HALIFAX, TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2014

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

 

3:40 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Patricia Arab

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'd like to call the committee to order. This is the Subcommittee of the Whole on Supply and today we will be looking at Resolution E10.

 

Resolution E10 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $9,622,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, pursuant to the Estimate, and the business plan of the Nova Scotia Fisheries and Aquaculture Loan Board be approved.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Colwell we'll begin with your opening statement.

 

HON. KEITH COLWELL: Thank you, Madam Chairman and greetings to my colleagues around the table this afternoon. I'm sure we're going to have an interesting discussion today and I look forward to it. With me today is my staff, Mr. Weldon Myers, on my left, Director of Finance, Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, Barry MacPhee who should be here on my right, he'll be back just momentarily, Acting Executive Director for Fisheries and Aquaculture. Associate Deputy Minister Kim MacNeil is also with us today, as well as a number of our directors who should be able answer most of the questions that come forward today.

 

It's an honour to appear again as Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture; as some of you may recall I was Fisheries Minister back in 1998 and am pleased to have another opportunity to work in this portfolio. I see great opportunities to grow the fisheries of Nova Scotia and to renew and revise the great sector of our economy

 

Granted, we have many challenges to face. As my colleague, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, noted last week, we face significant economic and fiscal challenges. Our population is shrinking and our population is aging and our economic growth is very limited.

 

The facts say what Nova Scotians already know - the status quo isn't working. We cannot continue on this path, but there are some positive opportunities over the horizon - we have a steep hill to climb. Last week's budget prepared the foundation for hard work ahead of us and the challenges that must take place in Nova Scotia. We must make strategic investments in our future. The private sector drives economic growth - government has to clear the way and create an environment that sets a stage for business to invest, produce, compete and grow. Amongst all those, the industry has to be profitable.

 

That is the work of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture. It is important work because fisheries and aquaculture is the backbone of the rural communities along our coastline. The seafood industry contributes significantly to Nova Scotia's economy.

 

Aquaculture in Nova Scotia includes both land-based and water-based facilities, producing aquatic plants and animals. Aquaculture is a small but growing industry. Salmon accounts for 76 per cent of the total industry value. Other major species include rainbow trout, mussels, scallops, oysters and marine plants.

 

In 2012, the value for the Nova Scotia aquaculture industry was $52.2 million - up from $43.3 million in 2011. The industry directly employs 639 full-time and part-time workers in 2012.

 

New Brunswick, however, and Newfoundland and Labrador who 15 years ago were slightly ahead of Nova Scotia now have grown substantially while Nova Scotia has basically stood still. Nova Scotia's industry is worth $191 million annually while Newfoundland and Labrador's is worth $113 million per year. That's a lot of employment and growth opportunities that both provinces have enjoyed.

 

Nova Scotia's harvesters landed 233,655 metric tonnes of commercial fish in 2012 with a landed value of $732 million - a terrific impact on rural Nova Scotia. Lobster in Nova Scotia tops the fishery with a landed value of $385 million in 2012 accounted for 50 per cent of the landed value. Scallops were at $102 million; crab was at $92 million; and shrimp was at $52 million. These are the most valuable species we have. In 2010, there were 4,300 commercial fishing vessels, and 21,476 fishing licences issued.

 

Sport fishing in the province continues to grow. In 2010, anglers made purchases and investments valued at $56 million in Nova Scotia. There were 57,756 adult anglers and at least 14,500 youth for a total of over 72,000 active anglers. This represents a significant increase of 23 per cent since 2005.

 

In 2010 the contribution to the Nova Scotian economy from the fishing and aquaculture industries measured by gross domestic product was approximately $367 million or 1.1 per cent of the provincial economy. Together with seafood processing, the gross domestic product totalled $536 million in 2010 or 1.6 per cent of the provincial economy.

 

The Nova Scotia fish and seafood industry is primarily export driven with exports totalling $1.07 billion in 2013. Fish and seafood in Nova Scotia is the largest export commodity group. Lobster was the largest fish export in 2013 with $453 million. Crab was the next with exports of $141 million, followed by scallops at $132 million.

 

The United States is the largest market for Nova Scotia fish and seafood products, accounting for 58 per cent of exports valued in 2013. The top exports to the U.S. in 2013 were lobsters, crab, and scallops. The second largest export destination is the European Union, which accounted for 15 per cent, or $160 million, of total fish and scallop exports in 2013. The top exports to the EU in 2013 were, again, lobster, shrimp and scallops. Clearly a Canadian-European trade agreement could help open the doors for more meaningful access to the markets and will allow our companies to compete on a level playing field.

 

Now I would like to tell you how we are improving upon these results in some of the areas we'll be working on in the coming months. In the nearly six months we've been in power we have achieved a lot in the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture. One of the important items we have launched is work to develop a commercial fishing strategy to ensure that the fishing industry is sustainable, creates jobs and helps grow the economy and wealth in rural Nova Scotia.

 

The strategy which I announced in February consists of six pillars: industry organization; quality; safety in training; efficiency; market development; and innovation. My department is working with harvesters, industry organizations and Aboriginal communities to develop the strategy. Quality and innovation are needed in the fishing industry to drive up exports and grow the sector. The commercial fishing strategy will ensure this happens.

 

Incidentally, I announced development of the strategy at the annual Fisheries Ministers' Conference, a conference I initiated in 1998, the first time I was Fisheries Minister. I might add that this conference was the first time in history that the federal minister actually attended and spoke in support of the work we are doing and outlined the priorities for the federal government. This is a new era we have with co-operation with the federal government, which we will continue to grow upon which is so critical to grow our industry.

 

I want to talk a little bit about our aquaculture regulatory framework. As I noted earlier, aquaculture is a valued contributor to our rural economy and has been so for more than three decades. Nova Scotia supports both land-based and marine-based aquaculture. We are a leader in land-based aquaculture with 24 active land-based operations. As part of the action plan outlined in 2012 in the Aquaculture Strategy, work continues to develop a new regulatory framework to guide the industry into the future.

 

Last May the government began this effort to consult with Nova Scotians on the way forward by appointing Dalhousie University law professors Meinhard Doelle and William Lahey to lead the effort. These two gentlemen, with assistance from an advisory committee, and a scientific advisory committee, are considering the full range of impacts, benefits and risks that need to be addressed through regulations. At the end of their work they will put forward recommendations to help ensure that we come up with world-class aquaculture regulations. We look forward to seeing those recommendations later this year. Having a modern regulatory framework for aquaculture will provide the foundation for responsible growth in this important industry.

 

Little talk has been on quality in the past. I make it a focus in our department to ensure that the processors, harvesters and totally through the value chain have a quality assurance system in place. This has not been discussed in the past in any great detail and it's going to be critical to marketing our products, especially our lobsters at this time and all our products, indeed, to get the highest possible value we can for the product. Highest value to the customer means highest value at the wharf, it's that simple.

 

We're going to initiate programs around quality and drive quality standards in the province to ensure that the Nova Scotia lobsters and the Canadian lobster brand will be the highest valued in the world.

 

Other critical work that's underway in my department in conjunction with the colleagues in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island is to work forward on the recommendations from the Maritime Lobster Panel report. Only a few weeks ago, I and my two Maritime Fisheries colleagues, New Brunswick's Minister Michael Olscamp and Prince Edward Island's Ron MacKinley hosted the Canadian Lobster Recovery Summit in Halifax. Federal Fisheries and Oceans Minister, Honourable Gail Shea, was also in attendance. I was pleased to see her department engaged and active on this file.

 

The summit brought together more than 200 fishermen, processors and industry experts to discuss the four key recommendations of the Lobster Panel. The four key recommendations are: establish an independent Maritime Lobster Market Intelligence Institute; develop a comprehensive generic marketing and promotional campaign; discuss price setting mechanisms; and establish a process for an industry levy.

 

I'm happy to say that the summit was a great success. Fishermen, buyers, shippers and processors all engaged in a levy to support the marketing of Canadian lobster. Summit participants support the mechanism to collect a levy and gave clear direction to the three of us to proceed. I was extremely encouraged by the co-operation and collaboration by industry; we received great feedback on a number of key issues and will follow the industry and move these items forward.

 

We have further discussions with industry and we put the levy in place to ensure that it does the job properly. The levy can be set by regulation and will be set by regulation, but we do need to go to the Legislature and allow the tools for us to collect it. We will work with the Legislature and will have the recommendations in the Fall sitting of the Legislature and in place by the end of 2014. We will work with New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island to ensure that the regulations for collecting the levy are consistent across the Maritimes.

 

The future of the lobster industry is critical. That is why last week's budget announced a $0.25 million this year to promote Nova Scotia lobster nationally and internationally. This interim funding while work continues towards introduction of the lobster levy on provincial harvesters and processors in Nova Scotia and other Maritime Provinces, which would support this marketing and market expansion work in the future.

 

The fishing and aquaculture seafood industry are only part of our heritage. They're also a key part of our economic growth and future. Nova Scotia fisheries supports vibrant rural communities. We will continue to work towards actions to support the sector's creation of more efficient, better quality, more productive and innovative ways to do business.

 

Growth and development of the fishing industry can make a critical contribution to growing our province's economy, which we absolutely have to do. That growth is dependent on industry organization and collaboration - the kind we have seen at the Canadian Lobster Value Recovery Summit in Halifax. Thank you very much and I look forward to your questions.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: We will begin the questioning with Mr. Lohr from the Progressive Conservative caucus.

 

The honourable member for Kings North.

 

MR. JOHN LOHR: Madam Chairman, I would like to thank the minister for his remarks. I wasn't aware that he had been Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture in 1998 so I commend him and realize that this must be a moment to have come back to this portfolio. It must be a great honour for him and I appreciate and recognize that.

 

In your opening remarks, you outlined many bits of information about the state of the fishery and aquaculture at the moment and talked about some of your goals. I just wonder, in light of the Ivany commission how you feel your department's goals line up with that commission's report.

 

MR. COLWELL: That's a very long answer to that question but I'll make it as brief as I possibly can. We feel it aligns perfectly with the Ivany report, most of the fishing industry and processing industry in Nova Scotia and rural Nova Scotia create very valuable jobs in that sector and well paid jobs as well. What we hope to do - and I'll give you an example in the lobster industry and it's not limited to the lobster industry - is improve quality, get Nova Scotia lobster to be known as the best lobster in the world, which we are very close to that now but we have some quality issues that have to be addressed. That will ensure that we get maximum price, instead of getting five or six dollars a pound in an export market; there is no reason we can't demand over $20 pound, it is a gourmet product, it needs to be treated like one, and it shouldn't be treated like a commodity.

 

Those are some of the things we're going to do. We're anxiously awaiting the reply on aquaculture to see where we're going to go in that direction. We've got an unbelievable opportunity to grow that industry quite rapidly but sustainably and environmentally sound so the Ivany report hopefully will line up with that report as well and as we move forward to help create jobs and more economic wealth in the province, which we desperately need in those industries I feel that we are one of the departments, one of the very few departments - except for agriculture, the other department I represent - that really are poised to move the Ivany report recommendations further than anyone else.

 

MR. LOHR: I was interested to hear of your strategy with the six pillars for commercial fishing and what you're working on in aquaculture and I know that you as a former business person would recognize that value of goals and in particular numerical goals. I wonder if your department has set any numerical goals in terms of where you want to see the industry going, concrete goals.

 

MR. COLWELL: We've been working on goals, that's part of our fishing strategy, the strategy we're working on now, we want to set goals. We want to get the report on aquaculture in our hands to see where that is going to take us because that is one area that we can rapidly grow export dollars in the province but we have to do it again at a very sustainable and economically sound and environmentally sound way, so we are anxious to do that.

 

We will have better numbers than that, this year we've gone over the $1 billion mark, when I was Fisheries Minister before, 15 years ago, all the exports in all the provinces combined didn't equal Nova Scotia's exports. The year before this year, in 2013, New Brunswick out-exported us, I give them a lot of credit for doing that, and Newfoundland is a small industry compared to ours but if you look at the $113 million they have in aquaculture and we're at $52 million, almost where we were 15 years ago it shows that we have not progressed.

 

You can see what is happening as the out-migration from rural Nova Scotia where these facilities are and people leaving the province and these beautiful communities are basically shutting down and becoming retirement communities which creates some problems towards economic development as well.

 

We don't have firm goals set yet but that's part of our fishing strategy, overall strategy for the industry and they will be in place when we finish our strategy.

 

MR. LOHR: I noticed you had mentioned the other provinces, how much they have done. So you're saying yes your department will set firm numerical goals for growth for your term, your mandate.

 

MR. COLWELL: Well we're going to set those in with the strategy we're working on now. We will have it probably early July, sometime early July we'll have that in place. There are so many issues to consider because over the years in the industry there are a lot of issues around processing facilities, that adds a lot of value. That's where New Brunswick has really moved ahead on us. There are serious issues around lobster quality which keeps the price down, we can get the quality up, the price up then we can easily move our goals up. There is a lot of issues around aquaculture, a lot of opportunities, a lot of resistance to it, but there's a lot of it that shouldn't be resisted because the old adage that you can't have a mussel farm in your harbour because it pollutes the water - it's just the opposite, if the water is polluted, they won't live and they won't grow.

 

We have to tackle that and work on that. These are long, complicated issues so we really need to have a strategy in place.

 

MR. LOHR: I would like to emphasize that I think, as you know, an industry having numerical goals is very valuable and would encourage you to do so.

 

MR. COLWELL: We have no argument with that whatsoever and they will be set.

 

MR. LOHR: I'd like to start to talk a little about the budget. I noticed that the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture missed the 1 per cent cut to spending. Was the department ordered to reduce spending by 1 per cent?

 

MR. COLWELL: We did cut it by 1 per cent. Actually we took 1 per cent out of our budget but we added in the $0.25 million for marketing that wasn't in the budget before, after that, after we took the things and we added some salary cost in aquaculture that we didn't have in the past. So in effect, we took it out but fortunately, with the industry - it's the largest industry employer in the province - the government saw fit to give us extra funds to move the industry forward. We're the lowest-funded Fisheries Department in eastern Canada.

 

MR. LOHR: You say you took it out, can you show me where you took it out in the budget?

 

MR. COLWELL: They removed $93,000 out of my budget actually - Page 12.3.

 

MR. LOHR: Okay, I guess just to drill down into that, I was under the impression that it was the mandate of your government, or one of your election promises, to reduce spending in each department by 1 per cent but as I see it, we're looking at a 6.4 per cent increase. Did you feel at any moment that that was justified, in terms of how you were running the department, that you failed to keep that commitment?

