Debates of May 12th, 2010

ATLANTIC SHELLFISH INDUSTRY

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Madam Chair, my 17-year-old son, who does not pay attention to a whole lot, could figure this one out. If I order a large combination pizza, I can get it cut up into eight pieces, or four pieces, or 16 pieces, or I can eat the thing whole.

With respect to the fishery, we are talking about how much of the resource is extracted from the ocean. When we were government, we believed in sharing the resource.

With respect to the crab license, we believe that if we could give each of the core licence holders a bit of that action, if we could give them a bit of that resource, a share in that resource, that would take some pressure off the crab. It would take some pressure off groundfish. It would diversify their fishing portfolio.

This is not about how many fishers are in. It is about the amount of fish that is being taken. That is the problem here. All the indicators in the last number of years showed that the exploitation rates were too high and they were ignored by the government. That is the problem, not the number of fishers.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Mr. Chair, we have heard a lot of good stuff from the member for Cape Breton—Canso. We also heard a lot of good stuff from the member for Miramichi.

Did members hear what the member for Miramichi just said? She said that the minister did take scientific advice last year; she just did not follow it. That is quite astounding.

What the member for Cape Breton—Canso just said is really valuable as well. Not one extra pound of quota was assigned to anyone above the existing quota.

There may be some attempt here by members of the government to poke holes in the very decisions they support. When it comes to the southern gulf, what did the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans do? When she announced the 63% cut, she also said that all new entrants would be guaranteed access to this fishery not only this year, not only in 2011, or in 2012, or in 2013, they would be guaranteed quota until 2014, because some of them do indeed come from P.E.I. Therefore, she supports the stabilization and sharing of the fishery.

I ask the member for Cape Breton—Canso this. Why does the minister feel those principles are so inappropriate when it comes to the people and the fishermen of eastern Nova Scotia and Cape Breton in area 23 crab?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Chair, it seems somewhat inconsistent, and I brought this question to the floor before. Really there is no answer. The decision has been made. It is the wrong decision. It was a decision that has been appealed, the granting of the Tim Rhyno licence. He had gone through an appeal process a number of times with the previous government and he was refused. All the correspondence from DFO had recommended against it at all levels of the appeal. However, went it reached the minister's predecessor, that changed. The current minister is wearing the decision of the former minister and that is not fair.

If nothing else happens tonight, the alarm bells have to go off. If we thought it was a tough year last year in the fishery on the east coast, that was only a shower. This is going to be a tsunami and I am not trying to scare anybody. I am just trying to tell the truth as best I know it. The price is down. The harvest is down. People are being sent home from the plants already.

The government has to be prepared. Last year it announced a $15 million bailout package to much fanfare. We thought it was a little light at the time. We were hoping for a $50 million bailout package. It could have announced a $50 million package because it made the criteria so limited, so low that no one would get it anyway. It only spent half the money. It could have announced it $100 million. No one was getting it anyway.

People are going to hurt. Families are going to hurt. The government better be prepared.

[Rodney Weston, Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Chair, I really enjoyed the analogy the member used about the pizza. I have heard the situation referred to several times tonight that by adding new fishers, new entrants into the program, does not make the difference with respect to the size of the biomass.

The member for Acadie—Bathurst mentioned that I was the minister responsible for fisheries in New Brunswick a few years back. At that time, there was a decision taken by a former Liberal government that would be contrary to what the member stated here tonight.

I was the minister of fisheries back when there were riots incited in Shippagan, New Brunswick. Fishing vessels and fishing plants were burnt at that time. That whole issue evolved around the very question of adding new people into the fishery. Since that time, the traditional fishery has asked for an investigation into the decision by the former minister of fisheries.

Does the member believe that decision warrants an investigation?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Chair, there is a great deal behind the measures. We knew what was going on, and as the fisheries minister back then he would know this as well. A small number of people were making substantive amounts of money. The benefit of the fishery really rests in the hands of very few. Therefore, our party has continued to believe in the sharing of the resource. We believe an independent fisherman is an entrepreneur. If people have access to additional opportunities of revenue, if they have different resources they are able to harvest, if one is down on one particular year then they can rely on some revenue source from the other one. It is a diversity within that small enterprise and that is what builds equity within those businesses.

