Fisheries Committee on March 9th, 2026

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Over the course of this study, we'll probably be hearing from fishers' associations, or even from fishers themselves. You're the ones here today.

Since 2022, there have been two points of view. We have your perspective and the industry's perspective. The industry people maintain that the mackerel are plentiful and that they see them everywhere when they go fishing. At the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, you have a more bureaucratic point of view. You maintain that the mackerel are all gone and that we must be careful.

I would just like to put things in perspective. Who is telling the truth here? How can we obtain an accurate and fair picture in order to explain the health of the mackerel stock to the different groups?

What steps are you taking to explain to fishers' associations the threat to the species and the need to exercise caution? You said earlier that you carried out scientific surveys in 2025. Are you doing your surveys in partnership with the industry, or are you doing them on your own, with the department's scientists?

How can we ensure that everyone understands the current condition of the mackerel stock?

[Bernard Vigneault]

Thank you for the question.

Actually, it isn't one or the other. Both are true.

The fishers' observations are entirely plausible and valid when it comes to the clustering of fish in high concentrations in localized areas. Think, for example, of the fish found near the west coast of Newfoundland and Labrador as a result of warming waters.

We worked with the Fish Food and Allied Workers union, FFAW‑Unifor, to set up a number of research projects in order to take these observations into account and to ensure that the model of our scientific biomass study remains valid under these changing conditions. So far, we're quite confident in the results. The stock assessment is based on eggs and larvae collected throughout the Gulf of St. Lawrence by sampling the water—

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

I don't want to cut you off, but have you been doing these samplings in the same places for the past 20 years?

[Bernard Vigneault]

Some places are the same, but measures are in place to ensure that we have plenty of sampling areas. This matter was explicitly discussed in detail in 2023, when we carried out the stock assessment. We confirmed that the current model remained appropriate and that most of the eggs were in the areas where the collection takes place in June.

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

Does the industry know how you carry out these surveys? Do they actively participate in your data collection?

[Bernard Vigneault]

Yes, we work with the industry. For example, they give us samples of adult fish. We use these samples to establish the maturity of the fish and their fertility rate. This direct input in our model helps us to fine‑tune our biomass projections.

We also work with the industry to establish research priorities. A number of research projects have been set up in response to comments and questions from the industry. We're looking in particular at environmental factors and climate change. We have work under way to study how climate change affects larvae prey, a key factor in the species' reproductive success.

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

Since the introduction of the moratorium in 2022, a certain quota for bait has been made available to fishers. What is the current figure? Is it the same as last year, or will it be reviewed this year?

[Bernard Vigneault]

I'm going to ask my colleague Mr. Williams to answer you.

[Todd Williams]

Since 2024, we've allowed a small bait fishery of 440 tonnes, shared across Atlantic Canada. We've instituted a range of monitoring requirements for that, which vary to some degree among regions, including hails or daily catch reporting and so forth.

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

Is the total available quota for the bait fishery this year set already, or not yet?

[Todd Williams]

Last year, the minister made a two-year decision in which 500 tonnes were allocated for each year, 440 tonnes being for bait each year. However, given the renewed focus on what the U.S. announced and the ongoing input we receive from stakeholders.... We just met with the Atlantic mackerel advisory committee a couple of weeks ago—with industry. They had a number of suggestions, and we're taking those on board. We're looking at the latest science advice, and we'll provide the opportunity for the minister to evaluate this again for 2026.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Cormier.

Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll continue with my questions for Ms. Gaudet.

I want to make sure I understand what you said about the elimination of 724 positions at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans by 2028‑29. In your opinion, these job cuts will not result in any loss of scientific expertise. Is that correct?

[Céline Gaudet]

Thank you for the question.

In terms of expertise, the cost-cutting exercise is also a review of priorities and resources in order to put the people we have in the right place. Sometimes a reduction doesn't necessarily mean a loss of jobs, but rather a reorganization of priorities or the way things are done. That's how I would answer your question. We have to remember that this is also in a reorganization exercise. As mentioned earlier, there are things we are going to do better, and we are going to adapt to today's needs. That is also the intent of the exercise.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Okay.

Can you provide us with a written response indicating how many of those planned job cuts will actually affect the department's scientific capacity? That's my question. If the department is planning those job cuts, has it assessed the risk of the permanent loss of scientific expertise, particularly if analytical capacity is affected? I would like you to answer that.

Ms. Gaudet, you will understand that it is with a great deal of emotion that I am speaking to you today. I represent the people at the Maurice Lamontagne Institute in Mont-Joli, in my riding. Those employees and families are grappling with uncertainty.

Can you tell us if their jobs will soon be at risk?

[Céline Gaudet]

Thank you for the question.

Again, I don't have the details about the people affected. There is cost-cutting at the Maurice Lamontagne Institute, but if you want details, we can provide them to you in writing.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Ms. Gaudet, the herring and mackerel stocks are going to need more science, specifically for their recovery. How can the department strengthen its analyses if it reduces its scientific capacity?

[Céline Gaudet]

Thank you for the question. I'm going to turn to my colleague Mr. Vigneault if he would like to respond.

[Bernard Vigneault]

Yes, thank you.

You have to remember that this is part of a budget reduction exercise. We have been tasked with reducing our spending, especially where there is duplication. One way to reduce the impact of this reduction is to work with internal organizations, which usually happens through contribution funds. We can maintain the same science, but everything will be delivered differently. As a result of partnerships, we will need fewer resources. There may also be longer periods during which we have the same information, but then we will need fewer resources—

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Are you going to privatize the analyses—

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm sorry, but your time is up.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

I would like an answer in writing, Mr. Chair, because that answer didn't reassure me very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Okay. You'll have a few more rounds of questions as well.

With that, we will go to Mr. Gunn for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to pass my time to Mr. Small.