MR. COLWELL: Yes, definitely yes. If we're going to add value to our products and increase our sales, we had to put money in marketing. That was an election promise as well. It was an election promise for $500,000 this year but I asked to have it cut to half that. The reason is we are not ready to do the marketing yet and in the following years we will increase that marketing but it's essential to do the marketing to get our exports increased in the province.

 

MR. LOHR: I'm not disputing the worthwhile elements of the marketing plan, I'm just curious to know why you didn't find that somewhere else, why you increased spending in this department when the campaign commitment was a 1 per cent reduction.

 

MR. COLWELL: We did the 1 per cent reduction.

 

MR. LOHR: Well that's a 6.4 per cent increase, Mr. Minister.

 

MR. COLWELL: Overall, but when you add in the extra marketing that was also in the platform, we took it out of one area and we had to make investments in other areas to grow the industry. It's that simple.

 

MR. LOHR: So a 1 per cent reduction and the 6.4 per cent actual increase, you missed your mark by over $1.5 million, that would be what . . .

 

MR. COLWELL: No, that's not correct.

 

MR. LOHR: If you had your 1 per cent reduction compared to having it, so I mean that's I guess . . .

 

MR. COLWELL: Okay, we added the $250,000 for lobster marketing and the aquaculture strategy that we're working on was $240,000 in addition and $172,000 were union contract negotiations, so that's where the money was. It totals up - we took out $93,000 out of other areas and that is a $578,000 increase.

 

MR. LOHR: I'm just saying 1 per cent of $9 million would be $900,000, right?

 

MR. COLWELL: No, it would be $93,000.

 

MR. LOHR: One per cent of a $9 million budget . . .

 

MR. COLWELL: Is $93,000. Ten per cent is $900,000. I wouldn't want you at the budget table when I'm trying to get money to help the department grow.

 

MR. LOHR: Okay, let's leave that. Where is the lobster review accounted for in this budget?

 

MR. COLWELL: It is on Page 12.4. It's under the Marine Fisheries and Field Services and we increased the $0.25 million there.

 

MR. LOHR: So going from $3,329,000 to $3,944,000?

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes, that's correct.

 

MR. LOHR: So that's where the money is for the lobster promotion, is that what you're saying?

 

MR. COLWELL: Lobster marketing is in there.

 

MR. LOHR: The lobster marketing is in that line, okay.

 

I just want to go back to your budget. Administration is set to increase by 26.8 per cent, is that right - in your department, from forecast to estimate?

 

MR. COLWELL: Where is that?

 

MR. LOHR: Cost of administration, jumping from $620,000 to $786,000 - from forecast 2013 forecast to 2014-15 estimate, you are showing a 26.8 per cent increase in administration.

 

MR. COLWELL: The estimate was for 2013-14 was just over $1 million and the forecast is $600,000. That was because of transfers and all the changes that transpired with the move. A lot of our staff is gone, a lot of them are transferred to other departments but the estimate to bring the complement up to where it should have been again came in at $700,000-and some. That's why the difference in the thing, it was all around the move that was imposed on the staff. A lot of staff decided not to go.

 

Actually after 15 years I came back to the department and I think I recognized two or three staff actually still working in the department who had been there for years in the department. Most of them went to other departments and it was a real trying time for the staff I can assure you of that.

 

MR. LOHR: Okay, just to digress off my questions but I'm curious about the move. Can you just comment of the effectiveness of that move on the department and your opinion on whether that worked out.

 

MR. COLWELL: We ended up with a very good quality, motivated younger staff from the move. It was devastating for a lot of the senior members that had been there a long time, we lost a lot of corporate knowledge and that was not good. Fortunately some of the corporate knowledge is still available, some of it but not all of it is still available to us in other departments, some people went all over the place.

 

For example we have one marine biologist now working in Aboriginal Affairs that used to be attached to the department. It was quite devastating for the department as the move was done. I don't think it was a bad thing overall but for staff it wasn't positive, existing staff. It meant employment opportunities for new people. We had an estimate that dropped down below because a lot of people were transferred to other departments or people moved on and then we brought the staff up to where it should be now and it's a level that should be around $700,000. That's the reason for the sort of discrepancy in the whole thing.

 

MR. LOHR: Will you be considering moving the department back to Halifax?

 

MR. COLWELL: It's just too expensive to do it, absolutely too expensive. It would mean that we would lose staff again because a lot of the people that were hired in those areas are from those areas and chose to live there. The previous staff had homes in the area, their spouses had jobs, had children in school, all the reasons people don't want to move and we don't want to create that upheaval again. One of the advantages of it is it gives us opportunities in rural areas which are positive and it allows the people to be in areas they can service there but no matter where you are in the province you're not going to be able to service the whole province.

 

It was devastating on the staff when you talk to staff that went through it, lived through it, and some people did move, I'd say a very, very few did move. The office system in Halifax here now is almost no staff in Halifax whatsoever and that's difficult for myself and even any of the deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers, it means we have to travel a lot, a lot more than normally we would have to, or our staff has to travel to Halifax, that has put our travel costs up very significantly. We have some electronic equipment that is finally getting hooked up in some of the offices, we can do video conferences to cut that cost down but it's not complete yet.

We have some major challenges around it but I can't emphasize enough the quality of staff that have been hired have been really good. The only thing we have lost is the corporate knowledge that you just can't replace.

 

MR. LOHR: Just to look back at your estimates, what is included in the jump in estimates for aquaculture?

 

MR. COLWELL: We put in another $240,000 in the aquaculture program to bring that up to where we should be.

 

MR. LOHR: It looks like it's nearly $400,000 from forecast to estimate.

 

MR. COLWELL: Yeah overall it's $400,000, it's part of the Aquaculture Strategy we're working on.

 

MR. LOHR: Again, operating costs are also going up by about 20 per cent estimate to estimate. I'm just wondering why that, is that when you look at, I think you have a 20.3 per cent increase in operating costs, I'm just wondering if you could explain that.

 

MR. COLWELL: I would think it's the same problem we had in the other department where everybody was moved because they were moved as well. They are in Shelburne now but I just want to double-check that.

 

Yes, it would have been a shift-over in staff, plus the extra money we put into the Aquaculture Strategy and the marketing. We've already filled some of those positions, the Aquaculture Strategy in particular, the other ones we're still working on.

 

MR. LOHR: Okay, I'm just wondering about this line, Chargeable to Other Departments, $657,000 in this past year. I just wonder if you could give some insight to what that was.

 

MR. COLWELL: That was money given by Treasury Board last year to cover some of the costs of the move.

 

MR. LOHR: That was less. I guess that's a negative number, isn't it. So that was income from the Treasury Board.

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes.

 

MR. LOHR: I actually didn't notice that negative in front of that line item - not real clear there.

 

You had 63.6 full-time employees and you are bringing on another 13 full-time equivalents. Can you tell me what those positions are?

 

MR. COLWELL: I've got a biologist we've hired, we've got an inspector supervisor, I'll get you the rest. We have another inspector, coastal coordinator, a marketing individual and I'll just get you the rest of them.

 

We're just filling vacancies that were there so actually when you look at the numbers, the number is almost identical, at 77 across but we had to replace people who had left or refused to move and were assigned to another location, so we're bringing it back up again and key people who we absolutely need in those areas.

 

MR. LOHR: How many of those were inspectors that you just mentioned, of those 13?

 

MR. COLWELL: Inspector supervisor and an inspector, to do fish plants and that sort of operation.

 

MR. LOHR: How many inspectors were there?

 

MR. COLWELL: There was actually a supervisor for inspection and two inspectors. Again, they were filled because people refused to move and we had to get those back in place.

 

MR. LOHR: So two inspectors were located in Halifax? I can understand the supervisor of inspectors.

 

MR. COLWELL: Were, and they were in Halifax, too, as far as I know. When the move came they refused to move.

 

MR. LOHR: I would have thought the inspectors would have been located in rural communities already.

 

MR. COLWELL: You would have thought but they weren't. I can't really comment on all this as this all happened before.

 

MR. LOHR: So in a sense it's a 20 per cent increase from current staffing levels, right?

 

MR. COLWELL: No, that's not correct. Our staffing level is almost identical to where they were, at around 77 and will be at 77 pretty well . . .

 

MR. LOHR: I just talking an actual to 2013-14 actuals.

 

MR. COLWELL: Budget to budget. We're almost at our complement. We're still in the process of hiring some of these people to fill all these positions.

 

MR. LOHR: So salaries and employee benefits were off budget by $436,000, in the forecast to estimate number is an increase of $608,000. I'm just wondering, what is the average salary of the positions you're hiring?

 

MR. COLWELL: Probably just guessing around the average salary would be $65,000 per year. Most of the people we have are pretty highly trained.

 

MR. LOHR: Marine Fisheries and Field Services operated on only 22.2 full-time equivalents during the past year, but they will be hiring an additional 10 FTEs this year, is that correct?

 

MR. COLWELL: We're in the process of hiring six new staff, which I've already described to you, and it will bring us up to our regular complement. It just takes time to get all this done and find the right people.

 

MR. LOHR: Inland Fisheries also, estimate to estimate, has increased 3.1 per cent. How will this increase in administration help the people out in the field?

 

MR. COLWELL: They're going to help implement the commercial strategy that we're working on. This is critical to the department to move forward.

 

MR. LOHR: Just to change the topic a little bit - we talk about interprovincial relationships and you had mentioned collaboration with P.E.I. and New Brunswick, and I believe you mentioned Newfoundland and Labrador - maybe not in terms of collaboration, but how do you feel about those relationships? Is that collaboration increasing or getting better, just generally speaking?

 

MR. COLWELL: It's getting a lot better. We've had several excellent meetings already with the ministers from Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. I've also met, in conjunction with them, the Governor of Maine and our counterpart in Maine. It's not a fisheries minister; it's called a resources commissioner. We're working with them. We haven't had a chance yet to meet with Newfoundland and Labrador - we haven't had the opportunity yet. We plan to meet with Newfoundland and Labrador; also with Quebec, and have a united front when we work with the federal government.

 

I will say we've established a lot better relationship with the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Again, as I said, it was the first time in history she or any of the federal ministers ever came to a ministers conference, and they've been going on now for about 16 years that I initiated. It was really positive to see. It was great to see her in Halifax again at the lobster summit. She has committed verbally and in writing to myself that they will strengthen our working relationship, which I think is very important. I talked about that yesterday in the Department of Agriculture as you're aware. I think that's very important and I do have her private cellphone number and information - I can get a hold of her anytime, which is very helpful.

 

The staff also here locally has a great working relationship with my new deputy minister - that's very positive. We are poised to really work and change how the province does business with the federal government and the provinces and territories.

 

I'll just give you a little bit of history. In 1998-99 when I was minister, there was a big rift between the provinces and territories and the federal government at that time in fisheries. At one fisheries meeting we had, I can recall the Northwest Territories hadn't got there the day before we were supposed to meet with the minister so we intentionally had a meeting to talk about the difficulties we had working with the federal minister's department in general. So the Northwest Territories wasn't there and we went around the table, everybody had basically the same complaints - exactly the same complaints - and I guess I was a bit noisier than everyone else. At the end of the meeting I was chosen by the federal government and all the provinces and territories to rewrite the book on how the federal government and the provincial government and territories work together.

 

The following morning before we met with the federal minister, the minister from the Northwest Territories came in and if you could have been at that meeting and listened to what that individual had to say you would swear that there was no way he wasn't at the meeting the day before. It was exactly the same problem, same complaints.

 

So move ahead a year further, we met in Quebec City - a place that's typically very difficult to get Quebec to sign on to anything to do with the fishery because of the implications they have with different views on how they should be resourced and how they should deal with the federal government. I managed to get all the provinces, all the territories, including Quebec and B.C. - they're as hard to sign up as Quebec - to agree to everything we had and the federal government, and we rewrote the rule book on how to do it. So I have experience doing this. It's the only time in history that has ever happened. I don't think I'll be that successful again in that venture, but we do have a lot better working relationship now.

 

The federal government is very aware of that. So are the bureaucracy because some of the people are still there from that day, and they still can't believe we got Quebec to sign on or B.C., because B.C. was harder to deal with than Quebec at that point. So I have experience doing that and we hope to build on that structure.

 

I can say, from the standpoint of working with Minister Shea it has been very positive. We've agreed on some collaborative efforts we're going to put in place that weren't in place before. There wasn't a hope of putting them in place before, and we've got an excellent working relationship, which I want to see flourish for the benefit of Nova Scotia's economy.

 

As I said yesterday, I don't care who the minister is in Ottawa or what government Party it is, we absolutely have to work with the federal government to ensure that we get everything we can for Nova Scotia. They're a key part - especially in the fishery - of resource allocation and licensing and all the other things we've done. We've already started initiating some discussions at my level and also the deputy minister's level, and our executive director's level. That's one thing that we're very happy with. The executive director has extensive experience working with the federal government; working with the First Nations in British Columbia; and a lot of experience working in Prince Edward Island in the fishery and other areas.

 

My deputy minister has worked all around the world in the fishing industry and really knows the industry. It was my request that we go out and get somebody from industry as a deputy minister. We were the only aligned department in government that has a deputy minister from industry, and that was at my request. I'm pleased to see that that has happened and we have a very capable assistant deputy minister who has a lot of experience in dealing with government, so we have a really good team.

 

I think that team over time will really show a difference in how we're dealing with the industry. The deputy minister has only been here a very short time. The assistant deputy minister has been here a little bit longer and we rely on his expertise. Mr. MacPhee here has been exceptionally great at getting a lot of things done; a lot of initiatives done. We were operating with a part-time deputy minister for a long time in the department when we first came for several months. Now we're just getting things settled down and really starting to take a positive approach.

 

I think we have great opportunities with the people that we've managed to assemble, and they've got a great vision for where we should be in the fishing industry and where we should be in Nova Scotia to share the vision I have. I share their vision, which is very important. I think we can grow the economy in Nova Scotia substantially in the fishing industry if we do it right, but we've got to do it right, we've got to take the time to do it right, and we've got to have the long-term view, we can't say next year we want to be here which isn't realistic. We've got to look four, five, six, 10 years out and say we want the industry to be at this quality level, this export level to ensure that we're going to get there and that's what we have to do and that's the approach we're taking with this.

MR. LOHR: You mentioned that there were several areas that you were working collaboratively with the federal minister on, could you enlighten us on what those areas are.