However, as a result of those fires, riots and uproar, there was the sharing of the resource beyond that. I continue to believe that is the way we should approach this fishery. That is the way we should approach any fishery so the greater number are able to share in the resource.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to speak on this debate. Being from New Brunswick, I certainly understand some of the arguments that my colleague from Acadie—Bathurst was making. Even though I do not have any crab in my riding, I do have a number of potato producers and a forestry sector. I tend to equate some of the issues that we have in terms of barrels and board feet. It is a bit of a different argument, but I am pleased to speak today on the impact of the snow crab fishery on the communities in New Brunswick and the Atlantic provinces.

While I understand the difficulties that these regions are facing and how this debate can get very emotional, because it is impacting a number of communities and families, it is important to look at the facts and ensure we base our decisions with the future of the industry in mind.

Since 1966 the snow crab fishery in this area has grown rapidly, peaking at more than 33,000 tonnes in 1982. Landings have fluctuated since this peak to as low as 8,900 tonnes in 1990 and as high as more than 36,000 tonnes in 2005. Landings last year were just under 24,000 tonnes.

It is clear that the snow crab stocks, when we look at this data, are cyclical in nature. The size of the stocks for the given year have been provided by scientists from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans who created the detailed annual assessment based on trawl surveys of the available snow crab biomass. These trawl surveys show that the 2005 fishery was the peak of the most recent cycle and the stock has been in a declining phase since that point in time.

Management decisions and quota levels are guided by the annual science assessment and advice as well as input from industry stakeholders. The annual quota has been gradually reduced to reflect the snow crab's natural cycle. The most recent data prepared in 2009 was used to provide advice on this year's quotas in February.

Since 2008 Fisheries and Oceans Canada has been developing a precautionary approach framework for the southern gulf snow crab fishery. This will reinforce the fishery's long-term sustainability and is one of the department's objectives to achieve sustainable fisheries based on strong conservation outcomes.

A fishery managed under such a framework fits well with eco-certification guidelines and can provide a fishery with a competitive market advantage. We are seeing more and more of that around the world today as we are looking at eco-certification for a number of our fisheries. Hopefully, at some point in time, the committee on fisheries and oceans will get a chance to start looking at eco-certification.

In recent years Fisheries and Oceans Canada has also been working with industry to develop a long-term harvesting strategy. Using precautionary approach principles, departmental scientists identified appropriate reference levels for this fishery. With industry input, decision-making rules-based on the precautionary approach are being developed for establishing the annual quota. These rules will support stock conservation while providing predictability and stability so the industry can plan for the future.

Members opposite will know to put things in perspective when they consider the current situation in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence snow crab fishery. Trends in world snow crab stocks are well studied and are known to be cyclical in nature. The southern gulf is no exception and it is the cyclical nature of snow crab that has led to the decline in recent years. This decline was expected and we expect to return to abundance in the coming years.

I just wanted to refer to a study that was done for the province of New Brunswick back in 2007 by GTA Fisheries Consultants. It has a nice chart on page 12 that shows that trend. It is very evident on these cycles that we can expect that and what was happening this year could eventually be expected as well.

That is one of the reasons the minister announced that she will stabilize access to the crab fishery for the next five years. The fleets will be able to plan their fishing so that it is viable throughout the natural cycle. While there might always be uncertainty in the fishery, access should not have to be part of that uncertainty.

That being said, the biomass has declined to a level where it is important to establish stringent management measures to protect the spawning portion of the stock. In this way, we can avoid extending the current period of low biomass.

After two weeks of fishing, harvesters are claiming a high abundance of crab. As for the rest of the fishery, we should not base our decisions for future actions on impressions and assumptions. Preliminary reports from independent dockside observers indicate that catch levels thus far are much lower than last year.

In fact, for the first week of 2010, the catch rate is the lowest observed in the past six years, 18% lower than last year, and 50% lower than in 2006. Additionally, molting crabs, which have soft shells and are extremely vulnerable to injury, are in much greater abundance this year. This has actually necessitated the closure of some portions of the crab fishing area.

