Evidence of meeting #25 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was objectives.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
That would be my assessment in terms of wanting to make sure that voices are heard and that engagement is taking place.
Conservative
Aaron Gunn Conservative North Island—Powell River, BC
The logic is that the longer it takes going into the future and the longer it takes to get any certainty, the better the job the department is doing.
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
No, I think it's about meaningful consultation—to hear back from the fishing industry and sort out where boundaries make sense and how we can still achieve the conservation objectives.
Conservative
Aaron Gunn Conservative North Island—Powell River, BC
Do you appreciate, though, the uncertainty that a lack of answers can create in the industry and how detrimental uncertainty can be to investment and the people trying to plan out their lives?
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
That is information and feedback that I have heard from the fishing industry, yes.
February 25th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much.
Next we're going to Mr. Cormier for five minutes, please.
Liberal
Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm going to use my time to table a notice of motion. I just sent it to the clerk for distribution to committee members.
The notice of motion reads as follows:
That, (a) the committee recognize that: (i) Atlantic salmon populations are experiencing a critical and ongoing decline in several rivers in New Brunswick, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador, (ii) Atlantic salmon is an iconic species essential to the balance of aquatic ecosystems and to the economic, cultural, and social vitality of many coastal and Indigenous communities, (iii) despite conservation efforts undertaken in recent years, salmon returns remain at historically low levels, (iv) the rapid and unprecedented growth of the striped bass population in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence, particularly in the Miramichi River, has resulted in increased predation pressure on smolts and juvenile salmon, raising serious concerns about the survival of Atlantic salmon in adjacent rivers, (v) predation by seal populations in eastern Canada is also a concerning factor affecting the survival of Atlantic salmon, both in estuarine environments and at sea, (vi) without timely and appropriate management measures regarding predator populations, this could compromise efforts to restore Atlantic salmon stocks; (b) pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake an urgent study of no more than four meetings on the decline of Atlantic salmon, with particular consideration given to the impact of the current striped bass population in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence and predation by seals, the available scientific data, existing management measures, and concrete options that could be implemented rapidly to restore Atlantic salmon populations; (c) as part of this study, the committee invite to appear representatives from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, salmon conservation organizations, outfitting operators, recreational fishing guides, affected Indigenous communities, and independent scientists specializing in population dynamics; (d) the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House; and e) pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request the government to table a comprehensive response to its report.
Again, this is a notice of motion. We can discuss it in our next meetings.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much.
All committee members will receive the motion by email. Only the notice of motion has been given. Members will have to wait two days before moving the motion and discussing it.
Mr. Cormier, you still have the floor.
Liberal
Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB
That's fine.
I will conclude by thanking the witnesses for listening today. I'm glad to know that they listened to the testimony of the various groups that appeared before the committee and were concerned about the news regarding these proposed marine protected areas. I think the message is to listen more attentively. That's what we want on our end, and that's what my colleagues have said.
As has just been said, there needs to be a consultation process that's a bit more open and transparent. It's important to make sure that fishers, especially, and people who are involved in the industry and depend on fisheries understand how the government wants to use these marine protected areas. They have to understand that it doesn't want to take away their jobs and harm their quality of life. Fisheries are in the DNA of our communities. In my riding, regardless of whether you're a fisher, everyone is connected to fishing in one way or another. We all have a cousin, an uncle, a father, an aunt or another family member who makes a living from fishing and has worked in fishing practically their entire lives. My father was a fisherman all his life. I understand that we want to protect certain fish stocks, which is fine, but at the same time, we also have to protect these people's livelihoods. I hope that we will be very attentive to their concerns in the upcoming meetings with them. We must also ensure that they fully participate in the designation and process of these marine protected areas.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Cormier.
Mr. Simard, you now have the floor for two and a half minutes.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
That's too generous, thank you.
I have a question for the witnesses.
I don't know if you're aware of the situation that occurred here with a witness, Mr. Lushington, who was pressured by the parliamentary affairs unit of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. He was supposed to come testify here, and he was basically told that he'd better watch what he says and show loyalty because his testimony could jeopardize his livelihood and his way of paying his bills.
I assume these aren't practices that you encourage; at least I hope not.
For your part, are you under any forms of pressure or being given any instructions on how to frame your testimony and answers? Is this a customary practice of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans?
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
No, not at all.
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
I'm aware of what has been reported in the media.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
Okay.
Earlier, I talked to you about your consultation process and said that you probably had a framework. If you have any information on how fishers can be included in the pool of people you'd like to consult to obtain the information you're seeking, we would appreciate it if you could table that with the committee. It could advance the committee's study. Above all, it could be valuable for members directly connected to fishers to help them better understand the consultation process.
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
We'd be happy to do that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Simard.
Next we have Mr. Arnold for five minutes or less.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to bring the committee, and especially our witnesses, back to the three points that were in the motion to do this study, particularly the second and third parts of the motion. The second part was about studying “the government's methods for measuring whether conservation objectives and reasons for establishing protected areas are achieved”, and part (C) was, “whether the government's reasons and objectives for establishing marine and coastal protection are achieved”. I don't think we've heard that yet. I was hoping we would today.
Could I ask you to submit to this committee how the government plans to measure “whether conservation objectives and reasons for establishing protected areas are achieved”? How are you going to measure that for each of the areas you're proposing? Have any of the objectives already set out for MPAs or conservation areas been achieved?
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Yes, I'm happy to provide that information.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC
Thank you.
I'd like to see that before we finish this study. I think it's very important. Those were key components when I crafted this study's motion. I believe they are very important as we and the government move forward with our recommendations.
I want to move on to a slightly different topic now: southern resident killer whale management zones on the west coast.
There have been proposals floated out there by DFO to severely restrict access to chinook fisheries, especially off the southwest coast of Vancouver Island, to the point where it would eliminate the livelihoods of entire communities because of the recreational fishing opportunities that happen around those areas. Instead of static closures that would close off areas for extended periods of time and space, has the department looked at more dynamic closures, like the ones being used in some of the whale protection areas on the east coast?
Director General, Marine Planning and Conservation, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
I will turn to my colleague Anna Classen.