Fisheries Committee on Oct. 7th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. d'Entremont.

Next, we're going to go to Mr. Morrissey, for six minutes or less.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

With my first question, I want to follow up with Mr. Sandt-Duguay.

Could you expand on the comment you made that it was a divisive plan and a missed opportunity. Could you explain a bit more the missed opportunity?

[Emmanuel Sandt-Duguay]

I think we're going through some big changes. With climate change, the lobster we find in Quebec now is an opportunity not to miss. On Anticosti Island, only a few licences have been issued. Quebec alone has more than 3,000 kilometres of coastline, while Anticosti Island has about 500. Right now, there might be 50 lobster licences, including the ones already issued. Prince Edward Island, as Mr. MacPherson can confirm for us, might have about 1,200 lobster fishers. The gulf region alone has 3,000 lobster fishers.

I think there's room, but let's be patient.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Could you clarify? Was it more a case of spreading the resource amongst more individuals within the adjacency areas? Is that the missed opportunity?

[Emmanuel Sandt-Duguay]

Absolutely.

I think we can meet everyone's needs with the same number of lobsters. I can give you an example. We can look at the requirements.

One fleet of crabbers in region 12A includes five individuals. Three of them received a lobster licence and two didn't. It certainly can cause tensions, but there were only five of them. If three fishers each caught 50,000 pounds of lobster, that adds up to 150,000 pounds of lobster. However, the 150,000 pounds of lobster could have been divided differently. Each fisher could have caught 20,000 pounds of lobster, with 50,000 pounds of lobster set aside for conservation of the resource.

Everyone would have been happy. There would have been some conservation, and the process would have been fair for everyone.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Just to clarify for the committee, it wasn't so much the granting of the exploratory licence to exploit a resource that is now growing because of a changing environment; it was in the better distribution of that resource or the potential better distribution of the resource.

Am I interpreting you correctly?

[Emmanuel Sandt-Duguay]

Yes.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you.

Mr. MacPherson, you used the term “viable quota amounts”. Could you, again, elaborate on what you were referencing there and what a viable quota would be?

[Ian MacPherson]

I don't have a specific number in mind. What I have heard back on redfish is that a boat probably needs about a million pounds.

The intent of quota coming to P.E.I. was to hopefully revive the industry there. We used to have a significant redfish industry, but that takes investment, not only in boats but in processing, etc.

We're finding now, with some of the shrimp fleet there, that the costs, returns and things like that could be a benchmark, but at the end of the day, we're very dependent on lobster in P.E.I., and we were hoping that redfish could be a potential species to diversify into.

Thank you.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Following up on that, you also referenced infrastructure investment. I take it that would be land-based, on the processing side. Is that correct?

[Ian MacPherson]

Yes, absolutely. We talked to some processors who were very interested in adding that dimension to their operations, but if they don't know that there is a secure supply coming, it's pretty hard to go out and make that investment.

The other thing that has been alluded to in previous presentations was a five-year period of, “Well, the quota will be next year.” It's hard to make substantial investments and then not know if you're ever going to get a return on those, so I see that as a contributing factor as well.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

A number of presenters here today have referenced a rebalancing of the environment, so we know something is happening in the gulf that's impacting a number of species, but there was also a reference to regulatory certainty.

What would you leave with the committee from a regulatory certainty perspective that would be positive for this emerging redfish fishery?

[Ian MacPherson]

I'm not so sure I can speak to the regulatory aspect, but I think the process could definitely be refined. It's not every year that we have a fishery that's been dormant for over 20 years bounce back. Our colleague just alluded there to a missed opportunity. This could perhaps also be one in that prior to the quota announcements, I don't think there was nearly enough discussion on market development, the potentiality and who could get involved.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey.

I'll hand the floor over to Mr. Deschênes for six minutes or less.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to start with a question for Mr. Cloutier.

Mr. Cloutier, you mentioned earlier that you've been active in the fisheries since 1977. I gather from your comments that you believe that the exploratory fishery is being opened without scientific advice or sufficient objective data, and that continuity criteria are being applied inconsistently.