 

MR. COLWELL: Some of them I can't discuss because they're not public yet. We're looking at the lobster industry around quality product, we're looking at industry organization and several other things and there are some initiatives that we're still negotiating and we can't discuss at this point but we'll be announcing those when we can.

 

There is one other one that I can mention, the new and emerging fisheries strategies, they're working with the federal government and that means that we're going to have more people enter the industry and come up with new ways to generate wealth in the community.

MR. LOHR: Can you elaborate what you mean by new and emerging, do you mean new fishers or new species of fish?

 

MR. COLWELL: That would be species and new fishing opportunities.

 

MR. LOHR: I know that the federal government is a licensing body and there is a lot of dissatisfaction in the lobster industry or a lot of desire to have new licences and to be able to fish new species so I think that I would commend you on that goal. Given that, what are your personal goals in terms of dealing with the federal government, what do you personally see for changes that you would like the federal government to make?

 

MR. COLWELL: I want to build our relationship stronger first and we're well on the road to doing that. I would hope that we can continue the growth in that area that we've seen, I haven't seen this kind of growth even when I was minister before and we had a like Party in Ottawa, if I can put it that way, we had a good working relationship then but our working relationship is good or better now, if that's possible. I want to see new species, I want to see quality improvements, and we have some serious problems in the lobster fishery with quality, very serious problems. Nobody seems to want to address them in the past but we have to do that if we're going to market these as top quality.

 

For instance I can use the example of the AAA steak that you buy when you go to the grocery store, there is no such thing in lobster. A lobster is a lobster is a lobster but it isn't. There are hard shell, full meat lobsters and then there's everything else, everything else in between. I know I bought some this year from a local vendor and they looked like hard shell until you cook them and there was no meat in them, so we have to avoid that. There are ways to do those tests and to prove that and we just have to put that in place.

 

We have to look at the possibility of grading on the fishing boat. There has been some work done by some of the organizations that are actually putting the soft shell lobster back in the water, they've done that for a couple of years or a few years now and they show their catch rates have actually gone up of the high-quality ones. It has been a major improvement. These things have to go, we don't publicly talk about the number of lobsters that go to the dump but it's up to 30 per cent of total catch. That means that the lobsters that the fishermen are paid for at the wharf, they get $3 or $4 a pound but if 30 per cent of that goes to the dump that means that price of lobster will go down to pay for that, that's the bottom line and we have to make the industry understand that.

 

It's a pretty complicated issue, the whole thing, and it has to have buy-in from the industry, that's very difficult because they're very independent business people, and that's great, that's wonderful, but the independence is to the point that it's costing them money and they don't even realize it. I don't mean a little bit of money, it's costing them a lot of money, costing our industry a lot of money, it's affecting our exports, and it's affecting everything we have. We really have to move towards that. We've already got a commitment from the federal government to help us in those areas any way they can. We want to see some more opportunities, as we've already been talking about here about new species that we can harvest.

 

The federal government has basically stopped all the science on that, they've cut departments and everything so we have to do some work on those areas and we're going to have to spend money doing some science. That's going to cost the province some money but it will be worth it, if we can get new species in the value chain and new markets for those, that means their exports will grow and we'll very quickly get our money back.

 

We have to look at strategic investments that will give a return to the province. Everything I do in every department now, everything I work with, you have to prove to me that it's going to be an economic benefit to the province. If it's not an economic benefit, you can go to the papers and you can complain all you want, I don't care. That's the approach I've taken and that's the approach we're going to continue to take.

 

I've handed out some pretty sad pills to people who looked for money just because they weren't running their operations inefficiently. There will probably be one in the paper soon. This is what we're doing because we can't afford to support these organizations that aren't making money, we just can't afford it anymore. It is dragging our economy down, it's giving a disincentive to the people who are successful and trying to work hard and they see someone else getting money who is not doing anything, not accountable for anything and they say why should I grow my industry.

 

We're changing that. We talked about that yesterday here, applying the same things exactly to this industry. We've got a great group of people, very successful business people a lot of them, but we have to give them encouragement, set the environment up and get rid of the people who aren't - I shouldn't say get rid of them but encourage them to become profitable, I think that's more accurate. If they can't do that, well they probably shouldn't be in business and we're not going to support that anymore.

 

I'm going to take some hard knocks over this, probably give me some heat in the Legislature about it but at the end of the day it will help Nova Scotia's economy and that's where I'm headed. There's no doubt about that. I know that we've talked yesterday about the Nova Scotia Provincial Exhibition. I don't want to bring that in here because it's not Fisheries but it's a prime example of an organization that wasn't run properly and the solution in the past, by every past government, your government, the NDP Government, our past governments, when they got in trouble just hand them more money.

 

That stopped. We're going to move forward on all these issues. We've had fisheries organizations in and saying we can't afford to operate anymore because we can't pay our executive director. Well, get straightened out, get your money straightened out, we may help you with something - we're not going to do that.

 

We've taken a hard line on this, we're going to continue the hard line. I'm really pleased with the response I'm getting from industry. They're coming back and saying yes, we agree with that, we'll make the hard decisions and they're starting to make them. Once that happens, they'll become stronger organizations, they will add to Nova Scotia's economy instead of being a drain on the economy.

 

If it's $50,000 or $100,000 at a time, it doesn't take longer to rack up $1 million, $2 million, $3 million and they come back every year, every two or three years, and all of a sudden you don't have that to put into health care or they're not properly growing the economy where they could and our gross domestic product drops.

 

Those are the things I'm really after, that I want to see happen. I want these industries to be profitable and I want them to make money that they will reinvest in the communities and they'll ensure that our economy will grow. I want to grow the economy in rural Nova Scotia because it's such a wonderful place to live and what a wonderful way to make a living on a fishing boat or processing fish or whatever you want to do. That means the local carpenter can get a job, the plumber can get a job, the electrician can get a job and work right in his own community. They won't be going out West to work and that's what we need to accomplish. It's going to be a long road but we will accomplish it.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lohr, you have just under 15 minutes left for this round of questions.

 

MR. LOHR: Madam Chairman, I'd just like to turn the microphone over to my colleague here on my right.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

 

MR. TIM HOUSTON: Thank you very much for having me this afternoon. I just took a bit of grief in the Legislature for talking too long. I could sure learn something from you, though - all jokes aside.

 

I do want to thank the minister, he was kind enough to come to Pictou East and meet with myself and some of the fishermen in my area, so I do appreciate that he did that. That meant a lot to them and it means a lot to me.

 

My question today is along the lines that you were just talking about, about proper management of our resources to maximize the benefit to the economy of the province. I'm thinking specifically today about aquaculture and oysters. The waters around Pictou County are known to produce some of the world's best oysters.

 

I just have a few concerns about what we're doing to manage that resource. The way I understand it today is that a commercial fisher can go out with the appropriate licences and harvest oysters. He would be harvesting oysters in certain areas of bottom in competition with his neighbours and friends who are also commercial fishers. That kind of produces an environment where everyone tries to get as much as they can, as fast as they can.

 

I don't think that's the best way to manage the resource. What I think would be in the best interests of the province is to have fishers granted licences, or leases, I guess, to certain parts of bottom, which they could then farm. They would then seed oysters and they would harvest them in a more sustainable manner.

 

I have heard from a number of people in my area and across the province who have pending applications before the department, in some cases for years. I'm just wondering if you have any thoughts on how we can kind of speed those applications through and make sure that we are managing the resources - in this case oysters - most effectively.

 

MR. COLWELL: That's a very good question. We have several applications before us, and we've been talking about them. This study that's going on right now is sort of holding us up on a lot of things that we're hoping to do. I think oysters have a tremendous potential of helping rural Nova Scotia and the economy of rural Nova Scotia.

There are some issues around the licences in some areas, and I believe in your area there are some licences that were acquired by commercial fishermen a while ago that are not being operated. We are going to take those licences away if they don't start operating them, but they will be given a warning about that. That's a policy change we are in the process of making. It the same with every aquaculture site in the province, it's either use it or lose it. But they'll be given lots of warning and lots of time, because those are missed economic opportunities. They're approved, they don't need any further public consultation or anything, they just need to be put in production.

 

The market for oysters is really growing and I think with the right kind of marketing, we can turn that into an extremely valuable resource. You are absolutely right, there's a gold rush mentality in the fishing industry. It has always been there, and that's just the way it worked - whoever got the last one won, and unfortunately, they all lose because there's none left.

 

You're right, if we can put leases in place that will ensure a long-term, sustainable supply of a quality product, then we have the basis to grow the industry and not only that, but grow our exports. It's a great way to do it. We have lots of opportunity, especially with oysters. You weren't here earlier - I talked about mussels, and everybody says that mussels, you don't want them around because they pollute the water. It's just the opposite. It's the same with oysters. If the water isn't pristine and very clear and clean, they don't survive. So if your oysters are dying and your mussels are dying, you've got a big problem in your harbour, so they're very carefully chosen.

 

I think we've got a great opportunity to grow our industry and to go for exports. I know I've talked to several oyster producers and they say they can't produce enough for the markets they've got now. That's a good sign, so Nova Scotia oysters are getting a really good reputation.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Yes, I concur on that and I do think that - I understand that oysters are somewhat cyclical, that they kind of have highs and lows. I don't know if that's exactly accurate, but that's kind of what I've been told. We are definitely in a stage right now where it's kind of going towards the high, I think. It is a premium product that is well recognized around the world.

 

I think there's somewhat of a danger if we miss this. Time is of the essence, I guess, to get ourselves organized on this, because every day that passes is a missed opportunity for a multitude of reasons, not the least of which is that the economy is not getting the benefit that it could. I know that it's sometimes easy in these things to get an application and find reasons to deny it, but I just wanted to kind of hear your thoughts on how we can change the mentality towards finding ways to make things happen as opposed to finding ways to not make them happen.

 

MR. COLWELL: You're probably not aware of this, but we're developing a policy right now actually in North Shore in your area towards growing the industry and for the industry to make money. That's the mandate I've put in the department, that everything we do should make money.

 

The other problem we have with aquaculture sites - and we're starting to address this - there's a whole litany of different government organizations that have to approve everything we do; the Coast Guard, Environment, I think federal Environment, there's a whole long list of them and some of these people - it's not us holding it up - some of them will hold these files for a couple of years for no real particular reason. We've been working with those departments to see if we can't streamline it and put some deadlines on when an application comes in with all the information in place that they should have this approved in so many weeks or days or whatever it could be.

 

As part of that process, our aquaculture people are putting - the application is going to make them more complete, so hopefully we don't have to have anything come back from any of these outside departments. They're just holding it up, and they're not telling us that they're holding it up because this one thing wasn't addressed, and it may be a minor thing. With our applications, when they come in, if we know what they are, we'll address it with the proponent, but typically the other departments don't see any urgency in it. It's a quite complex issue, but we're working sort of on all fronts to try to get this done as quickly as we can, because it's a real positive way to grow the economy and it's an environmentally sound way to do it too.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I know I'm just running out of time here, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I think I'm hearing you say that you see value in increasing and supporting the oyster industry and you're working with the department . . .

 

MR. COLWELL: Absolutely no question.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Thank you.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You still have about five-and-one-half minutes remaining, so we'll turn it back to Mr. Lohr.

 

The honourable member for Kings North.

 

MR. JOHN LOHR: I guess it kind of relates to the oyster industry, and this is a question that sort of came out of my visit with Nolan d'Eon in the Yarmouth area, and that was that he informed me there's a Fisheries and Aquaculture Loan Board policy in which after an original loan has been made, a second loan is not permitted unless a new aquaculture operation has been established. In other words, an existing aquaculture operation cannot buy out their neighbours' licences. I'm wondering why that policy is in place.

 

MR. COLWELL: You're absolutely correct, that's in place now. We are reviewing that policy to see if we can't change it. There are some other issues around it that you haven't mentioned as well. If we're going to grow the industry, we have to make it easier for people to get financing, if it's indeed to buy out or expand. The biggest issue in aquaculture is cash flow because some of these operations are several years before they can actually sell a product and get some money out of it. There are some long-term cash flow issues.

 

The other problem has been, and I identified this shortly after becoming minister - I guess a week or so after that to sign the leases and I noticed the leases were five years for the renewals. Nobody in their right mind will loan somebody money on a five-year lease when it takes five years to develop it or expand it. So we're going to change the lease time. We're just waiting to see the aquaculture report. We're going to go to a minimum of 10-year renewals, and maybe 15 or 20 years so they can go to a commercial bank - even to the loan board. They know they've got a licence for that time so they can finance these operations. Financing is one of the biggest single problems they have.

 

The other thing with that is - again, going back to use it or lose it - you might have a 20-year lease or a 10-year or 15-year, whatever you decide it's going to be - if you don't use it, you're going to lose it; we're going to take it away. You're not going to sell it; we're going to take it away, and then we're going to sell it to somebody who is going to make the economic growth in the area. That has not been a policy. That's a policy change we're going to make. So we're making some policy changes, and we're not doing them randomly. We're going through the whole process as we do this, but it all goes back to ensuring the local community's economic development in those areas through the fishing industry.

 

These are solid investments. We've seen so many investments in the past by every past government, and every one of us - all of us included - and call centres. As soon as the money is gone, the people are gone, the companies are gone - and nothing. You invest in rural Nova Scotia in the fishing industry, and you do it wisely and carefully, you're going to see that investment there forever - the things you were talking about, long-term sustainable things and these are very positive things.

 

It all goes towards helping us grow the economy, but it's a long-term investment and some of the things are quite a while before you get a return. The only aquaculture thing I can think of right off hand is trout. You can grow them in a year basically and market them, but everything else is multi-year. Oysters, I think, are four or five years before you really get into full production. If someone started today, you're four or five years out before they really start making enough money to pay the loan even, never mind to make any money.

 

Those issues, we're very aware of, we're very willing to work with the industry on that. We've had serious discussions around that, and maybe we don't have to loan them money - maybe we have to do other things to make it easier for them to get financing from commercial organizations or by investors. We're looking at a lot of different opportunities, and there are a lot of opportunities and a lot of people very interested, which is very positive. I haven't seen that kind of interest when I was minister before. There was some, but not like today, and they see a great opportunity.

 

In finfish - a lot of people don't like finfish - salmon in particular mostly because of one company in the province, but that's neither here nor there, but the food conversion. We talked about food conversion in cattle is somewhere around, I believe - and you can correct me if I'm wrong - is about eight pounds for every pound of beef. In finfish, it's between 1 and 1.1 pound per pound of fish, so it's a huge source of protein that has almost perfect conversion of food to the end product. Economically, it makes more sense to grow fish than it does to grow cattle - although we want to grow both, don't get me wrong.

