Keith Ashfield

[Status of Women, March 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the opposition members have little fault to find in our budget if this is the only type of question they can ask in this House.

[Status of Women, March 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member opposite is following the newscasts and our talk about the federal budget.

It was indeed a great day to promote our budget on Friday. We had significant interest in it.

[Search and Rescue, March 20th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the question from the person opposite is entirely wrong. The Coast Guard does make every attempt to ensure that each vessel working in Quebec has a bilingual capacity to communicate with other vessels.

Marine communications and traffic services centres will continue to provide services in both official languages. These centres are the main point of contact for all vessels.

[Search and Rescue, March 20th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we have every confidence that the changes in Quebec City will have no negative impact on our ability to respond to distress incidents on the water quickly, effectively and in both official languages. Quebec is served by 19 Coast Guard vessels, including seven search and rescue lifeboats, two hovercraft and six helicopters. We are ensuring that the Coast Guard has the tools to do its job.

[The Environment, March 19th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier in previous questions, we have in fact made the decision to close the Experimental Lakes and will be ending the federal facility.

We conduct research across this country. We continue important freshwater research in other facilities such as the Freshwater Institute in Winnipeg and the Bayfield Institute in Burlington. We are also making important investments to clean up freshwater lakes such as Lake Winnipeg and Lake Simcoe.

[The Environment, March 19th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is that our department continues to do an incredible amount of science work. There are also freshwater components to the science program that are conducted at most of our other nine major research institutes that the department operates across the country.

[The Environment, March 19th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, we made the decision that the facility will no longer be a federal facility. The department has a number of science facilities that are focused on our freshwater program. The Freshwater Institution, in Winnipeg, as I mentioned earlier, the Sea Lamprey Control Centre, in Sault Ste. Marie and the Bayfield Institute, in Burlington focus heavily on freshwater science.

[The Environment, March 19th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we have made the decision that the experimental lakes will be ending as a federal facility. Our government is continuing important freshwater research in other facilities across Canada, such as the Freshwater Institute, in Winnipeg and the Bayfield Institute, in Burlington.

We are also making important investments to clean out freshwater lakes like Lake Winnipeg and Lake Simcoe.

[Questions on the Order Paper, March 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), prior to the decision to make industry responsible for paying for gear tags in commercial fisheries, with the exception of tuna tags, the cost to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, DFO, per tag in the Atlantic lobster and crab fisheries ranged from 12¢ to 15 ¢, for a total of $518,000 per year for purchase and shipping. This is the cost DFO paid for each tag, shipped to a harvester where that applied, and does not include salary or administrative costs incurred by the department to manage the program. DFO also supplied vessel validation and gillnet tabs in the Pacific region, at an average per unit cost of $3.19.

With regard to (b), after March 31, 2013, there will be no cost to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans for tags or validation tabs. There will be no cost to Pacific harvesters, as validation tabs are being eliminated. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans has not been provided prices for tag suppliers, as pricing arrangements are negotiated between tag manufacturers, tag suppliers and harvesters and constitute business arrangements to which the department is not privy.

With regard to (c), as a result of the decision, DFO projects savings of approximately $518,000 per year for the purchase and shipping of tags.

With regard to (d), the advantages of this decision are that it saves taxpayers approximately $500,000 in fisheries management costs and it will also ensure that all harvesters are treated equally in accordance with DFO’s position that industry should pay for the fishing gear conservation requirements for the fishery from which it benefits and that business participants should be responsible for supplying the equipment needed to carry out their business. The decision also reduces the administrative burden on Pacific fish harvesters by removing the requirement to obtain and display validation tabs. The department has not identified any disadvantages of this decision.

With regard to (e), the Department of Fisheries and Oceans undertook two studies on tagging that were incorporated in the regulatory impact analysis that was published on November 10, 2012, in the Canada Gazette, part I. These unpublished studies were titled “The Way Forward for Fishing Tags and Logbooks” and “Cost-Benefit Analysis: Regulations amending the Atlantic Fisheries Regulations, 1985 and the Pacific Fishery Regulations, 1993 to remove requirements for the departmental issuance of fishing tags and validation tabs”. These studies are available on request from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

With regard to (f), there were no consultations with industry prior to this decision; however, meetings did take place with industry representatives following the decision to discuss whether tags were needed for various fisheries and what kind of system industry could put in place to supply tags that meet specific management requirements.

[Questions on the Order Paper, March 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the policy on the preservation of the independence of the inshore fleet in Canada’s Atlantic fisheries, or PIIFCAF, was introduced by Fisheries and Oceans Canada, DFO, on April 12, 2007, after extensive consultations with stakeholders. This policy aims to strengthen the owner-operator and fleet separation policies by addressing issues concerning controlling agreements and ensuring that those who are licence holders are the ones making important decisions regarding their fishing licence and any quotas attached to it. The implementation of the PIIFCAF is a step taken by DFO to ensure that inshore fishermen remain accountable to any decision with regard to the licence.

With regard to (b), the policy on the preservation of the independence of the inshore fleet in Canada’s Atlantic fisheries, PIIFCAF, was put in place to eliminate controlling agreements by April 12, 2014. This deadline was established to allow sufficient time for those in controlling agreements to make alternative arrangements for accessing capital and to terminate or replace their existing controlling agreements. In order to facilitate this, DFO has developed tools that focus on helping fishers to improve access to capital, i.e., notice and acknowledgement system, DFO’s response to the Saulnier decision. These tools provide fish harvesters with options that support their independence. The PIIFCAF policy and deadlines are still in place.

With regard to (c), the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada has announced on September 21, 2012, that the fleet separation and owner-operator policies will remain intact in the Atlantic Canada inshore fisheries.

With regard to (d), as per the PIIFCAF policy, where an inshore licence holder declared that on April 12, 2007, he or she was a party to a controlling agreement, the licence holder has until April 12, 2014, to either terminate the controlling agreement or amend the agreement to bring it into compliance with the PIIFCAF Policy in order to be eligible to continue to hold the licence beyond this date.