All these facts show that the minister took the best decision under the circumstances. It was a difficult decision, as she indicated earlier, but a sound one. Moreover, even after cutting the quota in area 12 to 7,700 tonnes, there remains a risk of further stock declines in 2011. This quota does, however, provide the best balance. It allows some harvest to stakeholders while ensuring that the stock is able to rebuild.

By establishing Gulf of St. Lawrence snow crab quotas for 2010, the minister is putting the priority on preserving the resource. This decision was not made lightly. Our government recognizes that this is a significant reduction compared to last year and that crab fishers, plant workers and the community will all face hard times.

As a consequence, the minister has instructed officials from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to offer the maximum flexibility for fish harvesters. This will help them to achieve efficiencies and reduce their operating costs.

Restrictions around quota transfers between crab fishing enterprises are being lifted for 2010, enabling harvesters to consolidate operations. It will allow for individual harvesters to make business decisions, for example, reducing or increasing their investments in the fishery over the next few years, based on their needs.

This quota transfer flexibility goes hand-in-hand with the partnering options provided this year to harvesters. Under these arrangements, two harvesters can fish their quota from the same boat, significantly decreasing costs.

The department is taking care to respect existing licensing policy. Fish harvesters subject to the owner-operator policy will require to be on board the fishing vessel.

The industry has already taken advantage of these measures. To date, around 40% of licence holders have used the quota transfer option and some new partnerships have been formed in 2010.

These flexibility measures will remain in place until stocks return to the higher end of the cycle. If we decide to continue this increased flexibility in future years, it is likely that their use by the industry will increase. In any case, the lessons learned from these changes to licensing policy and fisheries operations will be very useful as the department moves forward with its ongoing reform of existing policy.

I would also like to mention the department's continued investment in science. In order to appropriately manage the resource and support longer term sustainability of the fishery, DFO has kept its science base up to date to enhance its precautionary approach to the management of the stock. This approach will improve the long-term predictability of fishery management decisions so that the industry can plan for the future.

To finish, I would like to assure people that our government understands that these are difficult times for the crab fishery and the entire industry.

It is our responsibility to ensure the sustainability of this precious resource as communities in New Brunswick and my home province as well as other provinces depend on it. Conservation has to remain our top priority so we can benefit and continue to enjoy the opportunities of this resource for many years to come.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Mr. Chair, I want to thank my colleague for his thoughts.

When we think about the industry itself and in the grand scheme of things, in his particular area and in general for the Maritimes as well as Newfoundland and Labrador, it seems like we were entering a new age when it comes to vessel size. They are becoming much larger and much more expensive. For new entrants, that is going to be a troublesome thing for the next generation of fishers, certainly for the east coast, west coast, and all over.

Given the downturn in the industry and given how much money was invested in other sectors, and I think of the auto sector as being one, how is it possible for a new entrant to actually finance a multi-million dollar boat based on current prices and in light of the conservation cuts that he talked about earlier, the 63% cuts? There are so many failures at play here, it is hard for somebody to get into the business.

However, I want him to focus on what it is the government can say to someone who wants the finance options to get involved in this industry as a single fisher-person. Could he explain how difficult that is and what will the government do to help that person?

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Chair, that is a great question. That is the same thing we are experiencing in agriculture, the same challenges when we look at prices going down and what producers are getting for their resource.

I want to re-emphasize to the hon. member over there that we also have a very cyclical industry. He did talk about the auto industry and I think everybody in the House should recognize the very integrated nature of that industry between Canada and the U.S., and the importance of us working with the U.S. on that. One industry was going to get something. If ours did not, we would not have been competitive. It was as simple and dry as that, and we are getting the money back, according to GM last week.

However, I do understand what he is saying. At the same time, as we do recognize that this industry is cyclical in nature, we will, and I think we can expect with the proper science decisions that the minister has taken, begin to see an upturn. Then we can start to see better prices and we can start to see new entrants have the ability to finance.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

Mr. Chair, my riding of Miramichi depends a great deal on both the lobster and crab fisheries, and fishermen in my riding have been affected by both the global economic recession and the recent downturn in the crab stock.