 

As we look at all those factors, we have to look at those to look at the total economic impact and the environmental impact as well.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Queens-Shelburne.

 

HON. STERLING BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, it certainly is a delight, and again, minister, I want to congratulate you. I know you have a number of staff with you tonight so I am actually going to do a trivia question to start off my introduction. I congratulate you on your second time as the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

 

My trivia question is simple, are there any other MLAs that you know of throughout our history who have held that portfolio twice? It doesn't come to my mind but it is an interesting question.

 

Your comments, I made note here with my colleagues of your comments in your opening statement where you suggested that we cannot continue on this path. I just paraphrase - creating the same environment, if we don't want to help our rural communities, I agree totally with that comment and hopefully we can get some good understanding of your appreciation of where you want to go with the mandate you were given by Nova Scotians last October. I appreciate the time here to ask a few questions.

 

I made note of my colleague's very respectful questions. One of the ones that I was a bit nervous of before getting to my prepared questions was the previous government's initial move of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture to rural Nova Scotia. I must say I listened very keenly to your address of that question and I noted that you said there wasn't going to be a move, simply of the cost factor and I felt confident that there's now going to be no more redirecting that department back to the city. I think you understand my appreciation of that.

 

One of your comments, and now I'm going to ask you first of all to correct, for the record - you indicated that there are some members who had concerns with that and did not wish to move. I appreciate, I understand that, I went through that and I'm not disputing that comment. What I want you to explain to me, my understanding is that you talked about the qualified staff that you have attracted to that department. I understand that your acting executive director, Mr. Barry MacPhee, may be from another province. Could you for the record tell Nova Scotians where Mr. MacPhee is from in his previous enrolment and where he is now?

 

MR. COLWELL: Mr. MacPhee was from Cape Breton, born in Cape Breton, but he did work in Prince Edward Island for 12 years in approximately the exact same position he holds in Nova Scotia now.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: So it's fair to say, I guess, my question is that people actually are moving to Nova Scotia, to rural Nova Scotia, for the good jobs and the good staff. I guess that's the point I was trying to make.

 

MR. COLWELL: He moved from rural Nova Scotia, rural Prince Edward Island, back to rural Nova Scotia. It was a good idea. I'm glad we have him, let's put it that way.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: I'm just recognizing that, I think it's a great idea.

 

Anyway, we'll continue on to my questions I had prepared and again, I want to thank you. First of all, I want to raise, I think in your opening comments you talked about the sport fishery. I know through my particular appreciation of this job - I've been in this House for the last close to eight years, I think that it's one of those gifts that doesn't get recognized enough. To me, a lot of Nova Scotians enjoy recreation sport fishing, it doesn't get the media attention, doesn't have the attention that I think it should hold.

 

I have a letter here from the Medway River Salmon Association. I want to make reference, Mr. Minister, to your Nova Scotia Anglers' Handbook & 2014 Summary of Regulations. I'm going to read you a portion of a letter, and I'll quote from that, but first of all if I can draw your attention, if you have that present - to a paragraph on Page 31, and I'll quote: on June 19^th to December 31^st - this is talking about a river being closed - "From the highway 210 bridge at Greenfield downstream to the highway 103 bridge, Jun 15 to Aug 15." This was in this handbook.

 

This particular group that I have a letter from, and I'll quote and I'll table it for all to read later. This is from the Medway River Salmon Association, and I quote:

 

It is with great displeasure that I find myself writing you this memo concerning the recent publication and circulation of the NS Anglers Handbook in 2014, especially the paragraph on pg 31 under the heading of Queens County indicating the closure of Medway River from Highway 210 Bridge at Greenfield downstream to highway 103 bridge, June 15th to August 15th [sic]

 

Our group has work [sic] very hard in an effort to strive towards improving river habitat and open communications and have made several sacrifices to remain working in this direction but when decisions such as the one mentioned above in this year [sic] hand guide are made with out [sic] our input we feel that you are taking steps that are not transparent and will have a negative impact on the Medway River. It is impossible to remain open minded and proactive when decisions like this are being made without consultations.

 

Just one more paragraph; it says that ". . . we would like to meet and discuss with you how this decision was made to help us understand the science and the management behind the pronouncement." I won't go any further, but this is signed by their President. I will table that to the Chair.

 

A direct question: the sport fishery is very important and to me, these people are actually enduring a closure on that river. They feel as if they have not been consulted. The question there, minister, is that they want to be consulted, they want to have that meeting. That's my first question.

 

MR. COLWELL: It was actually at the request of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada that it was closed for this year. That was done to protect the existing salmon stock that is there, which I understand is very limited.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: So to add to that, I know that you are kind of deflecting it off to the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans, but there was a request to you for a meeting on this. It was in Nova Scotia's provincial fisheries handbook. They are asking that they be included in this consultation because they alluded to somewhere in the paragraph that it was based on high temperatures and seasonal variations at a given time several years ago when they were involved.

 

This particular closure this year, none of those circumstances even had an opportunity to be discussed, so it's a different set of circumstances. They just feel as if they're left out of the loop, and I guess what I heard from them is that they are surprised to see this on a continuing basis, especially in this year's book. So the first request is for them to meet with you, sir.

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes, we will meet with them, as we meet with everybody. Unfortunately, I'm backlogged now into July with meetings, even though we're trying to push everybody in as quickly as we can. I don't know if that request has come to my department - we get so many - but I will check.

 

As you are aware as a former minister, there were previous closures on that river as well. This decision was, again, made by DFO and they requested that it be closed for conservation, as you should be well aware of.

 

We have no problem at all meeting with them. I don't know if we've had a request come directly to my office - I hope we've had. If there is, it's in the queue. As far as we know at this point - we'll have to double-check to be sure - but it appears that they haven't requested a meeting with me. It's pretty hard to set a meeting if they don't request it.

 

The answer is yes, we will meet with them. When we do meet with them, we'll have our Inland Waters staff available and DFO so they can get the full story on it. But it would be nice if they would direct the request to me directly and copy you on it, if they like - or copy me on your letter, whichever, it doesn't matter either way to me.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: If I could just remind the members that this is Committee of the Whole on Supply and if we could try and address our concerns to the minister associated with the budgetary items as we go forward.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for your wisdom. Minister, in the mandate of the previous government, there was a review or a survey done by the previous Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture regarding WCB fishermen's rates. That study was not concluded when there was a transition between the two governments. Can you tell me where that's at and when that will be made public?

 

MR. COLWELL: Would this be on the regulations or the Safety Association you're talking about, to clarify the question?

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: My understanding is that the Safety Association and the industry in general raised many questions about the high workers' compensation rates for independent fishermen. The Fisheries and Aquaculture Department was engaged in doing a review of that and they commissioned that review. During the transition between the two governments, over a period of time, that was scheduled to be made public.

 

My question is, the previous government commissioned that study for the review of those rates for workers' compensation, especially for independent fishermen. That review is supposed to be coming forward for the industry to move forward and to address that. My question is, where is that particular review that was commissioned by the previous government and can you table that before the closure of this session?

 

MR. COLWELL: It was actually released to the Safety Association and it's available now on our website, it's public.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: So just to repeat, it is available now on the website?

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes, that's correct, and the association had it before it was on the website.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you. Number three, in your budget . . .

 

MR. COLWELL: I'd better correct that. It was available for a while, so we'd better double-check to make sure it's still there, but it was posted. We made some changes to our website - no intention of taking anything off, but it might have slipped off the rails. We'll double-check and if it's not, we'll put it back up again.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Well I checked the website, believe it or not - on an occasional basis, I'm not there every day, I'm not a web junkie, if you want to call it, if that's a word.

 

MR. COLWELL: Me neither.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Yes, I'm surprised if it's there. I'll be more than pleased.

 

MR. COLWELL: We'll make sure it's posted again if it's off there again, but it was made public already.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Okay. My question is regarding budgetary lines. There was an article in one of our local newspapers, I guess you want to call it - I'm just seeing if this was on the web, or . . . But one of their news articles in southwest Nova Scotia reads, "Bio-security aquaculture lab not coming to Shelburne". I know that you made some comments regarding that in the press. Do you want to enlighten us here today where that is and what actually is being suggested for the aquaculture industry in Shelburne in the department?

 

MR. COLWELL: The facility in Shelburne is being upgraded right now for environmental testing. It won't be a biosecurity facility. The facility in Truro, where we already have labs for agriculture, is going to be upgraded as well to work with our fish fats and the information, but we are not going to a biosecurity facility at this time until such time as the industry grows big enough that we need that. We can contract it out a lot more cost-effectively at this point, if we need to.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Okay. I noticed your comments in there; you actually talked about the mussel industry and some of the aquaculture industries in particular harbours. You made reference to - I forget just exactly how you put it, minister - but you made reference to, to me it's almost the canary in the coal mine scenario, that if there's an aquaculture site there, they need a good, clean, healthy environment in order to be sustainable and they are guardians over the environment. I think basically I share those same views.

 

My concern is that you talked about the diminishing, or what I sense - can you reassure the public that by having the quality of labs - and I'm not a scientist - but I think the public wants to know that this lab that is going to be there, is going to be able to accommodate the needs of the aquaculture industry in Nova Scotia.

 

My concern is that I spent some time in the industry a few years ago and I know that just taking water samples and - not getting into technicalities here - but just in the transportation of water samples, it can be contaminated if not handled properly. I'm just using that as an example.

My question is, is this lab that you have - I'm questioning whether it has this Level 2 or the standards. Is that going to meet the qualifications to accommodate the needs of the industry for Nova Scotians?

 

MR. COLWELL: Before I answer that question, that Workers' Compensation Board report is on the website. We just checked.

 

The lab in Truro is going to be upgraded to work with the fish vets. The fish vets are trained to take samples and look after samples. It operates under a very stringent quality control system that's already in place in that location as a quality assurance manager and all the protocols around that.

 

If there is a need for a biosecurity lab, which is - I have some friends who work in biosecurity labs that are not here but outside of Nova Scotia, and they're pretty extreme - very extreme. If we have to deal with that sort of case, then we would make sure that the samples are properly handled. We'd have to get someone here to supervise the taking of the samples, how they're done, how they're transported, what specific tests need to be done and we'd have to have people come that have the correct training to do that.

 

I would think it would probably be pretty rare that we'd have to do that under biosecurity systems, but if we needed that, that will be taken care of. We have adequate facilities and we will have adequate facilities when the upgrades are done. Any training that our staff may need that they don't have, we will make sure we provide that.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: I think it's important that we understand. You are confident that the - to me, the industry is located there. The major part of that industry is located in southwest Nova Scotia. I am concerned about the security around sampling stuff - if that's a concern of yours, or are you going to make sure that Nova Scotians are confident that that lab is going to adequately address the needs of the industry when they're not in close proximity? That was the reason for moving some of these departments in the rural areas - to get them closer to the industries. I just raised that question because, to me, there are protocols that have to be in place and there has to be a certain level of security, so I'll ask you to respond.

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes, there are protocols in place. We'll be able to meet all the present protocols that are there. As far as being in a location near where the facility is, as we hopefully grow aquaculture in the province over time, the locations will be all over the province, we hope, as they are now with several spaces, not just in Shelburne County, but they're all over the province.

 

Truro is a more central location province-wide, so it does serve the whole province. Instead of one designated area, it's a lot easier to bring a sample from Cape Breton to Truro than it is to bring a sample from Cape Breton to Shelburne. So in reality, it's all a matter of where you put it. The fact is we'll have two labs set up - one for environmental monitoring, which we have to do. Shelburne is important, and as time goes on, if we need to improve on those facilities, we will. It's just a matter of need and of cost and of reality of what is actually needed in the industry.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you, minister. This a question - and I know he's going to spend some time, so I'll make my first attempt in this direction - and that's regarding the lobster summit. I know that my colleagues have asked some questions in the House, and I appreciate your insight into that, in bringing some of those questions and concerns forward in the House. To me, we could spend a lot of time on this - we could spend the duration of this particular session dealing with this one topic. I have a number of questions.

 

In some of your statements in the House, I think we have to have clarity on it. My honourable colleague suggested that there was a bit of clarity that needed to be done, because one question was asking whether there was going to be regulations or legislation. I believe you quickly said that - whether it was your deputy or executive in your answer - that you were both right.

 

MR. COLWELL: Correct.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: To me, there are two separate directions there and, to me, the industry needs to know there is an endorsement that you said came from this summit. I can assure you that I have been doing my homework, and what I've heard is that the industry wants to feel confident that the path that is chosen by the Maritime elected officials is the right path and the checks and balances are there to ensure that the industry is well protected. I'll just use this phrase, there's no way I believe what they're doing here is right for the industry, but I also get a sense of, when I talk across the Maritimes, that there's no way that anybody wants to be associated with creating a cash cow. There has to be a lot of work, a lot of leg work done to reassure the members of the public across the Maritimes that this is going to be the protection.

 

My first question that came from my honourable colleagues is that you talked about how there had to be further discussions and more consultation, and I can tell you in parts of my constituency there are literally port clusters that have not been consulted on this. To me, it's troubling to know that you're at this position, and when an individual representing three or four wharves calls you and, that port cluster is a region within a district that represents three or four wharves, which our fisherman identifies it as port cluster. To have those individuals say we were never given that opportunity and now you have an opportunity to bring that concern forward.

My first question on this lobster summit, in the recommendations you mention that there will be consultations and regulations, legislation would be put in place possibly this coming Fall or by the next Fall. Can you outline the when, where, how these consultations will take place across Nova Scotia?

 

MR. COLWELL: Let's back up a little bit before I answer that question. We can set a rate by regulation for a levy - we can set it actually in regulation, we don't need an Act in the Legislature to do that. Unfortunately, we do need an Act in the Legislature to allow us to collect it and the structure under which we are going to collect it. That is as complex an issue as consultation with the fishing industry, to make sure that, when the day is done, the levy is collected. That's sort of the first part of the answer to your question.

 

The answer is yes, we're going to consult with the industry. We're working on a plan to do that and we've already done, in a small way, some of that just based on the limited time I've been in the department so far. We've met with fisheries organizations, most of them across the province. We've met with the processors. We've met with some of the major companies in the industry. We've met with a lot of people so far and talked about this issue.

