Fisheries Committee on April 29th, 2026

[Chris d'Entremont, Liberal, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

That brings me to the question of why.

We have a couple of very successful companies in Nova Scotia, with Innovative Fishery Products being one of them in my constituency of Acadie—Annapolis. I'm just wondering why that wouldn't be used in places where we're trying to start up a fishery. Why wouldn't we come up with the same kind of partnering agreement with the provincial government?

[Alistair Struthers]

Certainly, from an aquaculture perspective, most of the aquaculture sites are located in waters that are cleaner and, therefore, don't require the process for relay and depuration. From a recreational or commercial wild capture perspective, I'm less familiar with those harvest volumes, but I suspect they're probably based on the volume of product that's going through and whether or not it's economically feasible.

[Chris d'Entremont, Liberal, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

I invite you all to come and check out the process we have in Nova Scotia, because it is one that really works. They have their own partnership with the CFIA. Of course, it's a CFIA-inspected plant. I don't know exactly who does the testing or how the testing is done to make sure that the products coming out of that fish plant are appropriate, but they are shipping their products to the U.S. and other parts of Canada, so their process is working from a testing standpoint.

Some of what I would call the “closed bays” that they're working in are areas that were contaminated and were brought back in some cases. Maybe in the Chaleur Bay or in the Gulf of St. Lawrence there's some opportunity to use some of that technology across the system, which I hope the fisheries would take on.

My next question is not quite as friendly, because I kind of agree with some of the questions Mr. Arnold was asking. There seem to be three different groups involved in this.

This comes from an instance I had a number of years ago when I was an MLA for the areas of Barrington Bay and Cape Sable Island. In those areas, there was a bait clam fishery. In order to go and get the bait clams...they weren't able to, because it was closed, even if it was used for bait, because of Environment Canada. Environment Canada wasn't testing those waters at that time, and it took us almost 10 years to get them identified again.

How do we square that circle? Having three organizations involved in a fishery is difficult at best. How do we fix or streamline that process?

I don't know who wants to take that one.

[Joanne Volk]

Perhaps I'll start and my colleagues can jump in.

First of all, I want to say how much I appreciate the frustration of people who want to harvest shellfish with the inability to do that everywhere, as people would like. At Environment and Climate Change Canada, we do the best we can, honestly, with the resources we have and we are trying to work creatively with the provinces—Nova Scotia would be an example—to understand how we can work collectively and differently to enable others to help us expand our ability within the program. That is a work in progress and something that we are committed to doing.

I will say as well that working with our partners collectively to try to balance where the resources are applied against the three constituents that harvest, namely the economic sector, the recreational sector and the food, social and ceremonial sector—

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I have to jump in. We're over the time. If you can, complete that answer. We'll have to go to the next—

[Joanne Volk]

I'm done. Thanks so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. d'Entremont.

Mr. Deschênes, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

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

Mr. Vézina, we'll continue our discussion.

What we're trying to understand is why there aren't more softshell clam fishing areas opened in Chaleur Bay and Gaspésie. The demand is very high. My understanding was that there was a lack of resources. We'll see. I'm trying to get things straight. It seems more complicated than I expected.

Despite the high demand for fishing areas, you're telling us that you haven't received any new recommendations regarding the opening of new areas. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency just told us that, over the past five years, it has conducted tests in Chaleur Bay and has not found any problems with toxins. In fact, it has allowed oysters to be raised in Chaleur Bay.

Environment and Climate Change Canada officials also told us that they conducted tests.

Mr. Vézina, you say that you don't lack resources to deliver on the program.

Why aren't more softshell clam fishing areas open in Chaleur Bay?

[Sylvain Vézina]

In Chaleur Bay, there are about 65 separate softshell clam fishing areas. However, only four remain open for shellfish harvesting. All the others have been closed over the years because of pollution that made shellfish unfit for consumption.

After that, testing was halted in all of those sectors. The tests that continue to be done are done for areas that are already open, not for new ones.

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

The reason new areas aren't being opened is that tests aren't being done in Saint‑Siméon, Bonaventure, Carleton‑sur‑Mer and Escuminac.

Is that correct?

[Sylvain Vézina]

That's right.

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

What I understand is that there are not enough resources to do tests.

If we want testing, we should allocate resources to Environment and Climate Change Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

Is that correct?

[Sylvain Vézina]

Yes. I'll pass the question on to my colleagues, because it's up to them to confirm, but that's more or less it.

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

Ms. Volk, how much more money do you need to conduct tests so that we can open areas in Chaleur Bay?

[Joanne Volk]

Thank you very much for your question.

I'm going to pass it over to Mr. Shahsavarani. He will be able to provide you with details.

[Arash Shahsavarani]

Altogether, we are currently spending about $1.6 million a year on surveillance sampling throughout the region. That amount has increased over the past few years.

It's hard to say how much more should be invested in a single region, given that it's going to take several years of testing. There is no certainty that the data collected will make it possible to open new areas in any case. As a rule, we spend about $50,000 a year in each region where we start working.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Deschênes.

We have time for some short last rounds of questions here for four minutes each, starting with Mr. Arnold.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to bring to light here that in 2012, the Conservative government introduced waste-water treatment standards for municipalities, and those standards were to take effect in 2020 to require at least minimal treatment for waste water from municipalities. Then, in 2020, the then minister of environment and climate change, Jonathan Wilkinson, introduced amendments to the waste-water treatment effluent regulations that allowed the extension of deadlines for municipalities to upgrade their sewage treatment standards. Some of those extensions reach out to 2040, 20 years later than originally planned.

Would improved waste-water treatment standards reduce the risk of contamination and the risk to human illness and death, if those standards had been implemented?

[Joanne Volk]

Not being an expert in waste-water technology or infrastructure, I could say there is a correlation between infrastructure that's degrading or older infrastructure and pollution sources—

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

Okay. If you can't answer the question, I'll ask Ms. Soo.

Would you have to sample fewer sites, or would you be identifying fewer potential contaminant sites, had those waste-water treatment standards been applied?

[Evelyn Soo]

For the CSSP program, we're monitoring marine biotoxins, which are a different—

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

Who's monitoring waste water, Mr. Shahsavarani?

[Arash Shahsavarani]

Mr. Chair, it wouldn't have reduced our sampling frequency, because we have to meet certain standards in terms of the number of samples we collect over time to meet international standards to be able to maintain—

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

Would it have reduced the number of potential contamination sites that you identify?

[Arash Shahsavarani]

Again, Mr. Chair, I—