Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries
Issue 1 - Evidence, October 29, 2002
OTTAWA, Tuesday, October 29, 2002
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries met this day at 6 p.m., pursuant to rule 88 of the Rules of the Senate, to organize the activities of the committee.
Mr. Richard Maurel, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, good evening. I see that we have a quorum. Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Richard Maurel. I will be the clerk of your committee, and pursuant to rule 88 of the Senate it is now my duty to preside over the election of your chair. I am now ready to receive a nomination to that effect.
Senator Watt: I move that the Honourable Senator Comeau be the Chair of the Committee.
Mr. Maurel: Are there other motions?
Hon. Senators: No.
The Clerk: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Watt that the Honourable Senator Comeau take the chair of this committee. Is it agreed, honourable senators?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Gerald J. Comeau (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: I appreciate the confidence that you have placed in me. I hope I will not disappoint you. I am quite sure that if I do, you will tell me.
I will now entertain a motion for a deputy chair.
Senator Cochrane: I move that Senator Cook be the Deputy Chair of the Fisheries Committee.
The Chairman: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Cochrane that the Honourable Senator Cook be the deputy chair of this committee. Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I will go through a number of motions that deal with the establishment of the committee. Most of them are fairly standard. I am quite sure you will have gone through a number of them before. If you bear with me, we will go through each and every one of them.
Item 3 is the creation of a steering committee. I would ask for a mo
tion as follows:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be created and composed of the Chair and Deputy Chair and one other member of this committee to be designated later.
I would be prepared to accept a motion that the other member be designated tonight and I believe Senator Cook has a suggestion in that regard.
Senator Cook: It would be my recommendation to continue as we were and have Senator Watt from Nunavik as the other member.
The Chairman: We will readjust the motion by saying that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed of the chair, the deputy chair and Senator Watt.
Senator Phalen: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item is the role of the steering committee, I will entertain a motion to the effect that, on behalf of this committee, the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure is to determine the agenda of this committee, invite witnesses before this committee and schedule hearings of this committee.
Senator Watt: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item deals with the staff of the committee. I would ask for a motion that the committee ask that the Library of Parliament Research Branch assign Claude Emery to be research analyst of this committee. Generally, committees do not ask for a specific researcher but in this case, we wanted to be specific that it be Claude Emery, so I hope the committee is in agreement.
Senator Mahovlich: I so move.
The Chairman: All in agreement?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Mr. Emery, you have been called to the table.
Item No. 6 is that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to negotiate the contracts and retain the services of such companies or experts as is required by the work of this committee.
Senator Phalen: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Item No. 7 relates to clerical, legal and technical staff. It is as follows:
That the Chair be authorized to seek authority from the Senate to hire such counsel, technical, clerical and other personnel as may be necessary for this committee's study of bills, subject-matters of bills and estimates referred to this committee.
Senator Mahovlich: So moved.
The Chairman: All in agreement?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Do not be afraid to stop me at any time if you have any questions.
The Chairman: The next item is a direction that, on behalf of this committee, the chair direct its research staff in the preparation of analyses, draft reports, studies, summaries and other documents.
Senator Watt: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item deals with the schedule of our meetings. I require a motion that, until another option is agreed upon by this committee and approved by both whips, this committee meet on Tuesdays at 7 p.m. in room 505 of the Victoria Building. I am quite sure there will be a question on this item. The reason the motion is worded in this way is that some other ideas have been put forward that we can consider later. In the meantime, we have a slot for our meetings until such time as we decide on a better one.
Senator Mahovlich: What is a better slot? Is it 5 p.m.?
The Chairman: We will discuss that later. This is something we revisit towards the end of the meeting. We have some ideas. In the meantime, this motion will see to it that we have a meeting slot. This is only for the next while.
Senator Phalen: For the information of the chair, I raised this issue at the Transport Committee meeting today. They are scheduled to sit on Wednesdays at 6:15 p.m.
The Chairman: We have prepared a document which we should try to wade through.
Senator Cochrane: Transport sits at 6:15 p.m. on Wednesdays.
Senator Phalen: There was no conflict with the sittings of this committee last year. They moved the time back to 5 p.m. They are looking at the issue again.
The Chairman: We will be coming back to that later this evening. In the meantime, we will have this as a definite time slot for the time being, if that is agreeable.
Senator Cook: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Item No. 10 deals with a quorum. The motion is worded as follows:
That, pursuant to rule 89, the Chair be authorized to hold hearings or receive evidence and to have it printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least one member of this committee from each of the government and the opposition be present.
Senator Adams: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Cochrane: How many members are required for a quorum?
The Chairman: Four for a quorum.