What words would you use to summarize the procedure being used to allocate exploratory lobster fishing licences?

[O'neil Cloutier]

Clearly, a residence qualification requirement has never been applied consistently to all applicants. This principle has existed for a number of years. At least, it's been around long enough to reasonably expect that the department would apply it in 2025, to give the mechanism some consistency and credibility. Unfortunately, the department has played with that requirement by applying it to some fleets but not to others.

I want to reiterate that the residence qualification requirement was specifically designed to protect the regions, ensure their economic growth and allow them access to inshore fisheries in their home region. That's why, as fishers and as an organization, we have no problem with the application of a residence qualification requirement. Unfortunately, the department didn't apply it.

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

How would you describe the process?

[O'neil Cloutier]

I would say it that was very fast. We only participated in it once, and that was during the consultations, when we tabled a fairly comprehensive document on the development plan vision, the economic aspect necessary for developing the fisheries and participation. The minister and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans accepted none of the proposals we made to protect the current lobster fishery or future exploratory fisheries.

Today, we're in a fine mess. The residence qualification requirements have changed, leaving some fishers excluded, while others from the same region have to travel 400 kilometres away to an exploratory lobster fishery, as Mr. Sandt‑Duguay said earlier. It makes no sense. We informed the department, but nothing was done. It's really unfortunate, because it has left one fishery fractured. Fishermen are fighting with each other instead of behaving like brothers and competitors.

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

I'd like you to tell us how things went in area 19, where commercial fishers were already active when new exploratory fishing licences were issued.

[O'neil Cloutier]

The Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du sud de la Gaspésie had always supported the development of an exploratory fishery, provided it was carried out in an orderly and unhurried way. That's one of the first recommendations we made in our document. It's unfortunate to note today, however, that the minister issued exploratory fishing licences in a commercial fishing area where the resource was known to exist. Ultimately, what this did was to create competition between exploratory fishers and commercial fishers in a location where licences are very expensive. It's unfair competition when some fishers buy their licence while others get it for free, even though all of them are operating in the same environment.

This creates a really bizarre situation that's not good for the fishers or anyone interested in buying a licence, since there is no way of knowing what direction the department will take when it issues future licences. Will it grant exploratory fishing licences in other areas and destroy the market, in other words, undermine the practice among fishers of selling licences to each other, with one coming in while the other goes out?

These are things we have to think about now, since we can't trust the future to Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

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

Thank you, Mr. Cloutier.

I have one minute left.

Mr. Sandt‑Duguay, you talked about a divisive plan and a missed opportunity. You suggest quotas or smaller traps. What would you have done to increase support for licensing among fishers?

[Emmanuel Sandt-Duguay]

First, we need a picture of the situation that's based on science and data. Initially, there were no data. Now, however, with the first year behind us, the situation could be corrected. If nothing is done, the division could grow.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Deschênes.

That concludes the first round.

With that, we're going to start the second round here. We're not going to get through a whole second round, but we're going to start for the five minutes with Mr. Small.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll read out a motion that I tabled on September 18. I assured Jeanette Russell, the mother of a young lad who lost his life off the south Labrador coast in the fall of 2021, that I would put this study to this committee. It is as follows:

That, given that fishing is Canada's most deadly industry, with an average of 11 fish harvesters losing their lives each year, compared to a nation like Iceland that lands two times more fish than Canada with an average of one life lost per year,

(a) the committee conduct a study consisting of:

i. one two-hour meeting with officials from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard,

ii. one one-hour meeting with the Honourable Steven MacKinnon, Minister of Transport,

iii. one one-hour meeting with officials from Transport Canada,

iv. one two-hour meeting with representatives from other countries, and

v. three two-hour meetings with different stakeholders and experts;

(b) the committee report its findings to the House; and

(c) pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request that the government table a comprehensive response to its report.

I'm moving to resume debate on this motion, Mr. Chair.