Sean Casey

[The Environment, May 30th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we continue to ensure the sustainability of aquatic ecosystems. We understand the importance of fishery resources in the Cowichan River to local indigenous groups and the local community. We are aware of the issues regarding the low summer flows and the threats to fish and fish habitat.

The department and the minister have attended meetings with local indigenous groups and provincial and local governments. We are actively engaged in ongoing discussions to find solutions and the possibilities of federal funding.

[Fisheries and Oceans, May 28th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans works to manage risk with provincial authorities and stakeholders in the industry.

With respect to sea lice, every single licensee has, as a condition of the licence, a requirement to monitor outbreaks of sea lice. Funding is in place and has been provided. All policy with regard to sea lice and aquaculture will be based on science and consultation with all appropriate stakeholders.

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is dead wrong. This piece of legislation would give the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard the power to freeze the footprint, so all of the activities going on in an area the day before he makes the order are allowed to continue the day after. For the member to say that the minister can, with a wave of a pen for some political motive, wipe out all activity anywhere he wants to draw a circle is dead wrong. When he says there is no requirement for gazetting, he is dead wrong. Once an interim order is put in place, the Canada Gazette process kicks in.

None of what the member said is true, and it is absolutely offensive that it is allowed to occur in this place. I would urge the member to read the legislation.

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the theme raised by the member for Whitby. Canada recently co-hosted a conference in Nairobi, Kenya, on the sustainable blue economy. This is something that requires international co-operation and collaboration. It really is an opportunity for Canada to lead.

I know the member for Niagara Centre is a very active supporter of the Chamber of Marine Commerce. There is probably no better poster boy for the economy and the environment going hand in hand with respect to marine matters than the member for Niagara Centre. I wonder if he could speak a bit about his work with the marine chamber and its relationship to a blue economy and the health of our oceans, which are all part and parcel of what we are debating here today.

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Vancouver Kingsway can always be relied upon to provide a thoughtful and thorough presentation, and this one was certainly no exception.

I appreciate that he challenged the government to be bolder to ensure that some of the measures we seek to put in place cannot be reversed by a future government and to consider some of the specific matters he raised.

I want to raise two specific points and ask him whether he agrees with them.

Without this legislation, there is no protection until there is full protection. This legislation would allow for an interim protection order that would effectively freeze the footprint. Would the member agree that this is an important tool, given all the considerations he outlined in his speech?

Second, he talked about what our standards should be and said that they should be more rigorous. Would he agree that in the approach taken by the government, the prohibited activities in any marine protected area should always be aligned with the conservation objectives?

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, in view of the parliamentary secretary's long career in public service, at both the provincial and federal levels, I would like to ask a question that is in alignment with what our government is doing with Canadian values right now. We went through a period under Stephen Harper when science was cut; it was not respected and scientists were muzzled. We have reinvested in science; we have reinvested in conservation; we have reinvested in the oceans protection plan. I would like my colleague to first speak to that, its alignment with Canadian values and where they are now.

Tied to that same theme, the fact is that Canada, as an international player in 2010, committed to these targets and in the last five years has made such remarkable progress. I would ask him to tie that in as well.

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech and his passion for this topic. It is very clear that he has an extensive background and experience in these matters, as we heard in his speech. There were actually a couple of things in there that I could agree with. When he talked about how important the terms and conditions are, he was absolutely right. In any marine protected area, the restriction on any activities is tied to the conservation objectives of that marine protected area, and they are not uniform.

There were a couple of things in particular that I wanted to ask my colleague about. One, he seemed to indicate that if this act passes, it will be possible for the government to shut down everything. No, what this bill does is give the minister the power to make an interim protection order. What that order does is freeze the footprint. Everything that was allowed in that area the day before the order is allowed the day after the order and for the next five years. Therefore, the suggestion that everything can be instantly shut down with the stroke of a pen is dead, categorically, wrong.

The other thing my colleague said is that the government is going too fast on this. However, the average time for the establishment of a marine protected area in this country is seven to 10 years. Is that too fast?

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, lest I be accused of stirring the pot, since my colleague talked about the Conservatives' passion for the environment, I would just like to take a look at the track record with respect to MPAs. The targets were established in 2010. The Conservatives were in power for five years after that. The amount of marine areas that were protected was 1% and now we are at 9%.

What does that say about the passion for the environment, and how does that align with the views of my colleague's constituents?

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I also would like to thank my colleague for his work on the fisheries committee. As a Newfoundland and Labrador member of Parliament, he would be abundantly aware that negotiations were successfully concluded recently between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Government of Canada with respect to the Atlantic Accord, including the designation of the Laurentian Channel marine protected area.

Could the member speak to what he is hearing from his constituents with respect to the level of consultation, the level of engagement between the respective governments and the stakeholders for this to be allowed to happen?

[Oceans Act, May 13th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague indicates that there is some sort of distinction between consultation and engagement and that somehow this statute falls short. I am wondering if he has read the statute, in particular subsection 33(1), which says:

In exercising the powers and performing the duties and functions assigned to the Minister by this Act, the Minister

(a) shall cooperate with other ministers, boards and agencies of the Government of Canada, with provincial and territorial governments and with affected aboriginal organizations, coastal communities and other persons and bodies, including those bodies established under land claims agreements;

It says “shall”, not “may”. The statute mandates engagement. There has been no amendment put forward to alter paragraph 33(1)(a). It addresses the very perceived problem the hon. member spent much of his speech talking about. Has he read that provision of the statute?