 

There seems to be a unanimous willingness to move forward on it. I think it's absolutely essential we do that, as you do, I know. As we move forward, we have to have total accountability and I'm all about accountability. We've seen, for so many years, successive governments putting money into losing operations. In my department that's going to stop, it has stopped and it's going to be accountable. We will put in place - and I'm very concerned about that to the point that in this recent lobster summit, we received an invoice from the organization that was doing it - rounded off numbers, no explanation what it was for, and we committed to, as the two other provinces did and so did ACOA, put money into this. I guarantee you they're not going to get a cheque until I see exactly how every penny was spent, and if they didn't spend all the money, they are not going to get all the money from us. It's that simple. I'm sick and tired of these organizations trying to come up and get money from us with no accountability to the people that they really should be representing.

 

We're not saying that that's the case with the Lobster Council of Canada - not at all - but it just points out the fact that we're not going to tolerate this kind of activity. I know the industry and I know a lot of players in the industry from my long history of working in the fishing industry over the past, as you're well aware. I know how the industry mistrusts everybody, and I can't say that's not founded in some cases. Some cases it isn't founded, some cases it is, but either way any kind of mistrust is very, very difficult to overcome.

 

We're going to have to set a structure in place that the fisherman that owns a small enterprise that has a boat and one person working for him, he has a comfort level that the money he is contributing to this levy, for whatever reason we collect it - because we've got to have further discussions about that, how it's collected, how it's spent - and that he can see results from that; not only results that so-and-so went to this trade show and this happened and that happened, but also he can see results at the wharf and be confident that he's getting an extra - whatever it is - value out of his lobster at the wharf he wouldn't have gotten otherwise if we didn't have this in place.

 

How we portray that and how we report it - it's going to be very difficult to put it in a format that is easy to understand and totally accountable. But I can assure you whatever we do in Nova Scotia - I can't speak for other provinces, but I believe they feel exactly the same way - whatever we do, we're going to be accountable for it, we're going to be open with it to the point that we can be, because some of the marketing activities you don't want to really tip off your competitors what you're doing unless they're working with us. So we're working that structure.

 

It's going to be a long, hard road. Our biggest issue is getting the fisheries organizations put together, as you're well aware of. That's our biggest problem in the province. If we had the organizations organized to the point that we could go and meet with their executives and say, okay, this is what we're going to do and this is the accountability we're going to put in it, take it to your membership, give us your feedback, we'll make corrections and change whatever we have to change until we get it right before we implement it. That is impossible in Nova Scotia today, absolutely impossible. That is really crippling us, really crippling us, and it will continue to cripple us until that's done.

 

One thing that we are doing in conjunction with the federal government, Minister Shea is working with us on this. This is the first time in history this has happened, trying to get people organized, because they have the same problem. They could make some changes on the recommendations of an organization if it made conservation sense or whatever the kinds of things that the organization wants to do, but when part of the organization says we want to do this - and there was a prime example down in LFA 34 when they wanted to not open the season for two weeks because of soft-shell lobster and to get it in place, and they voted for it. Then they came along and found the vote wasn't right. So anyway, at the end of the day, she didn't listen to them, to that vote, for all kinds of reasons. I've had a discussion with her about this and I don't blame her for taking the decision she did based on the information, just because too many people were infighting.

 

But at the same time, we need that kind of organization and we have staff dedicated to this process now - to get these organizations working together. It would be so easy to come forward and do some of these conservation things, things that will make a huge difference in a year, two years, five years, 10 years down the road, to make sure the children of the fishermen now, if they want to stay in the industry, can stay there, they can make a good income, they can stay in rural Nova Scotia. These are the things we have to address.

 

We have to address quality. The Lobster Panel report is good, but it doesn't highlight quality. If we're going to market - and that's all along what you're talking about here - if we're going to market lobster, and if I'm sitting in a Boston restaurant paying $25 or $30 a pound for lobster that I just got, and you open up a lobster and there is no meat in it, guess what? I am never going to order that lobster again. That means the restaurant that I just bought it from is not going to buy lobster, and that hurts the industry. That hurts the guy at the wharf because if they send junk out, you get a junk price and you lose your markets.

 

So we've really got to concentrate on quality. That is going to be difficult. We're going to have to put some regulations in place to make sure quality is done. We've got to do it the right way, we've got to do some science on it before we do that to make sure the handling of lobsters is done. There has been some work done, but nothing really definitive. All part of the accountability goes along with all of that.

 

For instance, if we started selling pork that was no good, that was rotten, in the marketplace, which is happening - not rotten lobster, but not good-quality lobsters - you wouldn't sell pork. You wouldn't be able to send a pound of pork anywhere. That's what's happening in the fishing industries - pile as much junk on the market as you can, get the highest price you can, and hope that they come back. That can't happen.

 

This lobster report had only minor discussion about quality. The most important thing of the whole report is quality. They can come up with these institutes and all the other stuff they want to do, but they're garbage unless you have quality products out there and you grade your product. The fisherman gets a premium price at the wharf, and then he knows what he invested in - it gets a return for him. That's what we have to get.

 

Around accountability - we're going to make accountability on this. We're going to be very clear where the money will be spent - very clear direction from us. We're going to make sure that there are reports on a regular basis on where the money has gone, how it has been spent, and the actual results we're getting in the marketplace. So if we see an increase in, say, an Asian market, for example - if we get a 3, 4, or 5 per cent increase - what does that mean, not only to the processers who are shipping that quality product in, but also on the wharf? What does it mean?

 

They talk about fixing prices. You can't fix prices until you've got quality. Once you get quality at the wharf and the processer has confidence in that quality, he's going to be forced to pay a premium price for that product. When he's forced to do that, that means that the price at the wharf will go up. The fishermen will say, we're not selling you our quality product; we're not selling to you - we'll sell these other ones for canning and all the other stuff you want at a lower price, because we know what they are.

 

There is some technology we're hoping to get our hands on that will check the quality - boat installed - so a fisherman can tell exactly what the quality of the lobster is, whether it's male or female, and also check the size by simply scanning it. They can scan these things just as they unload them, and they can store them in the proper storage facilities.

 

That's the other thing - we have to have proper storage at sea. We have to have proper storage and transportation by the buyers. We have to have proper storage and handling by the processers, by the shippers that move it to the markets, and also at the end market where the product is going to be sold.

 

It comes down to quality, so it's a whole value chain we have to build based on quality. Part of this - there's no talk about that - we're going to market everything, but if we can't find quality to market, we're going to have no markets. We can spend $10 million per week on marketing, but if we've got junk, we won't sell anything. We won't sell anything at all. It will sell for the first couple of weeks, but after that, you won't sell anything. That's what we really have to concentrate on.

 

From what I've talked to the industry so far, they're very conscious of that. The only thing I think that's holding the individual fisherman back is - because this is a business decision for him, and an expensive one - if he doesn't get a premium price for top-quality product, that's got to change. If you're selling beef or anything else, any other commodity, if you don't have top-quality product, you don't get top price. It's like anything - you can buy something that's half made, and you sell it for junk at the dollar store. You buy the same product that's high quality, you get high value.

 

I really think that people are demanding higher and higher quality of their products, of their food, and are going to become more conscious of what they buy. I can tell you, I'm not very happy. As I said earlier, I went and bought some soft-shell lobsters. They didn't look like soft-shell lobsters, and the person who was selling them said they weren't, but they were when I got them home, and I was very disappointed. Now I'll buy lobster again, but a lot of people would just say, I'm not interested anymore - I'm not going to buy something if I don't know what I'm getting, and that's a problem.

 

I don't know if that answers your question or not, but it's all part of the solution to the whole problem. As a former lobster fisherman, you know how hard it is to make financial decisions with your enterprise if you don't get a premium for the extra work you put into it, and that's only fair. I think that will address the premium price that needs to be paid at the wharf. I really do think that we can fix the price on the premium lobster once you establish the markets with quality, so you have to have the quality, market, and then back down through the chain.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister, it doesn't answer my question. My question talked about the levy, the summit, the direction you are going in. The fishing industry wants to know that there is not a cash cow that will be created. The people I speak to, including processors, fishermen, all the stakeholders - to me there are questions about knowing that there will be a review after a period of time. Two to five years - let's hear the number - is it going to be an annual audit to know where this money is going to be allocated and spent? These are fair questions.

 

Will there be a mechanism in place? This thing is off the rails. Is the freight train out of control? Can we call it back, take it off the tracks? Those are fair questions, open and transparent; you talked about that. One of the questions that I had asked of me is when I was going home last weekend a fisherman called me and said, what prevents this from a tax creep, increasing one cent now, two cents in three years, then five cents? I said it needs to be set in the regulation in the legislation. This is important, minister, and this is why I asked that question. To me you can ease a lot of tension, you can create a lot of anxiety by addressing - what I'm trying to lay out here is that the people want to know that their money is going to be spent wisely.

Some of the documentation I have, on an annual basis across the Maritimes, $2.5 million. That is a considerable amount of money and there is an importance of the industry knowing that here is an opportunity to address the things that we do. I would love to see the Goodyear blimp over a sporting event with the logo of a Canadian lobster on it or an NHL hockey game and knowing that money - personally, this is something that I cherish and I know that the big companies do that advertisement and they get rewarded for it.

 

My question is, the industry wants to know that, yes, these are tools but they also want to be reassured by the leadership in the Maritimes that these checks and balances are going to be there for the best interests of that industry. That's a fair question, when I talked about tax creep, a callback system or an annual review, an audit and to have that fair and open transparent process. Would you enlighten me on that please?

 

MR. COLWELL: I couldn't agree with you more but you forgot one simple thing when you were making your comments, the most important thing of all - accountability. That's what we have to have - total accountability.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: If I could just interject, that's a summary of all those events.

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes, accountability. I couldn't agree more. That's what I've been talking about for the last couple of days and everything we're doing, it's accountability. It's making sure that for every cent we spend we get a maximum return on it and it's accounted for.

 

I'm nervous, as you are, about how this is going to be accounted for, how we're going to set the structure up. The $2.4 million they were going to put in, we're going to put in $1.6 million, so we'll be the biggest shareholders in this whole operation. Even though the other provinces like to think they are, in reality, we are. That's what the two-cent levy is, about $800,000 per penny that we put in. We really have to be accountable about this and we have to set up a structure that is accountable to all the provinces and we have to set it up not only to the provinces, but as I said earlier, to the guy on the wharf, the guy who is there and saying, where's my money going?

 

That's key to making all this work because if he sees it's worth the money - and I hope it never has to increase, I really hope it never has to and I don't think it will because I think you'll see the processor dumping money in. They are already doing that now. You'll probably see other ways to invest money in it. We might get money from ACOA or whatever organization is around at the time to help do marketing. There may be other money to bring to the table and quite frankly, if we get $2.4 million a year in the three provinces, it's peanuts. Maine has $160 million a year and we have $2.4 million? We'll need to do some pretty serious work with that $2.4 million to make sure we get a benefit from it.

 

I think we can do some really solid work with that, but we can't waste any money doing it. We can't be hiring all kinds of consultants that eat up money like there is no tomorrow and bring reports in that are really useless for us.

 

We've got to spend money on quality, number one. Nobody has talked about this, but it's key to making this work. Get the quality in place, marketing will become easy. Because you can go to the marketplace with a quality product and say, okay, here is a lobster from Maine - they're going to be one of our main competitors, and they're gearing up. They're way ahead of us. We've lost ground to Maine, we've lost - Newfoundland and Labrador has $420 million under the agreement that they managed to get with the federal government when we were working on this free trade deal with Europe, and we didn't get it, so we're $420 million behind there. That was before my time, under your government, that that happened. So we're working from a hole, and we've got - our processing industry is being taken over by New Brunswick. It's just not a good situation.

 

The only thing that is saving us is we're the biggest harvesters in the world for lobster, as far as I know. We're not getting the benefit from that, so I can understand why fishermen and the industry are nervous. They should be nervous - I'm nervous. We have to have total accountability and we have to put a structure in place, and I'd look forward to working with you to help put that in place because you know what the industry needs, as well as I do. But we've got to work together on this, because our province's economy depends on this greatly. If we can get the export sales to $1.5 billion, what an economic boost that would be for the province in rural Nova Scotia where we need it absolutely the worst. So those things have to be in place.

 

I'm really concerned about we're going to do that. I'm concerned - I'm not concerned about the processors and those guys, it's pretty easy to explain to them because they do this stuff all the time. You can put a financial sheet together and show them what the results were and all that. It's easy to explain to them.

 

But some guy who's working on the wharf and making himself and his family a living, it's hard to explain to him because he doesn't understand if you go to a trade show and you spend $30,000, $40,000 going to a trade show that down the road, maybe we can get another one and a half or a half per cent of the market in that particular area that you've gone in, and that will mean more money to him on the wharf because they're selling quality product. It is hard for him to see that because it's not tangible, he can't touch it, he can't feel it, he can't see it.

 

Those things are going to be very, very difficult to sell. I know that. We're all going to have to work as politicians towards that and this accountability. As we go through this process, we're going to work with you and with our colleagues and the Progressive Conservative caucus to make sure this thing works, because we need it so badly for all of us. You know, I don't want to see my kids go away. I'm fortunate my kids are here. I want health care when I need it and I want everybody in the province to have health care when they need it. We can't pay the taxes for it - we're getting to the point where we're not going to pay for it. We're really getting to the point right now that we're almost there now.

 

So as we move this forward, we have to put the accountability in place. I've got some ideas around how to do that, but how do we sell it to the guys that are on the wharf? That's the problem - so they are satisfied at the end of the day. Yes, this makes sense. Like you said, I'm proud that I put my $500 or $5,000, whatever my catch is, into that, and I know that because that's there I'm going to get another 50 cents a pound for my lobster next year. If we can get that in place, we will have succeeded. And then continuously put it in regulation, legislation, whatever we've got to do for accountability - we've got to do that and I'm working on that right now with - this is sort of related, but in a smaller way, in the Truro Raceway I'm doing exactly the same thing. I want accountability. People are responding to that. They want that.

 

So it's not something that we might do, it's something we have to do. It's essential we do it. I appreciate your questions in that. I would like to get some solutions from you too, so if you can suggest ways we can do that and improve accountability, I'm all for it, because it is so much easier - I said it in Public Accounts Committee in this Legislature. I have sat through a lot of scandals and I can tell you I don't want my departments to be any such thing. When they do the audit on our departments, I want to come out squeaky clean. We're working towards that as we speak.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you very much minister, and again if you review some of the points I raised, the industry responded about making sure that protection is there for this levy. I think those are some guidelines, guiding principles that everybody can adhere to and we'll all be stronger for it.

 

I know we have only a certain amount of time in my allotted time here.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ten minutes left, sir.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: I'm going to move on to another topic. In the second round I'll get back to some of these areas.