I have spoken with the fisheries minister on many occasions about these issues and I am encouraged by some of the investments our government has made in the fishery. We have invested over $200 million under the economic action plan last year to bring our wharves up to a safe standard. We provided over $70 million in support for lobster harvesters during last year's global economic downturn. And we transferred over $245 million to the province of New Brunswick, under various HRSDC programs, to allow the province to provide support for those in the processing sector.

We know that decisions concerning the crab fishery are based on science advice. I wonder if my hon. colleague could explain in more detail on what basis decisions are made regarding quotas.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Chair, there are three main areas that we take into consideration in connection to quotas: the catch per unit effort, which is the number of crab in the pot; the post-season surveys, which include the DFO trawl survey; and the collaboration with the industry on the trap survey that it has as well.

I am glad my colleague brought up the money that is going to New Brunswick. I think that is important because that represents a collaboration with the provinces. One of the things about signing these labour market development agreements is the fact that each of these provinces gets a chance to invest in the things that are different in their province because not every province is the same.

The province of New Brunswick has $245 million, which allows it to invest in things like getting people to move to different areas, to actually invest. Also, under the EI program, there are retraining programs. Those are important factors that we need to consider. That is why the negotiations we have had with her province on these deals is good for her community and is also good for the workers in the community.

I also want to stress that it is a very interesting read when we look at the 2007 report on the crab industry in New Brunswick, especially, because it does highlight a lot of these things that have been cyclical. The same problems are still in the industry today that have been there for many years. It involves, always, a challenge between DFO science and the fishers. There is always, I guess, a negotiation every spring, as the minister talked about before, with respect to what that final quota will be.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Mr. Chair, that is fabulous. The province of New Brunswick must be getting $1.5 billion through the labour market development agreement. Every time those in the fishery industry meet with members from the Conservative Party, the Conservative government, they are told that they have $240 million in the labour market development agreement to meet their needs. Then when people from the forestry industry meet with those same individuals, they are told they have $240 million to meet their needs. Then when they get to meet with the tourism industry to help solve those problems, they are told they have $240 million in assistance to meet the needs of that particular industry. Total all the different industry sectors and it is about $1.5 billion.

That is not really the case. It is $240 million for the entire province for all industry sectors.

However, my question for the member is, does he feel that it was a good, responsible move to ensure stability to the fleet, to the new entrants to the southern gulf crab fishery, by informing them that they would stay in the fishery until 2014, with no changes to overall sharing patterns in terms of overall percentages?

If he agrees that was a good decision, then does he also say that it was a good decision to let the new entrants into the fishery to begin with? Because if we provide stability, unprecedented stability, for five more years to those new entrants, guaranteeing them that they will have fair access to their overall quota as it exists, then that tells me that the position of the government, the Conservative government, is that the Liberal government that put in the new entrants did the right thing.

Does he agree with that or does he not? Because if he does not agree with that, he is saying the current Conservative Minister of Fisheries and Oceans did the wrong thing by actually announcing that there will be no changes to quota sharing structures until at least 2014.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Chair, that is an interesting point. I guess he did get something right, that the stabilization did start in 2005 under the member for Halifax West at that time.

I can say that the minister has made a very informed decision this year. As was pointed out earlier, this has always been a challenge. The report says very clearly that every spring it is always a challenge when the fishers negotiate and none of them ever wants the quota changes. The minister informed them very clearly last year, based on her decision, that there could be ramifications this year and those ramifications have hit.

It is going to be very interesting as the fisheries committee looks at the next round of this. I look forward to delving into this in more detail here on the ground and to finding out just exactly the challenges that are being faced. I think we all know what they are, but those of us who do not have crab in our ridings are certainly going to hear about it and we will have a good opportunity to see what some of those challenges are on the ground.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I rise today to bring light to a situation that is unfolding in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence.

As all hon. members are aware, the Canadian snow crab fishery represents an important part of the livelihood of many families in the Atlantic region and Quebec. Today we find ourselves here to address a crisis for people who depend on this industry. We are also here to address an injustice that has been precipitated against those very fishers, workers and first nations.