The next item deals with printing of the committee's proceedings. My recollection is that we currently print 70. It is a low number. I recommend that we leave it as such until we start running into problems. We deliberately set it low. The information is also available now on the Internet.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item also deals with printing and the number of copies. It reads as follows:
That the Chair be authorized to set from time to time the number of printed copies of the proceedings of this committee as required.
Senator Cochrane: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Item No. 13 deals with expenses. The motion states:
That, pursuant to rule 104, the Chair be authorized to report on the expenses incurred by this committee during the previous session of Parliament.
Senator Watt: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: You have the report. Do we want to look at the report now or at the end of the meeting? We will look at it at the end of the meeting, if that is agreeable.
Item No. 14 deals with a motion that there be one witness per organization only. It states that:
That, pursuant to rule 102 and the Senate guidelines for witnesses' expenses, this committee have the authority and discretion to reimburse reasonable travelling and living expenses for one witness from any one organization, with payment to take place following a formal claim by the witness.
I want to be absolutely sure on this one.
Senator Phalen: What was the procedure last year?
The Chairman: Exactly this, with the provision that we could, using item No. 15 on the agenda, provide for a further witness. We had deliberately set the number at one. Some committees have allowed for two witnesses.
Senator Watt: Could we not say that we would cover one person's expenses and that the other person would be on his or her own?
The Chairman: Absolutely. That stands to reason, because that would be automatic. They could bring more than one person, if they wished to pay the expenses themselves.
Senator Watt: If we state it in here, then it is absolutely clear; otherwise you run into administrative problems.
The Chairman: Would we run into problems?
Senator Cochrane: The guidelines are for the witnesses. We can bring one witness and, if we need to, we have permission to bring in a second witness.
As for witnesses coming, that has nothing to do with the expenses. That will be the administration's expense. If they want to bring in two or three witnesses, we could work it into our schedule. It has no bearing on what we are trying to do here.
The Chairman: We have never had any problems with this.
Senator Phalen: There were instances where we had two witnesses.
The Chairman: Yes. We have never had any problems with it. The passage of motion No. 15 will give us a little bit more flexibility. If a certain organization could not afford to pay the expenses of its representatives, and we wished to hear from a second witness from that association or organization, it would give us some flexibility. In the meantime, the guideline is straightforward — we pay the expenses of one witness, no more.
Senator Watt: If others get to hear about this, they will be asking for two or more witnesses to appear all the time.
Senator Adams: Can an organization send more than one representative?
The Chairman: Yes, but we will not pay for additional witnesses. We will pay for one.
Senator Watt: There is still the possibility you might end up paying for two.
The Chairman: There is the possibility, yes.
Senator Watt: That is why I prefer it to be clear-cut.
Senator Mahovlich: You must leave your options open.
Senator Cochrane: The option is open. We pay for one. The fact that some organization might want to bring multiple people has no bearing on the budget, which is what we are trying to do here.
The Chairman: We are being quite prudent. This is one of the few committees that does limit it to one. With most of the other committees it is more open. Last year we deliberately did limit it to one.
Senator Watt: Will we be in a state of flux if if we do not make it clear-cut right off the bat?
The Chairman: We have not had any problem with it yet.
Senator Watt: I have in other committees.
The Chairman: This one is fairly straightforward. It would only be under extraordinary circumstances that we would invite a second witness.
Senator Watt: You are the boss.
Senator Cochrane: If we set the bar at only one witness, and we need three at some point, we could argue for three. I do not foresee any problem.
Senator Watt: Then we would have to make that request of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.
The Chairman: Motion 14 is agreed to.
Item No. 15, which deals with a supplemental witness, is worded as follows:
That, pursuant to the Senate guidelines for witnesses' expenses, and if exceptional circumstances warrant it, the Chair have the discretion to approve the reimbursement of reasonable travelling and living expenses for a second witness from a given organization.
Following up on what Senator Cook has just suggested, would we have to reword it by saying ``and living expenses for `additional' witnesses'' rather than a ``second'' witness?
Senator Cook: I have no problem with the additional witnesses, but I think it would be better to stick with what we have now.
The Chairman: Shall we stick with what we have now, that is, include a second witness?
Senator Cook: Yes. Then it will be clear. Nothing is left open to interpretation.
Senator Adams: Under this motion, how many witnesses from, say, Nunavut would be reimbursed for travelling and living expenses?
The Chairman: Two in total. One witness is allowed, plus an additional witness, if we pass the motion under item No. 15.
Senator Cook: We can negotiate with Internal Economy with respect to any additional witnesses.
The Chairman: If we want to reimburse additional witnesses, we will have to ask for permission to do that.