 

Minister, you talked in your budget process to some of my other colleagues about investing, particularly in the lobster industry. I want to move you in a different direction. It may take the second round to get there, but you referred to undeveloped species, something that is dear to me. As a new minister, my first question is, I know there have to be some scientific dollars to do the research and to make the big DFO in Ottawa confident that we're going down that - a straightforward question without getting into the details. Probably in the second round, I'll go down that path of undeveloped species.

 

But my first direct question on that topic is, is your government willing to contribute to the research to develop undeveloped species?

 

MR. COLWELL: I already signed some agreements with it last week.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: I understand the signature. I've signed a lot, but to me there's the dollar value and it doesn't mean anything until there's actually a dollar value there. These are not photo ops. These are serious commitments. When you talk about pledging the work that is going to be done to get the science - I'll get into that in the second round, we're not going to have time here - to me, there's a commitment there. You'll hear that later on in our second round, that literally thousands of jobs will be coming to rural Nova Scotia if this is done. To me, the first initial step is making sure that we have the science committed to develop these new species.

 

MR. COLWELL: Science is essential, absolutely essential. If we can't prove that we have a harvestable resource, a sustainable harvestable resource - and it is hard to prove the science around that, but if we don't take the time and the effort to do that, we will risk being discredited down the road, let's put it that way.

 

We don't need that. We need to be sure when we provide science and work for science on a particular topic or test fishing. I've had a lot of discussions with the groups that are doing that. There's one group in particular that I'll speak to you about later that has a lot of hope, but didn't have the financial accountability that they should have had and it caused some grief for them and it's unfortunate. We're working with them now to resolve that problem.

 

We do need science. The science has to be properly thought out. It has to be around proper parameters when it's done, and it should really be done with one of the research institutions we have. We have Perennia - I don't know if you're familiar with Perennia or not. It's in agriculture; it's an organization that takes ideas and turns them into commercial products. It works with universities and turns those into commercial products and works with industry to do that, the individuals or businesses, whatever the case may be. We're going to take Perennia and not only use it for agriculture, we're going to use it for aquaculture and fisheries. They have a great deal of expertise in that area and we will add the expertise we need to help industry organizations that are doing science and research.

 

It's important that we do that. The importance of science today is probably more - and you brought it very aptly - it's more important today than it ever has been, especially with DFO removing all the scientists and all the studies and everything they are doing. The problem with these studies is that they are super expensive, they take a long time to get results and to prove in an instance.

 

The other issue that we've been talking about internally is I want to come up with a system from DFO that says okay, if you do these five things, we will allow you to fish this and we will put some licence in - or maybe it's 25 things - whatever it is, if they are clearly defined, then we know what kind of research we have to do, we know what kind of documentation we have to put in place, we know how we've got to train harvesters. Whatever we have to do in the process to get to a point that we say okay, we started doing the science and the research on this project - and I now you've got several of them. We've been working on some of them since you left the department, continuing that work which is very important, I'm glad you did start that work.

 

It's not clear how we get from here; what looks like a harvestable supply of, say an invasive species and I'll use green crab for an example, how do we get from here? We know there's a problem with these things, we know there's a market for them but how do we convince DFO all the in-between stuff? So there's no pattern set down how to do that.

 

Anything else you do in life, if you're going to plant a garden there are certain things you have to do and you know the steps you have to take to make it happen - or anything, if you're buying a house, anything. With DFO they're sort of all hazy and fuzzy and no one really seems to know what's going on. Those issues I've started to address with the federal minister and I know our deputy minister and Mr. MacPhee have been working on this and so have our aquaculture people to do this. We have to have a clear road, we have to have a road map of how we get to where we are, to where the solution is. That road is not clear now and we've got to make that clear and I don't know because there's so much bureaucracy in Ottawa and the DFO it's very difficult to get straight answers and definitive answers.

 

We need definitive answers. If we could come up with definitive answers - I'll use the green crab as an example - of how we could get that to a commercial fishery and we could market, we'd be on the path today. We're working on it but we're sort of shooting in the dark sometimes, as you well know.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: Well speaking of answers, minister, I know I've got only a certain amount of time here and I'm going to look forward to my next round. To me there has been a pilot project that was most recently approved by the federal DFO in February regarding a pilot project on green crabs. It's interesting to note that the pilot project is only in the areas of northern New Brunswick, P.E.I. and the Gulf of Nova Scotia. Something that kind of irritates me and irritates a number of fishermen across Nova Scotia is that we see that this pilot project kind of focused the spotlight on that particular area when we know that that biomass is right across Nova Scotia, particularly southwest Nova Scotia, I can assure you of that.

 

Another example is whelks. We see whelks that the federal DFO will issue a licence in Cape Breton but not west of Halifax. To me that is certainly discriminatory, in my humble opinion. I'm looking forward to in the next round getting down to this, but to me there is a classic discrimination towards Nova Scotians, fishermen in general, when you have one group of people who can have access, whether it's a pilot project or permanent licence, and DFO in Ottawa thinks this is satisfactory. It is literally putting red tape roadblocks in front of our traditional fishing industry. Can you expand on that and does that raise your interest as much as it does mine?

 

MR. COLWELL: It sure does. If we can get some of these under-utilized species, I'll just use that term as an example, in the industry, that we can have our fishermen, and I've always said this, even 15 years ago as minister before - if we can use under-utilized species so they can fish another month or two months a year and complement their income, it makes a huge difference to the economy in that area. I don't think DFO does this properly.

 

The other problem I've seen is that there's a rush to get some of these licences. For instance, the green crab is a prime example, a gentleman that you're well aware of has done some extensive work himself and done very valuable work and there are other guys sitting around with these licences and haven't moved a muscle, just hoping that someday these things would be worth something and they will benefit from it. That has to be stopped, too.

 

We need to review this whole process and we need to get that road map in place. Once we get the road map in place, we can go to DFO and say okay, here's the five or six or 10 areas in the province we want to do this experimental fishery in and how do we turn this experimental one into a commercial enterprise?

 

We totally agree on this, the road map is what we need. We're missing the road map and then rules around it. If someone is issued a license for research, they had better well do it because if they don't do it, we're never going to move forward and that's three-quarters of our problem right now.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Time is up. Thank you, Mr. Belliveau.

 

The honourable member for Kings North.

 

MR. JOHN LOHR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm just wondering - I know we've been doing this two hours straight and most of us had a chance to take a short break. Did you want to have a break or just keep right on going?

 

MR. COLWELL: If I get in a panic I'll let you know. Thank you.

 

MR. LOHR: I guess what I would like to do first is pick up where we left off an hour ago with the question about the Fisheries Loan Board and the existing aquaculture operations not being able to get a loan from the Fisheries Loan Board to buy a neighbour's operation. I think I did hear you confirm that is, in fact, correct.

 

I would like to suggest that I'm sure that the aquaculture industry probably fairly reflects the demographics of Nova Scotia, and there probably would be at any given moment, operations that want to sell because they're aging - you know what I mean. There would be a lot of reasons why an operation might want to sell and likely the most value that could be achieved for that operation would be to sell to an existing operation in that same sector. So if it's an oyster operation, a neighbouring oyster farm would likely be able to pay the most for that.

You mentioned some of the issues with the length of licences being quite short for commercial lenders, but I'm just wondering if you're going to - will you look at that and review that policy? I think that needs to be reviewed. Your Fisheries Loan Board needs to reconsider that policy and open that up for oyster operations or aquaculture operations to be able to buy out neighbours or to expand that way. Will you be revisiting that issue?

 

MR. COLWELL: We're already looking at that and the point you have brought out is only one small problem. It's a small problem in comparison to cash flow. An oyster site has to have continuous cash flow with no income for three to five years. So you can imagine in the operation that you ran before if you had absolutely no income for three to five years and you're investing almost daily in operating costs and equipment and everything to make this thing work. Then you're probably two or three years after that before you get enough market share and enough sales to start seeing a profitable situation.

 

There are issues around financing a cash flow, that's a serious issue. It's not an issue that someone who has limited resources can get into, quite frankly. I think there are a lot of opportunities in coastal Nova Scotia - maybe some fishermen, like a colleague had talked about before who may want to get into it, start slowly and build into it.

 

The other thing is, the money is not only in the growing of the product, but it's also processing it. You have to get to a certain level, a certain volume of product before you can process, and it depends which product you're in. If it's oysters - I don't know what the break-even point is, but we have a gentleman now who is looking at it and he has to get to a certain point, but he's going to be five years plus before he gets to the point when he can start processing. Once he gets processing, then he has a finished product to sell to the marketplace so his margins are much higher so he can make more money and he can ultimately afford to do some of the stuff that he can't do now.

 

So it's very limiting, the way we've structured this. We've had some very successful people come forward recently on existing sites that want to open them up again. Thank goodness they've got a lot of their own cash because they couldn't start it otherwise. This is a lot of expertise so it's not an issue about expertise; not an issue about marketing - none of that. It's just a matter of cash flow and we really don't have the tools to do it right now.

 

When the last government took a lot of this stuff away from the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture and the Department of Agriculture and put it in the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, it really hasn't worked well. That's another issue we have to look at. We've got to get them on stream with what we need to do to grow the economy. They're in that business too, of course, but they've got to be directed.

 

As far as I'm concerned that structure is not working as well as it should be; not necessarily that it's the wrong structure, but the structure really has to be aware of what we do and the challenges to the industry. There's one particular case we're working on, it was very clear what the gentleman needed. He knew his stuff. He has a lot of cash, but he needs cash flow. It has been a challenge to get him in place in an area where we need the jobs, desperately. He'd have full-time employment on his site. I would say his chances of success are 99.9 per cent. It's that simple - with the expertise he has, with the cash he has, knowing the business, knowing the markets. He doesn't even have to search for the markets; he knows the people so it's not hard.

 

The fact that we don't allow one site to be sold to another - in this case, if there was a site nearby in the same business, that would mean you'd put the processing on line sooner. These are usually a $3 million to $5 million investment. The sooner you get that in place, the more profit will be quicker, so it would make sense to do that.

 

It is in place. We're reviewing the whole process and as we go through the process we have to make some hard decisions to see where we're going to go. We're simultaneously doing that while we're waiting for this report to come out from the committee that has been set up to look at aquaculture in the province. It's the biggest growth potential we have in Nova Scotia. The immediate growth potential is in aquaculture - it's that simple. There is a lot of opposition to it; a lot of issues we have to address.

 

One thing we have done since I became minister - the first meeting I had with the vets, they had a requirement that they wanted to improve quality control. It takes about a year to put in place. We talked about that. I initiated the first meeting I had with them. Now the businesses are going to be a little bit cranky about that, first off, but it gives us more accountability, more traceability of what's going on, and that should have been in place a few years ago.

 

So we're making steps, but this report is holding us back until we see what that says. Hopefully it comes in positive. Hopefully it doesn't shoot us in the foot, which it could do, but who knows until it comes back - I have no idea.

 

The Ivany report identified these industries as things we move forward on. If this report comes back and concurs in some way with that, I think we're on the road to improving where we need to be, but we've got to grow the economy. What you're talking about is essential to make those changes - and we'll make the changes, but we've got to make the changes correctly.

 

We've got to look at not just that one part of the loan board or financing - I really should call it financing, not just the loan board - to make sure that you can establish an organized site and weather the three to five years on some of the shellfish sites until you can get to a point you can make money. So it's a long-term investment. If it's a finfish and salmon, again, it's a few years - a huge investment, big returns on the result. If it's trout, it's shorter returns - shorter term investments, but still a huge investment.

 

All of these things have to be in place, and one thing we don't want is a monopoly in the province. If we can encourage some smaller business co-operatives or individuals, whatever they want to be, to get in these things, I think that makes our economy stronger and makes our rural communities stronger.

 

It's a pretty complex issue, but you hit the nail right on the head. We've got to get that kind of change made, and we've got to take those steps as quickly as we can, but they've got to be careful steps - that we don't do that and create another problem that we're not aware of.

 

MR. LOHR: Sure, and I would say I know the Farm Loan Board in agriculture has the kind of timelines you're talking about, and aquaculture would be typical of some industries in agriculture. Certainly the Farm Loan Board has been a key player in the last 40 years, I'm sure, in seeing the success in agriculture. It's easy to see that aquaculture has that same kind of growth potential, and the Fisheries Loan Board giving the flexibility to allow one operator to buy out a neighbouring operator and growth in the industry in general, I think it would be a key factor in seeing aquaculture go forward to give the right kind of framework to that loan board that they could engage these aquaculture operations and provide funding for them.

 

I commend you and I would encourage that that's very critical that the loan board be able to function in that way. I'm just curious about the report that you mentioned. When would that report be coming in? Maybe you can give me a bit more detail on what is expected on the aquaculture report.

 

MR. COLWELL: I have no idea what is coming out of it at this point because I haven't had a chance to talk to either one of the people who have been commissioned by the previous government to do the work. I did meet with Ivany - I mentioned this yesterday - I could have written the report and he could have written the report and we never met each other before. I'm hoping it's the same case with the aquaculture review, I think that's really, really important that we have that support from that organization but directions to go too, because we've got some really serious issues with public perception around aquaculture. Some of it is justified, some of it isn't. Some of it is myth, some of it isn't. A lot of it is "not in my backyard, I don't want to look at it" attitude.

 

I know when I was minister before, a couple of very wealthy people came in to me and they built their $2 million house on this beautiful bay with an aquaculture site there. So they got up one morning and said, we don't like it, we want it out of there. So they came and saw me, expecting that I would just tell the guy to get lost. So I said no problem. I called up the guy who owned the site, I said would you like to sell your site - fish, nets, everything but you get to keep all the fish and all the nets and the whole works. I'll give you a licence just down another bay and we'll move you.

 

I called the couple in and said do you want it moved? We'll move it, you buy the guy out and pay him in cash. Guess what? All of a sudden all the complaints disappeared - and they had the resources to do it.

 

It's just a matter of people realizing that if we're going to grow the economy, we have to do some of these things. As I said yesterday - and my deputy minister is going to give us a briefing, I think we're going to come to all the caucuses and talk about this - we're going to run out of the food supply we have, in 20 to 40 years and we're not going to be able to produce enough. If we don't look at things like aquaculture sites and ensuring our farmland and all our resources are available to use for these purposes, we're not going to be able to feed the population. That's real, that's not a maybe, it's real.

 

We have to look at these things and we have to get ready for that. That's not very far away, 20 years. I've been in politics longer than 20 years - and that's a horrible thought. It just shows you how quickly that will come and if we don't get ready for that and if we don't get positioned, we may be in a situation where it's a hungry country with the ability to come and get what they want and, all of a sudden, we don't live in the country we live in anymore. We've got to face those things and they're real, they're absolutely real.