It has become clear that the minister has had the opportunity to avoid the situation, but she did not act. Now so many people will suffer due to this inaction. I will speak more to that in a moment.

First I would like to talk a little bit about the snow crab fishery as a whole, the immediate crisis and some of the amazing people who participate in it.

Earlier this year, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans announced a 63% cut to the total allowable catch of snow crab in the Saint Lawrence region. The impact of this decision will have an effect on the economy of the entire region. In straightforward terms, we are talking about an overall reduction in quota from 20,400 tons, the level it was in 2009, to 7,700 tons for the 2010 season. That is a very deep cut to a large sector of the economy.

This will have an enormous impact on the fishers, some of whom have fished snow crab all their lives. Some families' yearly incomes rely heavily on the fishery. What are we to tell them about this situation, that we are sorry? When they cannot afford to pay their bills, what are they to do? All this because someone in Ottawa made a mistake. I do not think this is good enough.

It is not only the fishers who will be affected by this massive slash to the quota. This year less crab will be processed and the fish plant workers who rely on snow crab will be negatively affected. For example, in New Brunswick roughly 1,500 fish plant workers were employed in snow crab processing last year, according to the 2009 registry on fish plant workers. Another 250 to 300 did occasional work.

Last year, fish plant workers had about nine weeks of work processing crab in the spring and a few more weeks in the summer. This year they will only get about three weeks of work in the spring. That means last year most of them banked more than 200 hours and this year they will be lucky to bank 85.

For the riding of my hon. colleague, the member for Acadie—Bathurst, this will deal a significant blow to the local economies and leave many families with little or nothing to fall back on.

Then there are the first nations who only gained access to the fishery in 1999 and hold communal licences. A communal licence represents the entire community, and for first nations fishers it is not a private enterprise. They take profits generated and use them to support programs, which are underfunded by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs.

They use this money to enhance their education student allowances and to support cultural and language programs. It is used to create employment in the community for people who otherwise would not have an income over the winter. This reduction punishes them as well.

What we are talking about here is entire communities built around the fishery all across the Atlantic region and Quebec, which will be significantly impacted by the reduction.

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans says it had to take desperate measures. How did it get to this, where such drastic reductions had to come all at once? Where was the minister last year or the year before or before that?

What do we say to those communities that are now faced with this desperate situation? These communities will suffer greatly because of drastic measures that could and should have been avoided. Could this possibly come at a worse time, just when we are climbing out of the most significant economic downturn in nearly 100 years?

I would like to take a few moments to tell this House about an alternative management structure that the DFO had previously implemented in a neighbouring area, area 19.

Recently I had the opportunity to talk with Basil MacLean, president of Area 19 Crab Fishermen's Association. Mr. MacLean got in touch with me because he was concerned about the situation that area 12 fishers find themselves in, and he wanted to discuss why the situation was different and why he did not believe that the TAC reduction should be imposed on him or fishers in his area, area 19.

Mr. MacLean and the area 19 fishers believe that their crab stock is in good shape. He says that they do not face the same problem of depletion in their area, as is the case in area 12. The reason they say this is that they have been directly involved in the management of the fishery in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Unlike area 12, area 19 has an integrated fisheries management plan and has had one since 2001. Fishers from this region have been much more involved in determining the management of the fishery.

The DFO website explains that integrated fisheries management seeks to introduce “a more structured, systematic and inclusive approach to fisheries management” where:

...resource users and DFO work together to develop clear, measurable, long-term fisheries management objectives for a fishery. On a more technical level [it] provides a framework to quantify fisheries management objectives as well as risk analysis processes that result in the development of specific management strategies designed to achieve specific objectives. DFO sectors including (science, resource management and enforcement) play key roles and interact with the fishing industry as part of the...process.

It is clear that the fishers of area 19 are much more involved in the everyday conduct and management of that fishery. By direct involvement in the creation of long-term, measurable objectives for their fisheries, the fishers come into direct contact with the science, resource management and enforcement arms of DFO, allowing them to have a much better sense of the state of their fishery.

