International Trade Committee on May 23rd, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll go on to Mr. Miao for six minutes, please.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to thank all our witnesses for being here, physically and online, for this important study.

As we all know, Canada holds the longest coastline, bounded by the Pacific, Arctic and Atlantic Oceans. In 2023 alone, I think the export value of fish and seafood products was around $7.6 billion. For my home province, British Columbia, it's well over a billion-dollar industry.

Through the chair, I'd like to ask Mr. Lansbergen the following question. As Canada holds the highest standard in our seafood and fishing industry, can you share with this committee what can be done in what areas so that we could better improve or hold our high standards so as to increase the exports from our seafood industry?

[Paul Lansbergen]

Madam Chair, it's a great question.

That's a pretty broad one. I think the best way to answer that is “market promotion”. We always need to promote our products, because our competitors are doing the same thing. Through the federal government and the provinces, I think we have pretty good support in trade missions and support for participating in and exhibiting at major trade shows for our industry in various markets, whether it be the North American seafood show in Boston, the global one in Barcelona, or the ones in Asia, Singapore and China. We need to continue working together to do that.

I think we need to constantly work at maintaining the the strong fisheries management regime that we have in place, and we have challenges there. DFO resources are stretched beyond their limits. They're not able to do as much fisheries science as we would expect them to and that they're mandated for, so that's causing some challenges that we're working on with them and with the minister.

Also, we need to maintain our eco-certification so that we can access premium markets and get the best value for our products.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you for sharing that.

I'd like to talk more about and discuss the marketing approach. You mentioned that there are trade shows and expos you attend across the country. With the sustainability and the environmental standard that Canada also holds within our seafood industry, do you feel that we have a very good practice in this area, which will increase the competitive advantage so other countries are wanting to import our seafood?

[Paul Lansbergen]

Yes, we do. We have a great reputation: the Canada brand. When customers around the world see the maple leaf on the product, they want to buy it. They have the utmost confidence in our food safety system. They have confidence in the sustainability of the products and how we harvest and process seafood.

The market is always evolving, so we need to evolve with it and stay at pace with it. We need to continue to innovate to make sure that we're as competitive as possible, because it is very competitive. There's a growing affluence in a growing population in the world. There's always a growing demand for protein, including fish and seafood, and we want to be in the best markets.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

With the import policy change, how is that going to impact our seafood exports into the American market or the EU, the European market?

[Paul Lansbergen]

There are a few things, Madam Chair.

The act, the MMPA, was mentioned, and there are additional measures coming down the pipe for 2026. I think we're well in place, well positioned, to have good determinations for our fisheries under that act.

On the seafood import measures program, SIMP, we understand that the U.S. is doing a review of that. They're consulting other countries. Canada is going to participate in that. We have a meeting with DFO over the next week or so to discuss what they're seeing as part of that review and what we, with industry, want to put in as a government submission.

One of the other witnesses mentioned the Food Safety Modernization Act in the U.S. That will require more traceability paperwork across the supply chain. In many respects, we already have the data. We share some of that data along the supply chain with our customers, but I'm not sure if all the data will necessarily be there, particularly around inshore fisheries, so that could be a complication. We're working with Agriculture Canada and DFO to understand that and to be ready for it.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

I understand that the European Union has also adopted a regulation to prevent and eliminate illegal unreported fishing. Will these regulations affect Canada's export of fish and seafood products to the European Union?

[Paul Lansbergen]

No, I don't think so. We have very little IUU fishing in Canada. That's a problem in other hot spots around the world and hopefully they have a very hard time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Savard-Tremblay, please.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank all the witnesses for their presence.

Mr. Lansbergen, from the Fisheries Council of Canada, we learned last November that the United States was giving itself until the end of 2025 to evaluate the practices of its trading partners and determine whether the marine mammal protection measures these partners have instituted are up to U.S. standards. This paves the way for protectionism and a kind of trade war that could be called latent, hidden and surreptitious.

The United States prohibits the import of seafood products whose fishing could cause death or serious injury to marine mammals. One example is the right whale, an endangered species found in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. However, at the last meeting, we were told that no right whales had died from entanglement in lobster fishing gear since measures to this effect were put in place in 2017.

In your opinion, are our protective measures sufficient and effective, and how do they compare with American standards?

