. Someone said to you that what matters is having a job so you can pay your bills. Who exactly said that to you?

[Trevor Lushington]

Yes, I understand.

It was parliamentary affairs that reached out to us. While I was actually getting on the plane, I read an email. Usually when you have an email from the Government of Canada, it's sent out with a signature. The first email I got had no signature. I didn't give it much credit. Then, when I was getting on the airplane, on December 1, it was a new discovery to me. These new things apply. It's a challenge to want to come and speak openly.

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

Someone in the minister's office, then, pointed out that you needed to have a job in order to pay your bills. Do I understand that correctly?

[Trevor Lushington]

What I got from the conversation I had was that my employment would be affected if I testified as an individual on that day.

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

I want to use the last few seconds we have left, Mr. Lushington. Were you, as a fishery officer, ever pressured by management or your superiors to not intervene in a case where there was a failure to enforce the act?

[Trevor Lushington]

I just want to go back to the last part, where you finished. Have I ever been told not to intervene when there was an infraction out there? I would say no to that question.

My leadership, in the area where I work, always directed us to deal with any matter in relation to a conservation issue. If we were able to conduct enforcement operations that were within the regulatory framework, we were always encouraged to do so.

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

Were you ever given the direction to not intervene in certain types of cases?

[Trevor Lushington]

No. I am testifying today about what I do in my area. We've never been told not to intervene. There were times when we had experiences in which we had weakly worded license conditions, which were license conditions brought into our regulations despite C and P's opposing them, and they were brought in. They never met the standard of the court system, and it was a failed prosecution.

In that matter, for many of our seizures.... In particular, at the Halifax airport, we seized 113,000 dollars' worth of illegal product that we had to give back because the wording was weak. It didn't stand up to the scrutiny of the court systems.

This creates officer frustration. It also breaks a bit of trust in what we're trying to accomplish. It doesn't provide any shield for protection of the resources.

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

In your written submission, you say that unauthorized fishing is on the rise. How do you explain that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Mr. Lushington, we're out of time, so be brief with the answer, if you could.