FOPO Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Thursday, January 30, 2003

The Chair (Mr. Tom Wappel (Scarborough Southwest, Lib.))

Mr. John Cummins (Delta—South Richmond, Canadian Alliance)

The Chair

Mr. John Cummins

Mr. Alan Nixon (Committee Researcher)

Mr. John Cummins

The Chair

Mr. John Cummins

The Chair

Mr. John Cummins

The Chair

The Chair

Mr. John Cummins

Mr. Alan Nixon

The Chair

Mr. John Cummins

The Chair

Mr. Loyola Hearn (St. John's West, PC)

The Chair

Mr. Loyola Hearn

The Chair

Mr. Loyola Hearn

The Chair

The Chair

CANADA

EVIDENCE

Thursday, January 30, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1130)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mr. Tom Wappel (Scarborough Southwest, Lib.)): I'll call the meeting to order.

    Before we go in camera to consider the two issues on the agenda, I'd like to very briefly discuss and put to the meeting the first report of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans.

    You have the report in your package. In nine short paragraphs, it sets out what the steering committee hopes to be able to accomplish within the next year.

    Mr. John Cummins (Delta—South Richmond, Canadian Alliance): I'd like to raise a question on that. With reference to the second point, we have these representatives from the B.C. fishing industry appearing before us, but the committee still has outstanding the report that we intended to do on the management of the Fraser fishery in 2001, on which we conducted hearings. We've never finished our Fraser report, so that Fraser report is still outstanding from basically a year and a half ago.

    The Chair: I was there, but I can't remember what the previous chair's idea was. Do we have any corporate memory here ? Were any letters written? What was the previous chair's idea in terms of—

    Mr. John Cummins: We actually started a report. We had a meeting on it. I remember that some of it has been written and some of it has been discussed.

    Mr. Alan Nixon (Committee Researcher): I don't believe it has been discussed at committee. It was discussed at a meeting with you and Mr. Easter. I think Brian Derrah was present, and Mike O'Neill was present as well.

    I have prepared some material for this, but it's certainly not in the final stage of preparations or draft. I think we had agreed, before December, that information from the 2002 season should probably be included before that report was completed, if my memory serves correctly.

    Mr. John Cummins: Yes, that's my understanding. It should be given some priority, though, because the issues we were concerned about in 2001 essentially came home to roost in 2002. As you'll hear when these witnesses come before us, there was a return of over 15 million sockeye to the Fraser River this past year, yet the commercial harvest was only about 2 million. The department shut the fishery down for the same reason it did so in 2001. The committee heard testimony in the spring of 2001, though, that advised against that department's management plan.

    I think it's critical that we complete this report, and I think it should be done soon.

    The Chair: John, do you think we will require further witnesses in order to complete that report, other than the witnesses who are coming on February 4?

    Mr. John Cummins: It would be helpful. Because of the failure of the department to adequately manage the fishery last year in British Columbia, estimates are that it probably cost the economy of British Columbia in the neighbourhood of $200 million to $250 million. It was a huge loss. Probably close to 7 million fish could have been caught, should have been caught, and weren't caught.

    The Chair: We'd obviously have to have members of DFO in to explain what they did, why they did it, and things like that.

    What do you want to add here? Do you want to add that the committee complete its—

    Mr. John Cummins: I'd like to add that the committee should complete its report on the management of the Fraser River fishery in 2001 and 2002.

Á  (1135)  

    The Chair: All right, let's do that.

    You've heard the suggestion. Is there any discussion? No? Then are we all agreed?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: So done.

    Mr. John Cummins: To that end, I think it would be helpful for the committee if Mr. Nixon were to contact DFO to ask for their catch statistics and that sort of thing, along with some of the relevant documentation for this.

    Mr. Alan Nixon: That's an important point, but I just want to mention that I did that for the 2001 season. One of the difficulties, though, is that the catch information from DFO is quite inconsistent, depending on where you access it.

    If Mr. Cummins has any suggestions as to how we can ensure accurate and consistent data from DFO—

    The Chair: Why don't we just ask for what we can ask for, take a look at it, and see if we find it inconsistent or lacking or whatever? We can then call some officials.

    Mr. John Cummins: What you may want to do is go to the Pacific Salmon Commission and ask them, because the numbers and whatnot that they use would be acceptable to both the Canadian and American sides. They're probably the best numbers, unless....

    The Chair: We'll definitely do that. We'll try to fit it in.

    Is there any other discussion on any of the other items on the first report, or are we all agreed?

    Mr. Hearn.

    Mr. Loyola Hearn (St. John's West, PC): Just on the last one, it says that the committee will undertake a study into issues related to the Atlantic fishery. Have we drawn any parameters there, or is it just to have a basic look at the industry or that type of thing?

    The Chair: As I remember, we wanted it to be broader rather than narrower, because we wanted to discuss the issue that was brought up by those witnesses who came at the last minute.

    Mr. Loyola Hearn: The licence end and the—

    The Chair: Licensing and all of those sorts of things, yes, and we also wanted to possibly get into seals. I therefore think it should be broader rather than narrower. We can always narrow it later.

    Mr. Loyola Hearn: I agree wholeheartedly. It should be big-issue broad.

    The Chair: Big-issue broad, yes. Exactly.

    All right, then. Are we all agreed?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: That's the agenda, then. Thank you.

    [Proceedings continue in camera]