 

You talk about global warming and there's all kinds of discussion around that but it's hard to see, but if you can't feed somebody and you can't feed your family, it's for real. You can't fix it overnight, it a long process to grow crops, as you are well aware, or to grow aquaculture sites. The fishing industry now is probably maxed out in what they can harvest, totally maxed out.

 

I think we have to handle what we harvest a whole lot better, get the quality up so we lose less of that product and use more product so we can get more value out of the products and more actual food out of it as we move forward. In this country we have not done a good job on that, not a good job at all, so we have to move in that direction. It's pretty complicated.

 

Aquaculture is key to part of this operation, how we do it, how we do it properly, how it's put out, how we get people to accept it and we're going to have to do a lot of science around it. Mr. Belliveau was talking about science, he's absolutely right, we have to do science around aquaculture, too. A lot of myths out there that lobsters don't live underneath a fish pen. Well, it's just the opposite, they grow very well there.

 

Then the excuse is, well they're not fit to eat. Well they've done tests on them and they are. But we've got to do all this science, we've got to prove it and we've got to do it in an environment that works, it's a very complex issue. We have to move these issues forward, we have to move them very carefully and we have to do them, again, based on fact, the science.

 

I'm getting off-track here from your initial question but it's all part of the answer to the question and that's a very critical part of that.

 

MR. LOHR: Mr. Minister, I think I heard you mention that statistic about running out of food yesterday, too. I'm wondering if you could - and I don't expect you to have it right now - could you provide me that quote, where that came from?

MR. COLWELL: Yes, it I think it is from the world food organization. Anyway, we'll get you the information.

 

MR. LOHR: FAO? I would be interested in knowing where that came from.

 

MR. COLWELL: I'll make it available to all the caucuses.

 

MR. LOHR: I've heard similar quotes, and even if they're not exactly true, if they are approximately true, it's still rather frightening. You wonder sometimes about predictions.

 

I was just wondering about the Maritime Lobster Summit and you mentioned that you were anticipating that you would bring legislation in in the Fall. In order to do that, I think there needs to be a period of consultation with the industry. Obviously that would have to take place pretty quickly and I'm just wondering if you could outline your plans on consultation with the industry or how you plan to go about that.

 

MR. COLWELL: One of the issues with consultation is when the seasons are open. If the seasons are open certain times of year, that means they just don't have access to those fishing enterprises because they've got to be able to make a living in a very short time - so certain areas close and open at different times. We've been reviewing that and we're going out to industry between now and the Fall and work with that.

 

We've already done some consultation with industry groups - any of the ones that are organized ones. The ones we have talked to are very much in favour - and even ones that aren't that we talked to, yes, they say we should be doing this. How we do it - and Mr. Belliveau brought up some very good points about accountability and that's going to be key to all this, and I think as part of our consultation that has to be part of it.

 

We're not going to have much money to deal with. That's going to be our problem because even with the three provinces together - because it's going to be a united program, we're still going to have $2.4 million when Maine has got $160 million a year and they're ready to organize. They're building processing plants for lobsters now. They mostly ship their soft-shell lobsters into New Brunswick to process so that's going to cause a problem for New Brunswick. We don't basically process very much here, unfortunately. Prince Edward Island is going to have an issue with that too.

 

So as the industry grows and evolves, we're really going to have to go out and consult - not only about the levy, but also about quality and get that out there. A lot of the fishermen are starting to talk and think that way, so I think now is the time to do it. There is an openness and a willingness to listen now. Some people won't and they will just have to do what they've got to do, and that's fair enough, but we have to turn that interest now into a positive situation.

 

I can tell you, 15 years ago when I had the ministers conference, it was a pretty interesting discussion - I'll put it that way. I tell this story - not publicly, but the first meeting we had was very interesting. We actually had the riot police on site out of sight because we didn't know who was going to fight with whom. We set the tables up with the fishermen, the fishing organizations, and we set name tags on each one and they weren't there by accident. They were there because they needed to be there because if you put two guys beside each other at a table, 10 minutes later there would have literally been a fight.

 

It has come a long way and I give credit to the ministers in between myself and going back to that position again. This time I went to the event it was unanimous - they all support the organization, which we have to do. We have to organize the industry. That is going to be our biggest challenge. Once you get them organized it's going to be a lot easier.

 

I'm not sure we're going to accomplish that in a short term. I may have to make a decision and put this thing in place anyway. I'm prepared to do that because if we don't, we're going to lose the industry anyway. So I will take some heat for that and that's fine. That's why I'm the minister, I guess - to make those decisions. Hopefully it will be well-accepted when we do it.

 

We're going to go out and talk to the people. With the willingness that's there - the processors are all for it, they want this to happen. They can see that it will add to their marketing efforts. We have to make sure, too, that we put some rules and regulations in place about what they ship. If we get some guy down in an area with a small fish plant who says ah, these guys are getting $25 a pound in Europe somewhere for premium lobster and I've got 25 tons sitting in my warehouse here, I'm going to ship them anyway at $20 a pound or $15 a pound - the market is gone and we've got a real mess. So we've got to put controls in place that do that, so that will keep our price high.

 

The goal is to get maximum price in the marketplace and maximum price at the wharf. If we accomplish those two things, everything else will fall into place. We're a long way away from that.

 

MR. LOHR: Yes, I'm just wondering, back to consultations, so this summer I know LFA 34, which I think represents a huge percentage of the lobster caught in the world, will you be holding town hall meetings in LFA 34 this summer?

 

MR. COLWELL: We already have a representative of our department out talking to the fishermen in that area. The federal minister has an individual who actually used to work in our department, who is very well respected, out doing just that as well. So those things are ongoing and we're committed to doing that.

 

It's pretty complicated doing these consultations in these communities. You've got to be careful where you go, when you go. I remember years ago I went to Clark's Harbour to a little show and tell with the business I had at that time and I went to Woods Harbour the next day and nobody showed up, just one guy. I said to him, how come nobody is here? He said, you went to Clark's Harbour yesterday and you didn't come here first. What I learned after that was you had to go to Clark's Harbour and Woods Harbour at the same time on the same day. That's what we're dealing with.

 

You have to make sure that you respect those differences in the community. Sometimes we don't know that and we have to find that out. Those things we have to do and as we do the consultations, we get buy-in and we work away at it. We're going to do that extensively.

 

MR. LOHR: I appreciate what you're saying and I understand. You mentioned that Perennia would be moving into aquaculture and fisheries, I believe I heard you say that.

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes.

 

MR. LOHR: I'm just wondering - I guess I hadn't heard that before - I'm wondering where is the funding, is there funding in the Fisheries budget here for Perennia?

 

MR. COLWELL: Not yet. It's going to be on a project basis initially and then we will move forward as we do. We're not going to reduce the effort in agriculture, not at all. I think it's important that we - I want to see Perennia busier than it is in agriculture, even before we look at the fishery. I'm going to make some changes there in the board structure. As you are aware, as minister - and I stress as minister - I'm the sole shareholder so I can control the board. I'm going to put people on the board again who are from industry. We don't have that now, we have basically bureaucrats on the board.

 

I'm going to change that and we'll put people on from the agricultural industry and from the fishing industry, from the aquaculture industry who are successful to help this move forward and show them that we mean business and we're there to support what they do.

 

I know we've lost some key staff there recently because of no direction in the past from the previous government and from the department, so that's in the process of being changed. I just haven't got down to that area in the pile I've got facing me but we're working on that. We're pretty excited about that, actually, because it's an incredible organization. I believe that you've had some dealings with them very successfully.

 

MR. LOHR: Yes, I would agree with you about Perennia.

 

MR. COLWELL: They speak very highly of you, by the way, which is good. They showed me some of your products - nothing about them, just the products. I was very impressed, quite frankly. That's the sort of thing we have to do and I encourage you to keep doing that and make some more money to put in the economy.

 

I didn't mention this but under a commercial fishing strategy, a couple of the pillars are innovation and research. As we move the strategy forward we'll - we may increase our budget, hopefully, to do some of this work because, as you know, it's very essential to do this type of work to get things commercialized, add the values so we can get them up in value and we can either displace imports or create some exports. I think that's very important.

 

That's one area we're going to focus on. Again, we've been buried in some old issues that we're getting cleaned up and once those are done, or before those are done, we're going to again work with Perennia.

 

MR. LOHR: I think it's interesting that you're going to Perennia because, I mean, for me as a farmer, the parallels between farming and aquaculture are striking. I think that in some ways, farmers have more in common with the people in aquaculture than the fisheries people would have with the people in aquaculture. I guess my question would be, are you planning to add staff to Perennia with expertise in aquaculture?

 

MR. COLWELL: Well, we'll see what direction we're going to go and what kind of research and development is needed by the industry. We're not going to just limit it to aquaculture, it will be anything in the fishery. They may be a key part in the quality program we're going to put in place. What we'll have to see is with each project as we look at it. We're going to bring it to them; we're going to work with them and of course we have the Agricultural College there and Dalhousie - that's the first step and then Perennia and then the industry, as you're well aware.

 

So we're going to work on those steps and make sure we keep them in place and they become successful. It's an incredible facility that's quite honestly under-utilized now and we're going to utilize it.

 

MR. LOHR: Just back to lobsters briefly - you emphasized quality and I couldn't agree with you more, the importance of driving down the quality road. I just wonder, what are your plans to implement quality standards? What is the road map? How do you see that being done?

 

MR. COLWELL: Well it's a difficult road map as you know. The results are known to everybody who has ever done a quality program - myself and yourself included. You know what the benefits are - it's a long, painful, hard road. It's going to be part of the process that we start with the processors. A lot of them have some quality assurance. We're going to talk to the registered organizations. We only have two of them in the province and they're both already working on this with some positive results. We're going to come up with a standard quality process to use.

 

I worked on a military one, which is equivalent to an ISO classification. I don't know if we're going to go with ISO. I don't know if we're going to use that or if we're going to do a different quality assurance system specifically for that industry. I don't know which way we're going to go at this point, but we are going to implement quality control in the system and we're going to enforce it. It's going to be two to five years before that's fully in place, but again it comes down to the point that if we can show the fishermen at the wharf that he can get a premium for his product because it's quality, it will immediately be in place and it will be adopted.

 

MR. LOHR: I guess I want to change topic a little bit to open-pen salmon farming. I know this has been controversial and you've already made some comments to reference it. I just wonder where you see the open-pen salmon farming industry heading in Nova Scotia.

 

MR. COLWELL: Well we really have to wait until we get the report back from the individuals who are working on it now before we move forward. I think there's a great opportunity for it. It's not for every community. It's controversial in some areas. As I said earlier, we have to do the science around it. We have to take the myths away. A lot of the information is incorrect. Some of it is correct. We have to verify the things that aren't correct that may be detriments, and those things we have to work on and make sure that they're monitored properly and enforced properly.

 

As I said already, since I became minister, or shortly after becoming minister, I increased protocols that the veterinarians use for testing and accountability of the sites, but it's going to take us a year even to get that in place. We're getting that in place prior to any further expansions. We're not moving forward any finfish sites at this point until we get this report and see where we go from there.

 

The biggest issue we have with that, there are some husbandry issues, the same as on a farm - you know there may be too many fish in a pen, they don't move the pens often enough and some other issues like that. There are some issues around the wild salmon, and some issues, although not bad in Nova Scotia, some ISA and sea lice. Neither one of them are that bad in Nova Scotia compared to other places in the world, so we've got a perfect environment for doing this.

 

If it was a farming industry and you said that piece of land on that piece of water, you'd be pretty anxious to start farming on it. They don't have the same respect as the farming industry has, so that's an issue, too. We have to look at all those things. We have to look at, again, quality in the product. The quality in those products is pretty good because these guys are competing in international markets. What is better, to buy a fish that is grown in Nova Scotia that you know exactly what has happened to it from day one, or one from Chile that you don't really know what happened to it, no idea what antibiotics were used or whatever the case may be, so which is worse? I really don't want to use that term - which is better for us is probably the better way to put it.

 

If we know exactly where we are and we have strict controls on those, I think we can move the industry forward in a positive way. We've got an aging population here that has a lot of time on their hands, they don't need a job and they move to rural Nova Scotia and build a nice home, a retirement home and they don't want to see any changes. In the meantime, the young people in that community are leaving because they can't find a job.

The average wages in an aquaculture site is $35,000 a year. You can't say that in the farming industry in Nova Scotia or anywhere in the country. They are well-paid jobs, they are year-round jobs and it's a good place to work. There are issues we've got to address. We'll see, when the report comes back, where we go from there. I'm hopeful that it will be along the lines of the Ivany report. They've identified that as one area of growth.

 

We've got to grow our economy, we have no choice. It's not a matter of you don't like the look of it out in front of your place, we've got to grow the economy and we've got to do it in an environmentally sound, safe, and sustainable way.

 

MR. LOHR: So, Mr. Minister, if the aquaculture report recommends more open-pen salmon farming sites, will you issue more licences for more sites?

 

MR. COLWELL: We will consider it at that point but we've got to do a lot of homework before we do any more sites, to make sure we get buy-in from the local communities, there has to be better consultation and we're already working on that side of it so that people know for sure what is going on, not just the rumour mills. That usually kills a site quicker than anything, so we have to do that.

 

We have to do some more science around the sites and take away the myths. We've got people popping their hand up and saying "I'm a biologist" when actually they're not a fish biologist and really aren't experts in the field and nobody is challenging that. We have to challenge that, we have to do our homework properly.

 

If there are issues, we've got to address the issues and if we can't address them then we'll have to take appropriate action. So the answer is we'd like to grow more but we're not going to do it unless we do it right.

 

MR. LOHR: What do you think are the biggest hindrances to growth in the industry?

 

MR. COLWELL: The biggest hindrance, very simply put, people who don't want it in their backyard. That's it.

 

MR. LOHR: What comments would you have on shore, on land salmon farming, I guess, what do you see the biggest hindrance is in that industry going forward?

 

MR. COLWELL: Cost.

 

MR. LOHR: What costs?

 

MR. COLWELL: Costs of operating them and building them. They are more expensive than the open-pen ones. They offer some advantages for some species but it's very capital intensive and it's very expensive to operate. The energy costs are right through the roof, a lot of water to pump, a lot of filtration systems. The list goes on and on.

There are some successful ones running. I don't know if they make money or not, quite frankly, I'm not sure they even do. There may be one or two in the province - I just want to check for sure.

