FOPO Committee Report

The Committee is charting a course for
federal intervention in an area under Quebec’s jurisdiction

Dissenting opinion by the Bloc Québécois
to the report on the federal role in aquaculture

The state of affairs in Quebec

The Bloc Québécois is in favour of an aquaculture industry that is in good financial and environmental health. It appears that the efforts made by the Government of Quebec over the past twenty years have produced results. We are underscoring these results and successes in order to develop this industry that is based both on the emergence of an industrial sector that is capable of delivering high-quality products and on the use of technology to support sport and commercial fishing.

Under Quebec’s Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy, aquaculture is one of Quebec’s preferred routes to reaching the goal of increasing the available aquatic biomass. It will also further the implementation of the resource areas economic development strategy.

Fishing production has increased from 300 tonnes in 1980 to more than
2,000 tonnes in 1999. Maricultural production, for its part, has grown steadily, from less than 100 tonnes in 1996 to 500 tonnes in 2001.

In 2002, Quebec's Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation (MAPAQ) put forward an Act on Commercial Aquaculture providing a framework for aquacultural development and promoting orderly growth in aquaculture in the government’s water resources, as well as ensuring that these activities are carried out in a manner that respects the health and safety of the public, the environment and wildlife.

All these past and future actions and initiatives should not be diminished by federal government interventionism. The Bloc Québécois is presenting this dissenting opinion because the majority on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans are wanting to move in this direction.

We would like to take this opportunity to thank and to congratulate all those who, by giving evidence and making other contributions, provided the input that was essential to the development of this report.

On the right track

Apart from the recommendations aimed at enacting federal legislation on aquaculture (recommendations 1 and 2) and those flowing from the application of the Oceans Act (recommendation 10), the report contains a number of worthwhile suggestions. The research projects considered are worthwhile and relevant because the federal government has a certain amount of responsibility for funding research and development. In providing such funding, however, the federal government may not impose its views and conclusions but may simply make suggestions to industry and to the national government of Quebec and Canadian provinces.

Recommendation 5 on the introduction of a system of environmental standards by the aquaculture industry is appropriate. Through environmental standards, the federal government is promoting excellence and improvement.

The recommendation on the use of drugs, antibiotics and pesticides (recommendation 22) is justified, but Quebec has already done the necessary work in this regard by banning the over-the-counter sale of antibiotics for animal use. The management of drugs, pesticides and antibiotics must be under Quebec’s jurisdiction.

The Bloc Québécois takes a positive view of the recommendations for actions designed to promote greater environmental protection and better management by industry.

We also favour diversified production in order to avoid the traps and constraints inherent in a more traditional and species-limited fishery.

Recommendation 8 regarding the periodic review of administrative agreements is acceptable and valuable, and recommendation 9 on the mandates of the Office of the Commissioner for Aquaculture Development and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is equally acceptable.

Jurisdictional boundaries

The recommendation (recommendation 1) on the enactment of federal legislation on aquaculture is a major shortcoming because it is pointless, highly interventionist and presumptuous, and gives rise to a wide range of actions that are in conflict with what is occurring in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada.

Obviously, such legislation is superfluous and will only duplicate Quebec’s efforts. Legally, the Civil Code already guarantees ownership of mariculture leases and harvests and provides protection for producers.

In terms of jurisdiction, Quebec safeguards the rights and obligations of fish farm operators by the issuing permits and through legislation. Taken as a whole, the recommendation shows a centralizing viewpoint and leaves little room for adaptation.

Recommendation 2 reveals a desire to standardize and control an industry which is already, particularly in Quebec, subject to standards. This will ultimately generate more confusion and confrontation.

Recommendation 3 cannot be implemented without first recognizing Quebec’s predominance. The federal government cannot claim to have any jurisdiction whatsoever in connection with environmental audits in Quebec. The Bloc Québécois does not recognize federal environmental legislation, in particular the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, on Quebec’s territory.

The intention underlying recommendation 4 only intensifies what we would call an excessively centralizing viewpoint. Quebec’s legislation (the Act Respecting the Conservation and Development of Wildlife, the Environment Quality Act, the legislation on agricultural products, seafood products and food, and the Commercial Fisheries and Aquaculture Act) already provides a framework for the required penalties.

Recommendations 6 and 7 are not acceptable because Quebec disputes the part of the Fisheries Act relating to fish habitat and does not recognize the Canadian Environmental Protection Act as Quebec has its own Environmental Quality Act, enforced by the Ministry of the Environment.

Furthermore, Quebec disputes section 35 of the Fisheries Act where the Department of Fisheries and Oceans states that it has jurisdiction over the protection of fish and their habitat; the Quebec Government is of the view that its Ministry of the Environment has authority in this area.

This, however, provides an opportunity for us to add that the federal government should agree to re-examine issues of shared jurisdiction with Quebec.

Recommendation 10 is not acceptable, as Quebec is opposed to the Oceans Act because of its territorial claims in the St. Lawrence River and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Integrated management is thus ruled out and the National Water Policy can compensate for this lack of management.

On the other hand, the objectives relating to promoting the integration of aquaculture into the coastal communities, local decision-making, aquaculture’s impact on local populations and its ordered development are avenues for action that we welcome.

Recommendation 13 stands to benefit from a federal government that provides the necessary funds to existing organizations.

Conclusion

In this dissenting opinion, the Bloc Québécois would like to show, for the nth time, its desire to defend Quebec’s interests. The difficulties inherent in a young industry, greed and disregard for the principles of sustainable development should not be used as pretexts for invading an area of jurisdiction that is exclusively Quebec’s.

Aquaculture development would be better served by federal support for research and development activities in co-operation with Quebec, the provinces and the territories. The confrontational approach taken in this report, involving as it does Quebec’s subordination to federal rules and regulations and their standardization from coast to coast, is harmful to the enormous potential that aquaculture has in Canada and Quebec.

The Bloc Québécois feels that aquaculture in Quebec can become, as agriculture has, a source of food and a source of economic development that is respectful of what nature and human beings can achieve together for their greater well-being, both now and in the future.

Jean-Yves Roy

Matapédia-Matane

Bloc Québécois Fisheries critic