Senator Cook: Other committees will watch you in the Senate and they will not allow us to put in an indefinite number.
Senator Adams: I want to make sure of the situation. Airfares from locations in the North tend to be quite different from those charged in the southern parts of the country.
The Chairman: That would be covered, yes.
Senator Adams: An airfare to and from Nunavut can be as high as $3,000.
Senator Cook: Airfares are included.
The Chairman: It will allow for reasonable travelling and living expenses. Are you requesting a number higher than two witnesses?
Senator Adams: If we want to bring in someone from Winnipeg, there is no problem, but if you want to bring someone from Resolute Bay to Ottawa, it costs a lot of money. It would cost $5,000 return. Internal Economy may suggest that we not bring in witnesses from areas such as that.
The Chairman: No, they cannot refuse.
Senator Cook: Item No. 15 specifies that the chair has the discretion to bring in the second witness, not Internal Economy.
The Chairman: A ruling from the Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration Committee dated February 28, 1996, states that committees may reimburse expenses for no more than two witnesses from any one organization and payment will take place upon application. We are following the rules.
We are actually being more stringent than the rules allow. We are saying one witness, with the possibility of an additional one; but no more than two.
Senator Adams: I would move that motion.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item is the authority to commit funds.
Senator Phalen: I move:
That, pursuant to section 32 of the Financial Administration Act, the authority to commit the funds of this Committee be conferred individually on the Chair, the Deputy Chair and the Clerk of this Committee.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Now we turn to certification. The motion is worded as follows:
That, pursuant to section 34 of the Financial Administration Act and Guideline 3:05 of Appendix II of the Rules of the Senate, the authority to certify the accounts payable by the Committee be conferred individually on the Chair, the Deputy Chair and the Clerk of this Committee.
Senator Cochrane: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Honourable Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Under the heading, ``Miscellaneous,'' the first item deals with television coverage and broadcasting.
Senator Baker: Mr. Chairman, I move:
That the Chair be authorized to seek the permission from the Senate to have the public proceedings of this committee, at its discretion, televised with the least possible disruption of its hearings.
Senator Adams: Mr. Chairman, I would just make the comment that I feel that there are times when members will not speak openly if the proceedings are being televised, and sometimes matters are not resolved. Are we talking only about televising witnesses from outside of Canada, or are we talking about televising only Canadian witnesses?
The Chairman: This motion deals strictly with televising the proceedings of this committee. We are not talking about video conferencing here. This is CPAC.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Adams: Do we request that the proceedings be televised?
The Chairman: The way we have handled it up to now is we have suggested televising our proceedings on certain evenings when we believe the testimony will be very interesting. Let us say we have the minister or some high-profile witness, on those occasions, we will advise CPAC and suggest that it might be a good occasion for them to come in.
Senator Adams: Do we have a limit?
The Chairman: No, there is no limit. They can be in every night if they wish, but they will not do that. It depends on the subject matter, of course, and the witnesses themselves.
Last year they came in about four or five times, and it seemed to work out fairly well.
Senator Adams: It may be a good idea to have television coverage when witnesses from Nunavut or Nunavik are here because I think the Canadian public does not understand what is happening up there.
The Chairman: On the occasion that the Fisheries Minister from Nunavut appeared before us we did get some good feedback. That meeting was televised.
Senator Cook: We also heard from Allan Gordon from Nunavik.
The Chairman: That meeting was not televised, but I wish it had been, because he gave terrific testimony.
Senator Mahovlich: So moved.
The Chairman: All in agreement?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item deals with persons authorized to travel.
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure have the power to designate, as required, one or more members of this committee and/or staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of this committee.
Senator Watt: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item deals with the determination of official business.
That, for the purposes of paragraph 8(3)(a) of the Senators Attendance Policy published by the Journals of the Senate on Wednesday, June 3, 1998, the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to consider a member of this Committee to be on official business if the member is: (a) attending a function, event or meeting related to the work of this Committee; or (b) making a presentation related to the work of this Committee.
This is something that started last year. When we last held an inaugural meeting, that was the first time it was done, and it seemed to work out well. The rules will not allow us to send people off using the excuse that they were attending business on behalf of the committee. This committee must authorize it. It does give, for example, the working group of this committee or one individual the value of representing this committee at a meeting somewhere.
Senator Mahovlich: Last year, someone from Caledon made a presentation before our committee, and I was invited to take a look at their operation. I do not know where we stand on that right now. Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, you could send me there if the committee does not want to go. I am sure that other members would appreciate that.
The Chairman: Yes.
Senator Mahovlich: It is a gravel pit.
The Chairman: This could be a steering committee item.
Senator Cook: Present a budget.
