House of Commons Hansard #208 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was aboriginal.

Topics

Vimy Ridge Day ActPrivate Members' Business

6:05 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

Vimy Ridge Day ActPrivate Members' Business

6:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Would members agree that we see the clock as being 6.30 p.m.?

Vimy Ridge Day ActPrivate Members' Business

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Vimy Ridge Day ActAdjournment Proceedings

6:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Loyola Hearn Progressive Conservative St. John's West, NL

Mr. Speaker, I asked the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans a question quite some time ago concerning a boat that landed in Newfoundland with a tremendous amount of fish which by anybody's standards were undersize.

The minister made it quite clear that the boat and the crew had not broken any regulations. To a degree I guess the minister was right. However, what happened when the boat was brought in and the ensuing actions that were taken, or lack thereof, are what concerned everybody associated with the fishery. It should have concerned the minister and his department but they basically sloughed it off. The minister basically said in the House that what I was saying was not true. We had a little discussion about that later on in the day but the information put forward was true.

The boat had several species, including redfish the size of one's thumb, cod livers in excess of the amount of cod that were involved, and other species that were so small they had to have been caught by undersize gear.

The parliamentary secretary will undoubtedly throw into the mix the fact that outside the 200 mile limit there are species not regulated by NAFO, 3-O redfish being one. It is load and go and if they can be scooped up in the capelin seine without getting caught, there is nothing wrong with it. Even when someone does get caught, nobody can do anything about it.

Some of the species were there because of bycatch which were allowed to be caught because they were unregulated species. Despite that, there was enough circumstantial evidence found in that catch to show that the manifest itself was way out of whack regardless of ensuing comments by the department and the skipper involved. Anybody knowing anything about fish knew that the boat was breaking the rules on the fishing grounds.

It is a resource giveaway. We have heard so much about it certainly in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are resource rich but financially poor because we have given away our resources time and again, be they hydro, minerals or forest products. We have given everybody else a great deal and have received little from the development of the resources.

There is oil off our coast which at some time will end. At some time all of the minerals will have been taken out of the ground. If the forests are protected they will keep on going but they are minimal compared to the rest. However, we can always have the fishery as we have had in the past, if we look after it.

From the lack of concern to the giveaways it is impossible to understand the direction the department is taking.

When the parliamentary secretary responds maybe he could clear up the rumour that is floating around that tomorrow or very soon,the minister will announce another giveaway of Newfoundland shrimp to P.E.I. or perhaps others. Again we have resources with which we should be careful. If there is an increase it should go to those participating in the fishery who are making meagre incomes. Quite often it is not worth their while to gear up to fish these species.

The department has to be much more cognizant of what is happening in the industry. The committee is creating awareness. All we need are the members of the committee to stand on the principles that we brought before the House. Certainly that was not in evidence today.

It has to happen. Canadians must stand up for Canadians and preserve our resources. It does not matter what part of the country they come from we should always look after each other because we can be sure no one will look after us.

Vimy Ridge Day ActAdjournment Proceedings

6:15 p.m.

Bonaventure—Gaspé—Îles-De-La-Madeleine—Pabok Québec

Liberal

Georges Farrah LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for St. John's West for his continued interest in the issue of foreign overfishing. Since he comes from Newfoundland, we understand his totally legitimate concern, giving the current situation in the fisheries.

Let me first point out that the Canadian government is taking the problem of foreign overfishing very seriously. The recent closure of harbours demonstrates our determination. We have closed our harbours to Faroese and Estonian fleets because they did not comply with NAFO conservation measures.

We are also pleased to see that Russian authorities have responded seriously to Canada's concerns by withdrawing for the rest of the year the licence allowing the Olga to fish in the NAFO regulated zone, and indicating that they will make further inquiries into the activities of this boat. In carrying out inspections, Canadian authorities have found that the Matrioska made false statements on its catch of black turbot, and a dock inspection confirmed that an offence had in fact been committed. We expect that the Russian authorities will also take action on this.

This confirms that we are aware of the fact that NAFO may have some problems in terms of control. I think that this issue was discussed on several occasions at the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. Nevertheless, we have to admit that there have been some improvements within NAFO.

Even though we realize that NAFO needs further improvements, we think that it is better to continue to defend Canada's position within NAFO rather than to withdraw, which could make the situation even worse.

This may be where we disagree with our Newfoundland colleagues. I understand that they are saying that overfishing has been going on for a long time and that if we wait any longer, there will not be any fish left. We will not be able to protect the fish because there will be none left. I do not think that withdrawing or unilaterally imposing rules on NAFO will solve the problem, and this is what the minister wants.

In a good number of fisheries, the fish are small. Redfish caught in the 3-O area by all fleets, including Canada's, both in Canadian waters and outside, are small. Scientists consider the small size of such species when they do a scientific assessment of stocks.

In the case of the Tynda , the fish landings fully complied with Canadian legislation and with NAFO's conservation measures. As for the other species caught by the Tynda , it was mostly cod from south of the Grand Banks or the 3N0 cod, and not northern cod. 3NO cod is under a NAFO moratorium. Under these conservation measures, a 5% bycatch is permitted. The bycatch caught by the Tynda was well below this limit. It did not do anything illegal.

According to some sources, the cod livers that were found onboard the ship, and my colleague mentioned this earlier, were from cod from south of the Grand Banks. However, it would appear that the cod livers that were found on the Tynda were already there when it stopped in the Newfoundland port on February 14 to fill up.

We may differ in opinion on the source of information. However, I think that there is a common will, particularly among committee members and the minister, to see to it that additional pressure is brought to bear so that international rules, when there are NAFO agreements, are respected for the welfare of the people of Newfoundland, who need this support.

Vimy Ridge Day ActAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Loyola Hearn Progressive Conservative St. John's West, NL

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. parliamentary secretary for responding to my comments. I find it hard to understand where he is coming from. He suggested that we not withdraw from NAFO as recommended by the fisheries committee.

My hon. colleague is a member of that committee which submitted a unanimous report to the House. The main recommendation contained in the report was that we should withdraw from NAFO. Now the member is saying we should not. I find that hard to understand. I presume what my colleague is saying is also what the minister is saying. If that is the case, I am okay with the member but I disagree with his minister.

For 20 years we have gone to NAFO, cap in hand, asking it to recognize what is happening on the nose and tail of the Flemish Cap. All we have received in return is complete and utter disrespect. The violations are getting worse. We have listed more violations over the last few years than previous years, and we are only scratching the tip of the iceberg because of the small amount of surveillance that we have. We must take this issue into our own hands. We have every right to control that area, and we should do so.

Vimy Ridge Day ActAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Georges Farrah Liberal Bonaventure—Gaspé—Îles-De-La-Madeleine—Pabok, QC

Mr. Speaker, let me take a few seconds to further explain my position. Concerning the first week of discussions the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans had on this, I do not hold this against the hon. member, but he was away on a mission abroad, including in Russia, to deal with issues quite relevant to fisheries. He did not hear my remarks in committee. I said specifically that even if we wanted to impose our regulations beyond the 200 mile limit, it was not practical to do so, internationally.

This is why I said in committee that we had to have a realistic approach. Having an approach that cannot be used does not seem to me to be a good way to uphold the interests of Canadians and of Newfoundlanders.

I had to make this point to let my colleague know that, if he had been present in committee, and he could not be, he would have understood my position better.

Vimy Ridge Day ActAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

A motion to adjourn the House deemed to have been moved. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6.23 p.m.)