This means that decisions being made in Ottawa are being made in consultation with people on the ground. When they were told by DFO scientists that their biomass had dropped last year, the fishers came together and decided what to do. In line with that precautionary approach, they chose to take less than the recommendation, to voluntarily bring down their TAC, in order to cushion them against the shock they knew was coming this year.

What is more, in 2004, when a crisis arose in the fishery and for conservation reasons the department prematurely closed the fishery, it was supported by the Area 19 Snow Crab Fishermen's Association, even though the fishery was closed before several fishers could begin fishing. Recognizing that this was not fair, it was mutually agreed that actions should be taken to change how sharing took place in order to ensure that this circumstance would not occur again in future seasons.

They created a new co-management agreement. At a special meeting on April 24, 2005, the Area 19 Snow Crab Fishermen's Association passed a motion to request that DFO provide regular access to all temporary access fishers under a revised co-management arrangement. This process was supported by the majority of 73 temporary and 111 permanent fishers.

DFO received representation from the Area 19 Snow Crab Fishermen's Association, identifying the need for revisions to the existing co-management agreement to reflect permanent access for the 73 temporary allocation holders. DFO then carried out a process of negotiations with the Area 19 Snow Crab Fishermen's Association. This process resulted in points of agreement that received ministerial approval in 2005 and provide the guiding principles for amendments to the multi-year integrated fisheries management plan.

One can see that when a problem arose in the fishery, one that might have divided the traditional fishers and the new-licence fishers, because the fishers themselves were accustomed to dealing with the fishery and because they were completely involved, they solved it themselves. The co-management strategy gave these fishers recourse to manage not only their crab stock, but also their individual fishing rights.

As my time is running short, I would just like to conclude by thanking Ms. Nellie Barker Stevens, coordinator of the Eastern Shore Fishermen's Protective Association, for all her support and counsel through this process. I would also like to thank Basil MacLean, the president of the Area 19 Snow Crab Fishermen's Association, for taking the time to share his insights with me and provide his feedback.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Chair, I have a quick question for my colleague from British Columbia.

His NDP colleague, who was speaking earlier, raised the issue of whether the science was accurate or not. In fact, he said that some of his constituents were telling him that there are lots of crab out there and that this 63% cut was not needed.

I just want to know if he has any information on that and whether he agrees that this cut was necessary based on the information that he has.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I think the situation is a lack of funding. In terms of science, we can get good science if the resources are there in order to get that science. Unfortunately, that has been an issue, not only on the east coast, but on the west coast where I am from that has certainly been an issue. We are hearing as a common concern that in order to get good science we need the resources and the funds to get the results that we need.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to ask a question in the debate tonight.

I listened earlier to my good friend from Baie Verte who spoke about the 63% drop in the allowable catch and about the major mismanagement of the government. I think he nailed it down pretty well. He explained about the enormous costs involved to get into the business in the first place. He wanted to know what the government will do to help the people in the plants and the fishers to get through this situation.

Could the member tell me what sort of programs he thinks the government should put in place as a temporary measure until the fishery gets back to where it should be in a couple of years from now?

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, unfortunately, the situation is at the point now where such a drastic measure has been taken that it will impact many families and fishers who rely on the snow crab. That might mean that we need intervention immediately to assist those who will suffer this year due to not having the resources they would normally get for their livelihood through catching their quota of snow crab.

We may need to look at other programs, whether it is employment assistance or other programs, but this is something that needs to be addressed now.

However, I would add that we need to look at other areas where there are co-management strategies. We need to look at the long term as well as the short term in order to solve this problem. We need to take those steps, which is difficult. We do need to withstand the pressure of always satisfying the needs of increasing numbers of catch and that is not always possible.

I think the fishers are reasonable. They will look at the allocation and at the science and they will come to a conclusion that will be beneficial for them in the long run. However, they do want involvement and input, which means there needs to be negotiation.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Mr. Chair, I thank the member for New Westminster—Coquitlam for having a perspective from British Columbia and talking eloquently about an east coast issue says that we share a common bond. We want to help fishermen.