Senator Mahovlich: Will you get back to me on that?
The Chairman: Yes, it is on our agenda.
Senator Mahovlich: If others want to go, they would be welcome.
The Chairman: It is a complicated subject.
Senator Cochrane: In a case like that, to whom would the submission be made?
The Chairman: Submit it to the chair prior to the engagement, not after. The chair will take it to the steering committee, and we will then, as a steering committee, authorize. If any member wishes to use utilize this rule, please submit the details before departure.
Senator Cochrane: I would move that motion.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The distribution of documents is the next item.
That documents to be distributed to the members and staff of this committee be distributed via electronic mail whenever possible.
Senator Cochrane: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The next item relates to the name of the committee. We tried this last year, and we will try again. The motion is as follows:
That the Chair be authorized to seek an amendment to rule 86(1)(o) to have the name of this committee changed to the ``Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans.''
If someone moves the motion, we can have a discussion.
Senator Watt: I will move it. I have an issue to raise.
The Chairman: The question was raised last year as to whether we wished to call this committee the Standing Senate Committee on Oceans and Fisheries as opposed to the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, in order to distinguish it from the Commons committee.
Senator Watt: What do they call it in the Commons?
The Chairman: They call it the Standing Commons Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. Initially we had requested that it be called Oceans and Fisheries in order to distinguish it, but it did cause a few difficulties when it hit the Rules Committee. In order to grease the wheels, so to speak, to make it go smoother, we may have to go with the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans.
Senator Cook: That is fine with me. The world knows ``Fisheries and Oceans.'' If we call it, ``Oceans and Fisheries,'' that would be reversing the name.
The Chairman: So moved by Senator Baker.
Senator Baker: Is it ``Fisheries and Oceans'' or ``Oceans and Fisheries'' in French?
The Chairman: ``Fisheries'' will be first in both English and French, except they do not say ``fisheries'' in French, they say ``fishery.''
Senator Cook: Mr. Chair and members, could I beg your indulgence? I have an engagement for dinner with Senator Kirby and the Social Affairs Committee that started five minutes ago. I would think that that is where Senator Robertson is.
The Chairman: Have we agreed on this one?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Watt: I am not sure whether ability to set a subcommittee can be covered under ``Determination of `official business'''.
The Chairman: That would be under ``Future Business of the Committee.''
Senator Watt: Even if it involves an additional expense? It is not in here.
The Chairman: We deal with it it under future business in camera.
Senator Watt: Is that what we normally do?
The Chairman: Yes.
Senator Cook, we wanted to know if it would be possible for you and Senator Watt and I to meet this week sometime to discuss future business.
Senator Cook: Just set the time. I do not think the Social Affairs Committee is meeting this week.
Senator Watt: We can have a meeting on Thursday.
The Chairman: Yes, in the early afternoon. If you have any ideas that you wish the committee to consider, please get those to us by Thursday at two o'clock. We will thrash it out at the steering committee and then bring back recommendations to the full committee, at which point decisions will be made. The steering committee does not make decisions as to future business; those are made by this committee. We only make recommendations to this full committee.
Unless the clerk has something urgent, that is all I have.
Senator Cook, we do not have a mandate yet. The committee will meet this week, and that is the best we can do. We have left a copy of our schedule of meetings for each of you. Please look over it and provide us with your suggestions. In the meantime, we will meet at 7 p.m. next week. We do have a time slot. When you have had a chance to look at this, please provide your suggestions to myself, to Senator Cook or to Senator Watt. We may want to get a better time slot for our committee meetings.
Senator Cook: This is a process of elimination. We lose members if we meet at a time other than 7 p.m. By process of elimination, the time will be 7 p.m. on Tuesdays. If not, members will be unable to be present.
The Chairman: Unless someone drops a committee.
Senator Cook: We tried that last year, and we only came to grief.
The Chairman: Let us not run the document off just yet. If we do wish to try to adjust it somehow, at least we will know where everyone sits. We do not need to make a decision tonight.
Senator Watt: I have a conflict with the Energy Committee and the Fisheries Committee on Tuesdays.
Senator Cook: We do not meet until 7 p.m.
The Chairman: That was what we decided last year. Actually, on Tuesdays, our slot is when the Senate rises, so there will be an automatic conflict. The Senate usually rises around 6:15 or 6:30, so there would be a direct conflict.
Senator Phalen: Did you meet at seven o'clock last year?
The Chairman: We met at seven o'clock last year and the year before. For the time being, we will meet at 7 p.m. on Tuesdays, unless we can come up with something better.
Senator Watt: Why do we not leave it at 7 p.m.?
The Chairman: If there is nothing else, the meeting is adjourned.
The committee adjourned.