Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today on this first day back to the House. I would like to take advantage of this opportunity to wish all my colleagues a happy New Year.
I am even more pleased that I am speaking on a bill initiated by my colleague, the member for New Brunswick—Southwest. The House is addressing a matter that is of great importance to a number of Canadian communities. The fishery is not the focus of the economy in the majority of ridings represented here. Still, there must not be indifference to the ongoing crisis in the fisheries sector in my province, in the Atlantic region and in the Pacific region.
With all due respect to the scientists in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, as well as the minister and senior departmental officials, those who earn their daily livings from the sea are the ones who know it best. That is why I applaud the initiative of my colleague from New Brunswick—Southwest.
His intent in this bill is to ensure that fishers have a say in decisions which may affect their work, their community and their way of life. What could be more praiseworthy?
Allowing fishers to have their say is not so far fetched. It is something we as elected persons have been struggling to do for years.
For instance, the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans visited 15 communities over a period of nine days in the late fall of 1997. The committee spoke with fishermen, plant workers and others involved in the east coast fisheries in Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
Many of the witnesses who appeared before the committee felt betrayed by the federal government. In their opinion the federal government was responsible for managing the fishery and did not meet its responsibility. The committee heard about the inequities and the arbitrary designations of those ineligible for the TAGS program. Many plant workers were ineligible because of small breaks in employment despite a long attachment to the industry.
It was felt that the licence buyout portion of TAGS was not successful because the boats, gear and other licences were transferred to other fishermen. Therefore the capacity was not reduced. Fishermen have little confidence in the ability of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to manage the fishery. As well fishers question DFO's scientific estimates.
There is a concern about the independence of the fisheries resources conservation council as the council used DFO staff and office space. Fishermen from all areas are criticizing the quotas for foreign fishermen. One fisherman quoted in the committee's report said “The fishery is the biggest foreign aid program around”. The east coast communities want fish caught in Canadian waters to be processed in Canadian onshore plants rather than on foreign vessels that process onboard.
The standing committee travelled in January 1998 to west coast communities where it heard many of the same concerns it heard on the east coast.
The west coast fishery has experienced a rapid restructuring, due in large part to the Pacific salmon revitalization program, but also to various other factors affecting fishers and coastal communities.
Very many fishers are of the opinion that DFO no longer has any interest in the future of their communities, but has centralized its decision-making process in the regional offices and in headquarters.
Many witnesses have criticized the lack of resources allocated to new fisheries. Downsizing at Fisheries and Oceans has resulted in a shortfall of personnel available to develop new fisheries.
DFO policies have raised serious concerns in many communities. For instance, the village of Ucluelet has invested massively in enhancing its water supply system because the processing of hake requires huge amounts of water. Then, DFO announced it planned to review its hake policy.
Also, DFO imposed on municipal governments in the Fraser Valley complex and expensive requirements with respect to cleaning ditches, while not taking any responsibility or sharing any costs.
Such departmental decisions may be warranted, but they are being made without any consultation or paying any attention to their impacts on the individuals and communities concerned. That is what needs to change. They must be accountable to these people.
There is a wealth of information and plain good common sense to be had from simply listening to the people who know the fishery best. It is time to rely on more than just the good graces of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. The time has come to formally recognize the voice of fishers in the decision making process.
The bill endeavours to establish the rights of fishers so they will be involved in the process of fishery stocks assessment, fish conservation, setting fish quotas, fishing licensing and the public right to fish. The bill would establish the rights of fishers to be informed in advance of decisions affecting fishing as a livelihood and the right to compensation if other rights are abrogated unfairly. The livelihoods of people in Atlantic Canada and Pacific coast fish industries have been affected by arbitrary decisions made with little or no consultation with those directly affected.
It is nothing short of a crisis. Fishers are increasingly frustrated and discouraged with the government's inability to deal with real issues affecting their lives. The fisheries industry should be a sunrise industry, not a sunset industry as seems to be the case today.
The bill before us today is a votable one. I urge all my colleagues to vote in favour of this bill.
There has been such turmoil recently in the fishing industry that the least we can do is to involve fishers in decisions affecting them personally.