One of the things that struck me about the member's speech was that he demonstrated a connection with some of the leaders in the east coast industry. He spoke directly with them and they explained to him some of the ways that we can do this better. It appears to me that, based on his conversations and on what they told him as to what the government was doing, there seems to be a disconnect.

We can do this better and we can do this more easily but we are not doing it, which I think is the lesson that comes out of area 19 that the member for Cape Breton—Canso referred to. That is a model of excellence. It is a model of how the fishery can be conducted but we are just not doing it.

I heard some heckling from the other side when the member for New Westminster—Coquitlam said that these were made in Ottawa decisions. The other side said, “No, they are not”.

I have an example. In area 23 crab, the regional director for DFO actually put out a memo to every crab fisherman saying that the 50:50 crab sharing split will occur in 2009. The regional director said that a month before the plan was torn up.

Therefore, if that decision was not made in Ottawa, where was it made? I think the member knows that made in Ottawa decisions that contradict the very groundwork done by DFO personnel in the region itself is not very helpful.

I ask the member what he thinks about that.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, that is the concern I am hearing on both coasts, certainly from the leaders in area 19. They have expressed a willingness to be involved and a willingness to make the tough decisions, for instance, to take less at times when they recognize that it is for the greater good. However, they want to see that these decisions are carried out in neighbouring areas and that they are being respected here in Ottawa. They are frustrated that this is not happening. We can improve that by looking at different models and management strategies.

The bottom line is that they just simply want to be heard and they want to know that their comments and their involvement is being acted on and that the decisions reflect that. This inequity hurts them, it hurts their families and it obviously hurts their communities.

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Chair, I am proud to rise in this debate tonight. My question is quite simple.

There is a fair amount of confusion and misinformation being spread about the actual status of the stocks and the responsible solution that the minister has found for a very difficult subject. It is never fun to tell a fisherman that there are less fish to catch. If the previous government had done that more often, we would not be in a lot of the trouble that we are in now.

During his speech, the member for Cape Breton—Canso chose to make a drive-by smear about one individual licence granted in Nova Scotia. The member for Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte asked a number of questions in the House about the same licence. Would the hon. member from the NDP agree to have the individual come to the fisheries committee to explain his side of the story?

People in this House may not know Tim Rhyno but I do. He is a 13th generation fisherman who had his licence stolen from him by the federal Liberal government. His grandfather sailed on the Blue Nose. Now that does not entitle him to a crab licence but it does tell us that he is a fisherman born and bred. I am appalled at the absolutely unethical, slanderous, morally incompetent and wrong allegations that have been made against this fisherman.

The member from the NDP can listen to the Liberals or he can listen to my question. Will the member allow this guy to come to committee to tell his own story or will he listen to the Liberals?

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, in terms of calling witnesses to appear at committee, I think the committee will look at that and look at everyone we involve. We will look at all suggestions. I do not have a problem looking at all perspectives.

On the west coast, which we are dealing with right now, we had a similar situation. There was no interest in talking about the aquaculture situation because it was a situation of conflict. We have looked at both perspectives and now we are digging deeper into that situation because we want to get to the bottom of it.

We are about to dive into the snow crab issue by taking a visit to a number of places on the east coast. We will hear from a number of people and I am sure that after the visit others will come to Ottawa and give us their perspective, and I welcome that.

[Rodney Weston, Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Chair, it is a pleasure to take part in this take note debate this evening on a topic that we spent some time on in the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I have enjoyed the debate here this evening. We have heard many different opinions and different points of view come across. The minister has received lots of advice and lots of criticisms this evening but he fact remains that the decision the minister took in this situation was a decision taken with one goal in mind, and that was to help sustain the industry for the future. We must keep that in mind.

I have to question the motivation behind the advice the minister has received tonight from the member for Acadie—Bathurst and the member for Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte. I asked members what they would do if they were the minister. The answer given by the member for Acadie--Bathurst was that he would get the fishermen together with the scientists and put them on the same boat.