[Paul Lansbergen]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for the question.

The challenge is, are we are doing enough or too much to protect certain species, knowing that there are sometimes severe economic disruptions for various harvesters and operators? That's always a delicate balance. Even without the MMPA, we would have domestic requirements, because the species is listed as endangered under SARA.

I think there's always room for improvement to make some of the dynamic measures a little better and less disruptive for harvesters. I think some of your other witnesses may have more expertise in that area, particularly the lobster fishers, but I think there is room for improvement.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Now, to your knowledge, are there any discussions with the Americans on this subject?

[Paul Lansbergen]

I think that would be a better question for Mr. Irvine, if you don't mind.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

So, Mr. Irvine, I'm passing my question on to you.

[Geoff Irvine]

Just so I understand the question, is that a question about our officials from Canada talking to officials from the U.S. about the MMPA? Is that the question?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Yes, exactly. Although my initial question for Mr. Lansbergen was more about the right whale, I think the issue of the bait and lobster provisions means that the same law also applies to you and also impacts you. From the feedback you've had, are there any exchanges going on with the Americans at the moment?

[Geoff Irvine]

I would say absolutely. I know that DFO is working regularly with NOAA in the U.S. on the comparability findings for lobster and the other 280 species. I think that's going quite well.

As Paul said, the measures have been working to date, notwithstanding some real challenges to some harvesters, especially today, in the Acadian peninsula in New Brunswick. We've had our first closures that are close to shore. About 225 harvesters on that peninsula have had to pull their traps. It's very concerning for everybody—for the harvesters and for the plants.

DFO works really closely with NOAA, and we work very closely with associations and with regulators in Maine and New England to talk about these issues all the time. As well, I would defer to Ian, from the PEIFA. His organization deals with this all the time.

[Ian MacPherson]

Thanks, Geoff.

One of the biggest challenges we currently have this year is not so much with our U.S. counterparts: It has been more that harvesting groups are looking for some slight modifications within the current protocols.

A lot of time and effort have been put into coming up with some recommendations, which were submitted in January. Very close to the start of the season in May, we were advised that none was under consideration and were not given any reasons for why they weren't discussed in a more whole manner. We will continue to work with DFO to hear ideas that I think can work for everyone and still achieve our objectives in preserving the whales.

Thank you.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Lansbergen, you said in your presentation that if we didn't follow up on the problems, there would be repercussions. Could you expand on your thoughts on this?

[Paul Lansbergen]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

As Geoff mentioned about the determinations from NOAA for our various fisheries, we do check in with DFO on the status of those. They talk to NOAA more often than we do, but we do need to stay on top of it as that process goes through, and it is a long one.

In the matter of SIMP, for example, I mentioned that we are talking with DFO about the review of that program. We also, as an association, compare notes with our American counterparts to discuss and get their perspectives on some of these issues as well. The two industries are quite integrated.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll now go on to Mr. Cannings, please.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

Thank you to all of the witnesses here today.

I'm going to start with Mr. Lansbergen.

You talked about the sustainability and how important that is for Canada's brand in terms of exports, and also, I would suggest, for the confidence of the Canadian people in the management of this resource. I noticed that your group was disappointed with the budget: There was a lack of support for science in Canadian fisheries. I'm just wondering if you could expand on that. I'm not sure what you were looking for and what you were disappointed with.

[Paul Lansbergen]

Yes. Thank you.

Madam Chair, in the budget there was one measure that provided close to $7 million for each of the next five years specifically for fisheries science and for rebuilding plants. From our understanding, that was to avoid a step-down in existing funding that was put in place in a previous budget, so it just maintains the status quo. It's not going to avoid any further gaps. It's not going to close any of the gaps that currently exist.

The problem we're facing is that if we don't have consistent, quality science, then fisheries management decisions will end up being ultra-cautious, which leaves economic benefit in the water unnecessarily. We've had a case where we lost our third party certification because we didn't have the data to use as evidence in the audits to maintain the certification. That costs us millions of dollars from losing access to premium markets, and costs profitability for companies and operators.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

I noticed that you made the distinction between farmed salmon and wild salmon in your presentation. I assume it's because your group deals with wild-caught fish and doesn't deal with the aquaculture industry. Is that correct?