Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to address some vital and sensible changes proposed by the jobs, growth and long-term prosperity act.
I would like to first acknowledge and thank my colleague, the Minister of Finance, for putting together a visionary, thoughtful and thorough budget.
I am proud to be part of a government that is taking much-needed steps to help Canadians address the challenges of today's global economy. Our government recognizes that Canada is lucky to be the steward of a vast and abundant array of natural resources. We want to ensure they can contribute to our economic growth and job creation in a sustainable and responsible way now and for future generations.
One of Canada's traditional resources is our fishery. As part of our government's commitment to jobs, growth and long-term prosperity, we have introduced changes to the Fisheries Act that would put a focus on protecting Canadian fisheries. These proposed changes to the Fisheries Act would shift the Department of Fisheries and Oceans from managing all impacts on all fish and all habitat to focusing on protecting Canada's fisheries and the habitat that supports it.
The current Fisheries Act's provisions are indiscriminate. They require that all projects and all waters, regardless of the fish species present or their contribution to fisheries, be considered in the same way.
Under the current rules, an irrigation canal on a farmer's field is valued the same way as the Great Lakes. We frankly do not think that makes a lot of sense.
The role and responsibility of Fisheries and Oceans Canada is indeed to protect this marvellous historic important resource, our fishery. We believe that Canadians want their government to make good, common-sense changes to the system so we can minimize or eliminate restrictions on routine activities on non-protected waterways and, at the same time, maintain appropriate, reasonable and responsible protection for Canada's fisheries.
In short, our government believes that fish protection policies should focus on Canada's fisheries, not on farmers' fields and flood plains.
Contrary to what some opposition members have been saying, the habitat that supports Canada's fisheries includes areas where these fish live, grow and reproduce along with the fish they eat.
We are in good company in our belief that Canada's fish protection policies should focus on fisheries instead of non-productive areas like drainage ditches or irrigation channels.
Berry Vrbanovic, president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, has said that the changes “...will allow governments to spend less time processing paperwork for small, low-risk public works...”.
This is good common sense, and a very conservative approach to boot.
He went on to say that:
These reforms will make it easier for governments to set clear, sensible priorities for protecting fish habitats. Currently the Fisheries Act applies the same protections to rivers and streams as municipal drains and farmers' irrigation canals. That doesn't make sense.
We agree with him and the countless other municipal leaders who have been calling for these types of reforms for many years.
Opposition parties should spend more time listening to Canadians about the countless tales of the current rules protecting ditches, man-made reservoirs and flood plains while they should be protecting rivers, lakes and oceans that are home to our fisheries.
Unlike the opposition, we are listening to Canadians. This government will ensure that decisions regarding Canada's vital waterways are made by Canadians in the interest of Canadians.
These proposed amendments would allow us to manage a range of threats, including the killing of fish, the permanent alteration and destruction of fish habitat, and aquatic invasive species.
To manage the threats to the fisheries, we would be able to identify ecologically significant areas for fisheries and ensure higher levels of protection for these areas. We would be able to enforce conditions through the Fisheries Act authorizations. Currently, DFO can set conditions but, believe it or not, cannot enforce them.
These changes would allow us to crack down on those who break the rules and they would align penalties under the Fisheries Act with those in the Environmental Enforcement Act, resulting in much stiffer penalties.
Now that we have set the direction, we will consult with interested groups, conservationists with expertise in protecting waterways, fishermen who benefit from the resource, aboriginals, provinces and territories and municipalities.
These consultations would inform us as we develop the regulatory and policy framework that would support and better define the changes. We will continue to build partnerships with those committed to preserving and protecting fisheries, with the hope that they can play an even larger role in the future.
In fact, we want to enhance partnerships with provinces and territories, industry and conservation groups. Where provinces and territories have laws or regulations for fisheries protection that are at least equivalent to our own, we would now recognize the provincial laws to avoid an unnecessarily duplicative process. We would now be able to incorporate best practices fisheries protection standards established by provinces or industry. The amendments would enable the government to allow other regulators to issue authorizations under the Fisheries Act, such as a province or a federal agency.
We would also be able to enter into agreements with third parties, such as conservation groups or professional organizations, to carry out and further the protection of our fisheries and the habitat that supports it. We want to work better and smarter with our partners and we want the rules to work more sensibly and practically for Canadians.
We would clarify situations where development poses the highest risk to fish and fish habitat and those areas of limited risk. We would establish a new framework, in conjunction with stakeholders, to make it easier for people to comply with the Fisheries Act while working in or near water. This would include identifying classes of low-risk work, such as installing a cottage dock, and classes of water where project reviews would not be required. For medium-risk projects, standards would be established allowing Canadians much-needed clarity while they carry out those projects.
Federal pollution protection laws would continue to protect Canada's waterways as they have in the past. We do not believe it is sensible or practical to treat all bodies of water the same way, and our government is making long-overdue changes to our rules to focus DFO on what is important to Canadians. It makes good common sense that the government should be able to minimize or eliminate restrictions on commonplace activities that pose little or no threat and, at the same time, maintain appropriate, reasonable and responsible protection for Canada's fisheries.
Other Canadians also believe that the Fisheries Act is in need of an update. Ducks Unlimited, for example, has noted that:
...the [Conservative] government announced that it commits to the responsible protection and conservation of Canada’s fisheries. Ducks Unlimited...supports this direction and understands that laws and regulations must be updated at interval to ensure that they address evolving social, economic and environmental systems, as well as support efficient process to achieve desired outcomes.
It went on to say:
DUC supports the federal government in updating the federal fisheries legislation and taking a targeted approach that would support the conservation and sustainable use of our fisheries resources. Also, the proposed changes will make it easier for the fisheries legislation and regulations to be enforced.
Let us take a look at what these changes can mean for Canadians. For anglers, the proposed changes would provide specific protection for recreational fisheries and support their ongoing productivity. For conservation groups, the proposed changes would enable the identification and protection of ecologically significant areas. Under the new rules, we would also be able to enter into agreements with these and other groups to undertake enhanced fisheries protection. This could include innovative approaches to protect habitat, support for aquatic invasive species outreach and development of standards for fish protection or other matters.
These proposed changes also include enhanced compliance and enforcement tools such as enforceable conditions, duty for proponents to notify in the event of serious harm to fisheries and penalties aligned with the Environmental Enforcement Act.
In conclusion, our recreational, commercial and aboriginal fisheries are important to Canadians. We want our rules that protect this resource to be sensible, clear and practical, and we want to ensure that they focus on the priorities of Canadians.