The minister consulted with the fishermen and took advice from the DFO scientists and made a decision taking into consideration that advice. The minister has listened to the fishery in the past. Last year she met with those people in fishery and talked about the need for a reduction in the TAC but they did not believe the science last year. They had difficulty with the science. The minister told them very clearly that she was prepared to make an exception but that if the science did not come back with a different position the following year, that she would have no choice but to implement that decision based on the science, and she did that. The industry was fully aware of the direction that the minister was planning to take.

Tonight I want to talk about the province of New Brunswick. It is a terrific place and I did have the pleasure at one time of being the minister responsible for agriculture, fisheries and aquaculture. The member for Acadie—Bathurst raised that point here this evening. When I was a minister at that time there was consultation with the federal level of government. I know there has been consultation this time with the federal and provincial ministers. Some of the indignation we have heard from the provincial government around the minister's decision has given me cause for concern.

The provincial minister even came to Ottawa with a delegation that included the premier to meet with the federal minister after the decision was taken. He sat in the meeting and participated in a discussion. Then he left that meeting and made comments to the media that were contrary to the discussion in which he had just participated. He spoke of the need for a compensation program but never raised the issue of compensation with the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

I would have to question the motivation here and the timing. It could be the fact that there is a provincial election coming this year and that this might be an issue that could be politically sensitive. It has been a politically sensitive issue in the past. The provincial minister came to a meeting and when he left the meeting he had a different message. What a shock. There has been a lot of discussion here tonight around what the federal government should do.

We all clearly understand why the decision was taken. It was to sustain the industry, to protect the biomass, to protect the resource. Nobody in the House is going to argue against those motives. Nobody will argue that.

The minister had to make a decision, and the minister made a decision. Now we have to live with the result. We have heard a lot of discussion tonight that the federal government needs to live up to its responsibilities. I talked a little earlier about my time in the provincial government. I know there are agreements in place between the federal and provincial governments that are designed specifically for situations like this. This is not a new challenge for the province of New Brunswick. This is not a new situation that we find ourselves in today.

We have heard people talk about this resource being very cyclical. We know that. We have found ourselves in this situation before. The provincial government found itself at the mercy, to be very frank, of the federal government. That is why these labour market development agreements were signed. That is why they were negotiated.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

By McKenna.

[Rodney Weston, Conservative, Saint John, NB]

They were negotiated by McKenna, no question. The member is right. They were a good idea and I have no difficulty in saying that.

When I was in the provincial government, we maintained those agreements because it was the right thing to do. Every province in this country has a different situation. There are different challenges that each province has to meet. This is one of the challenges the province of New Brunswick has to meet and this is exactly what these agreements are in place for.

There is funding available. We heard the member for Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte mention tonight that there must be $1.5 billion in the fund for New Brunswick. Quite clearly, there is $245 million over two years included in the labour market development agreement.

Here is a revelation. Last year the province of New Brunswick was not able to use all of that funding. It is unbelievable. Yet, this year, it needs more.

I heard the member for Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte talk about how the federal government calls on the province to dip into those labour market development agreements to satisfy the concerns and issues facing the forestry sector. No, we have put in place programs specifically for the forestry sector. We have addressed issues with the forestry sector quite clearly.

This is a specific situation that these funds were put in place for. The $245 million over two years is specifically designed to address situations like this, but it goes beyond that. It goes much further than that.

There is funding in place for older workers. Funding has been put in place by our government to address the situation with older workers. There are many people in the industry who would qualify for that funding.

There is funding in place for specific agreements, such as EI benefits, to address this specific situation with the fishery and the province of New Brunswick is able to take advantage of that. There has been flexibility built into the EI programs to enable the province and the industry to take advantage of based on the situation and challenges as they arise.

My main point tonight is that we are in a position to work with the province of New Brunswick. I want people in need to receive that help, if only the province would step up, take advantage of it and use the funds for the intention they were designed for.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

That is pretty rich, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank you for acknowledging me in this debate.

I also want to talk to my hon. colleague across the way, certainly about the LMDAs. Let us just go through a common thread that seems to be appearing.

I noticed in the speech that at several moments he pointed out that they had actually given money back. The reason is not that there was no need, it was because of the restrictiveness of the very program in and of itself. Let us talk about the lobster program and $15 million and what was sent back because it was so restrictive in the first place--