Fisheries committee  It has happened in a few cases in the region. In a few of them, the harbour authority was renewed insofar as we were able to get another board to take on the operations. In other cases, the harbour authority that had fatigue to that point was able to work with a harbour authority within the greater area and they amalgamated, with two harbours being managed by one harbour authority.

Fisheries committee  ACOA invests in economic development locally. We have had harbour authorities that have been able to access ACOA funding. It goes to the point that when we work out the long-term plans for our harbours, if there are opportunities for diversification it is also considered. Sometimes we've had ACOA come to the table and provide funding to harbour authorities looking to expand or diversify their harbour to satisfy other needs—not necessarily supportive of the fisheries but of other development wants.

Fisheries committee  There are two situations in your question, two scenarios. It has happened in the region that we've had harbour authorities that have been part of our core harbour base that have chosen to go off on their own and have naturally volunteered to be divested. Those harbour authorities have proven successful in diversifying themselves and accessing ACOA funding.

Fisheries committee  Barricades? Yes. I don't have the figures in front of me, but I can find them in my papers. We have a lot of structures where the barricades are causing more pressure on the other facilities there.

Fisheries committee  With respect to Aboriginal communities, 44 percent of our infrastructure supports that clientele. These are not just traditional fishers. There are also Aboriginal communities that fish, as well as aquaculture in the areas around our wharves, as I mentioned at the beginning. With respect to our infrastructures, 66 percent of our infrastructure base is at the end of its useful lifespan, of its sustainability.

Fisheries committee  That is a somewhat difficult question to answer. There are $1.1 billion in goods landed in the Maritimes and the Gulf as a whole. There are also $300 million in goods that come from aquaculture. The amount of revenue, including the contribution from processing plants and local employment, is not something I have at my fingertips, but the contribution to communities where we have facilities is quite significant.

Fisheries committee  Going way back when, we created our first harbour authorities 20 years ago. Most of our harbour authorities were formed in the early nineties, after the freeze was lifted. It was a long process, and decisions weren't made overnight. It's a matter of consulting with the community, not just once but on many occasions, to look at harbours within the broader area, to look at the fishing activity, and to try to determine what is best, not from a government standpoint but from a community standpoint, insofar as where there are concentrated activities and how we can best support the critical needs of the fishery with the infrastructure available.

Fisheries committee  As to the difference between the portfolio and the core, some of the 30 or 40-odd sites are actually being de-scheduled. There is no infrastructure there, so it's an administrative process and it's just a matter of getting them off the books. For some of them, it's just a matter of taking out the dead infrastructure.

Fisheries committee  I believe the $400 million you refer to comes from the long-term list of projects that would very well take into account the dredging requirement. Whether they added requirements to accommodate an expanded client base, I can't really speak to, because I wasn't part of coming up with those numbers.

Fisheries committee  HR is a challenge. I think insofar as our project delivery, we look at tapping into a mix of resources. In the Maritimes, we don't have an engineering base as the Pacific does. But we do have a strong relationship with Public Works in that we depend on their marine engineering expertise.

Fisheries committee  The numbers a couple of years ago suggested it was about $4.5 million to $5 million. I think what we have to take into account with the fee structures established by harbour authorities is that we encourage them to charge market fees. I guess not all opportunities are equal from one location to the next, insofar as some of our harbours have processing plants or subleases from which they can pick up more money, versus other harbour authorities who might be more dependent on berthage, versus other harbour authorities who might have a restaurant business on their upland.

Fisheries committee  As James said, it was something that was considered a few years back. I think the concept behind special operating agencies is to give more flexibility and authority in operations in general, but at the time, it was viewed as not being opportune for small craft harbours; therefore, it was just parked.

Fisheries committee  The small craft harbours program does have breakwaters within its inventory. Therefore, if the breakwater is instrumental in protecting and providing shelter to our harbour, that is part of our long-term planning process, and we will be spending money, as priorities are determined, to repair and develop as needed.

Fisheries committee  If it's within the harbour and it is deemed to be a requirement as part of the long-term plan for that harbour, yes.

Fisheries committee  Transport Canada does not play a role. They have breakwaters that they use for their own purposes, but when we determine the requirement for breakwaters within the harbour, that's determined by the engineers, in consultation oftentimes with the harbour authorities, with the community, and with Public Works and other experts in that area.