 

Basically, as far as we know, none of the sites that we have are making money. The only real light in the tunnel is the halibut hatchery. There's a halibut hatchery and they grow the small halibut and they actually fly them to Norway. They will take every small halibut they can get because they get $20 a pound for when they're grown out. They've come up with a system in Norway that has been very successful and we hope to have that sort of technology here in the not-too-distant future because there's a huge market for halibut now. It's a very labour intensive, onshore operation and very, very expensive to get set up in.

 

We had a meeting recently with the gentleman who runs that operation and his customers and they need to do some infrastructure improvements but it's difficult to invest the money that they need to move to the next step and make it profitable. It's all around their business plan, it's very difficult.

 

MR. LOHR: I would like to ask you some more questions about hatcheries but before we just leave salmon farming, I guess I would like to know about - you mentioned that we don't live in as difficult a disease regime here as in other parts of the world. I wonder if you could comment on the disease or pest issues and also what level of collaboration do we have with other parts of the world that are facing these same issues?

 

MR. COLWELL: Well the disease issues are pretty well universal. ISA is the biggest issue they have and in Nova Scotia, from what I understand, it is contracted from the wild salmon. So wild salmon swim by a site, not only in Nova Scotia but in Atlantic Canada, they have the disease and it infects the ones in the pen. If they find one salmon that is infected, they destroy the whole pen. We've seen that in Newfoundland, they destroyed I think it was at least $30 million worth of fish almost ready to go to market - found one salmon. So they're serious about identifying this.

 

The thing with the disease is it only affects salmon. It doesn't affect trout, it doesn't affect halibut, it doesn't affect Arctic char, nothing but salmon, only salmon. So that's a problem. We haven't had any sign of an outbreak in Nova Scotia for several years. That doesn't mean we wouldn't hear one tomorrow.

 

The other issue is sea lice and getting a system to get the sea lice off the salmon is an issue again. They are contracted from the wild salmon and they occur naturally so that's an issue that we have. Those are the two main issues that we see. There are other things as well but not as common. It's like agriculture with pests you would have, with aphids and all the other problems you have. It's a little bit more difficult to treat because it's in the water environment so they have to be very careful what is used, to make sure it doesn't cause any harm to the environment or to any other species around.

 

That science is developing. Presently the federal government, through the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, check for ISA. Again, if they find one or the fish farm finds one, they destroy all the fish. They are still safe for human consumption and are used in other sorts of food, like mink food or anything like that. They destroy them all and they are paid compensation through the federal government. We have no input on that at all. I'm glad they do it because I wouldn't want to see a $30 million hit on our budget for the fish that contracted a disease.

 

It's good that that's in place through the federal government. I hope they continue that, quite frankly.

 

MR. LOHR: Okay, I guess I would just like to move on to another topic. I will get back to hatcheries in a minute. The six pillars you mentioned, one was safety and I was just wondering, are there any planned changes to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations for the fishery?

 

MR. COLWELL: That's actually the Department of Labour that does that, not us. We're a partner in that. I know we do a lot of safety training - there are some organizations that do that around life vests. I've talked to the industry about it and many of the people in the industry - a fisherman would never ever wear a lifejacket - ever, under any circumstances.

 

I remember I was out in Prince Edward Island years ago and was on a fishing boat and we were lobster fishing and long-lining, and the Coast Guard and the RCMP came up in their boat and checked with this guy. They knew who he was. "Can you show us our life ring?" "I can't show it today because I've got it nailed to the wall so I don't lose it." So that was the attitude in the fishing industry. He had lifejackets, but he had a hard time finding them the day they came.

 

From what I can tell from the industry, that has changed now. They help reduce fatalities because one of the problems we do have in the fishing industry are very high fatalities. A lot of times it's because they don't have life preservers on or survival suits - whatever the case may be. Other times, it wouldn't help them anyway. They get tangled up in gear and the gear hauls them overboard. There are a lot of issues around that and with the workers' compensation that Mr. Belliveau talked about earlier, it is a serious concern for the industry. It's a huge cost and the more accidents and the more deaths they have the more the rate goes up for the whole industry.

 

I think the industry hopefully is starting to realize that the more claims they get, the more it costs them, so we want to get that cost as low as possible. Again, that's the minister through the Department of Labour and the Workers' Compensation Board.

 

MR. LOHR: I just want to ask you about hatcheries. Maybe you can refresh my memory. I believe there was a provincial hatchery closed maybe a couple of years ago. I know there is a hatchery in Margaree. What hatcheries does the provincial government operate around the province?

 

MR. COLWELL: We have three hatcheries. They are for salmon, speckled trout, brown trout, and rainbow trout. The Margaree does a lot of salmon work in that area. McGee's Lake, McGowan's Lake and Fraser's Mill are the three in the province. They're the only hatcheries like that. Now, there are some hatcheries for aquaculture, but they're privately owned.

 

MR. LOHR: They're privately owned, yes. Presumably they're holding their own in the budget. Where do they show up in the budget?

 

MR. COLWELL: It goes under the inland fisheries budget. That's all included in that. They held their own in that. It's important to our sport fishing industry. The sport fishing industry, as I said earlier, is growing in the province with licence sales up about 20 per cent, which is really positive. The ability to grow that industry is really important and it's a good healthy way to do it.

 

I actually spent some time at the RV show and we had a booth there supporting sport fishing in Nova Scotia through the department. It was pretty interesting - the people come by, they're pretty excited about it. They knew a lot about the industry and knew a lot about the hatcheries. It's a growing industry and it will continue to grow as people have more leisure time, more money to spend.

 

I know if I go on a fishing trip for a weekend at my camp in the woods, it's a very expensive venture by the time it's done. By the time you buy everything you need and fix the equipment you didn't fix last year and maybe get your outboard motor done again and whatever the case may be - I know every time I go it's a big expense and I'm an avid sport fisherman. When all the other kids were playing baseball, I was fishing.

 

MR. LOHR: I would just like to ask about - I think I'm correct - that there was one hatchery closed a couple of years ago, would that be correct?

 

MR. COLWELL: There was one hatchery that the federal government closed.

 

MR. LOHR: What are your plans for these three hatcheries? They're going to continue to operate? There are no plans to close them?

 

MR. COLWELL: No plans at all. We want to keep them open. We want to keep them stocking the lakes. They stock a couple of hundred lakes per year.

 

MR. LOHR: Is there a plan to see them increase?

 

MR. COLWELL: Probably not at the present level, but a couple of hundred lakes here is a lot of fish. Also, we do a lot in the Margaree with the salmon as well so it's important that we keep that going. The Margaree salmon stocks seem to be rebounding, I believe, am I correct on that? Yes, and it's probably the only river in eastern Canada that is rebounding as good as it is, and it has a lot to do with the people that are preserving the river and the hatchery operation. It all goes together to make a huge difference.

 

MR. LOHR: Very good, yes. I'm just wondering about the Gaspereau River. I know there is a small fishing industry on that and there are a number of licences - I believe that's where, Gaspereau - for smelts. I just wonder if you'd comment on where that industry is headed.

 

MR. COLWELL: Those licences are issued by the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Those resources are managed by DFO, so we actually have no input into that.

 

MR. LOHR: Okay. I believe that one of the issues in the Gaspereau River is water flow that I believe is managed by the Department of Environment on behalf of Nova Scotia Power. There is power generation there, but the water flow is critical to the fishery industry there. I'm just wondering if you could comment on that. Do you have any role in maintaining or being involved in that?

 

MR. COLWELL: No, that would be with Environment.

 

MR. LOHR: I believe my colleague has a question, Mr. Chairman. I would like to turn it over for a minute.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Sydney River-Mira-Louisbourg.

 

MR. ALFIE MACLEOD: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Minister, good to see you and your staff.

 

MR. COLWELL: Good to see you.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I appreciate having an opportunity. I know that you've gone over the lobster industry quite extensively over the course of the day. Last week was a milestone in the community, in the province, when it came to fishing, and I apologize for not being here for some of the conversation that took place in that. But I'm just curious as to the makeup of the board that is going to be there to help push the marketing of the lobster industry as we move forward. I'm wondering if you could just give me a sense of how that's going to work.

 

MR. COLWELL: That hasn't been determined yet. It has to be a co-operative venture among the three provinces, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. We've had some discussions on it, some ideas around it, but nothing is firm yet and those negotiations have to continue. We had to get this lobster summit behind us to get support from the industry. All three provinces are having consultations with the industry to see, number one, if they're in favour of the levy. It seems to be pretty unanimous in our own industry with the people we've consulted with, and we've got a lot more consulting to do to move forward on this.

 

Again, how we're going to structure it is difficult as some of the other members - it has to be all about accountability too, how this is structured, to make sure that the gentleman sitting on the wharf that doesn't understand how marketing works and how it will affect him directly appreciates what is going on and can understand why certain things are done certain ways. That's going to be difficult to get there, as you can imagine - you have fishermen in your area - so it makes it pretty interesting. They deserve that accountability, so we have to build that in and the structure we do to do it. It's going to be a complex issue but we've got to do it and we've got to do it right.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Thank you for that, and I appreciate that. I think it is going to be a complex issue, but I think the summit also showed the willingness of the industry to move forward. I think the ministers and the departments from the three provinces have made some headway that has been a long time coming, so I commend you all for that.

 

One thing that I would suggest is that when the makeup of this board for going forward is looked at, that we actually use some active fishermen as members of the board. Because at the end of the day, we all know the theory behind lobster fishing - we also know we have somebody here that has a lot of experience with lobster fishing - but I think we need to have some people there that know the practical, on the ground, how it works. I think that would be something that would add a lot of credibility to further what you have already said about wanting to make sure that it is a credible organization. I would make that suggestion to you, and I would be willing to supply some names that have expressed some interest in doing that, because after all, I'm very fortunate in my constituency to represent the lobster capital of the world. Sterling will argue with me about that, but I've always told him if he wants to bring some lobsters here and we'll have a test, I'm there for it.

 

MR. COLWELL: Well, I'll take you up on that one.

 

MR. MACLEOD: So that would be something though, I think, minister, that would be very helpful in making this work. To get it to where we have, I'm really pleased about that.

 

MR. COLWELL: I think that's extremely good advice, which we will take because if it's not a buy-in by the whole chain of harvesting, processing into marketing and all representatives from all those groups, it won't work. It just won't work. I'm a big supporter of having all the key elements of anything we're dealing with represented properly so people can't come back and say they didn't have input into this and they don't know what's going on or any of those arguments. We want to take all those away so they can get out there and have an open, transparent and accountable - accountable is the key - process.

 

This has been reported in the three provinces exactly the same way. As we move forward on this, we're going to be the biggest shareholder in this because we land more lobsters than anyone else. At a two cent levy, we're going to be about $1.6 million out of $2.4 million total. So we're going to be the biggest shareholder in this thing. So far I've let Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick get away with thinking they're the biggest shareholder. That's going to come to an end, but we're going to do it nicely.

 

But we have to have that accountability and I think that is a great idea and we will do that. We'll push to make sure that happens because we have to have that confidence. That confidence level is not there now in the industry and nobody trusts anybody. I think some of it is justified, some of it isn't.

 

We've made some changes already in the buying process that will hold more accountability. We're introducing some more changes and we're going to be doing more and more to make people more accountable so that we'll build trust between the fishermen and the buyers more, and between the buyers and the processors more. Those things we've already started to put in place. That's something that I initiated almost right after we got in place and our department is initiating those changes now. We're making progress. We take little steps and see what kind of results we get with those and then we'll take another step, maybe a bit bigger, and another one a little bit bigger.

 

We want to do this right. We've got one shot at this and if we don't do it right, then it's going to be gone forever. The Federation of Agriculture is where we'd like to be in fisheries. They don't always agree with each other, but at the end of the day, they duke it out, out of sight, and they come in and hold their breath and grind their teeth and say "I agree too" and we move forward. So that is what we need in the fishing industry. If we can get that same kind of a buy-in, we'll be in very good shape and we can really start making something happen and put more money in the pockets of the fishermen - that's what this is all about, that's the bottom line.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Of course we all realize that when you put more money in the pocket of the fishermen, you put more money back in the communities because they'll be putting that money back into the economy buying services and whatever. It has the potential to be a real win-win situation. What we saw last Spring with some of the protests that took place in our area, we certainly want to try to get past that and move forward to seeing an industry that is profitable and part of the backbone of our economy here in the Province of Nova Scotia. With that Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn back the little remaining time we have to my colleague, and thank you both for allowing me to have that question.

 

MR. COLWELL: Thank you.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. MacLeod.

 

The honourable member for Kings North.

 

MR. JOHN LOHR: All right, thank you. I guess I would like to just use the remaining time to ask you a question about the European free trade agreement. How do you see your department reacting to that or marketing that? Obviously that presents opportunities for the fisheries. What role do you see your department having and how are you going to facilitate the industry taking advantage of that free trade agreement?

 

MR. COLWELL: Well we're pretty excited about it in the fishing industry. It's going to remove some major tariffs from Europe that makes it almost impossible for us to compete, even though we're shipping a lot of product into Europe now. It will put us on a level playing field, and actually on an advantaged playing field. That's why this quality and marketing levy is so important, if we can do this now and get ready for when those markets open up and penetrate the markets before they do open up, with less levies as it moves forward, I think it's a great opportunity for us right across the board.

 

We're doing some programs now - I want to check on one. We're funding now for herring and lobster MSC certification which makes it possible to ship into Europe. It's really just a program that the retailers demand before they buy the product in restaurants. It's a standard level of quality and where the product came from, not nearly the quality that I want to see the industry move to but it's a first step.

 

We are proactive in that and we will continue to be proactive until we get the industry in a place that they're ready to put in there and we're already shipping in those markets. We've got some very successful businesses that are doing very well in those markets so we have to work with those industries. Actually I was quite surprised with the meeting I had, one of the very largest ones are very anxious to help us with that and also help the smaller companies because their vested interest is they want to send a quality product in, they don't want smaller companies sending garbage in and destroying their markets, too.

 

I think that's a huge change in the mentality of what the industry is about. They've offered to work with us extensively to help that, at their cost. So I think that's a major step forward. We're seeing some major movements as we move forward here. I think we've got a great opportunity for Nova Scotia and the lobster industry is just one example.

 

For other value-added products that the market may need, the industry is reacting to those and realized what those are. When we went to the Boston Seafood Show we talked to a lot of people, I'm sure you did, about value added and how it maybe needs to become - the lobster needs to become a convenience thing that you pull out of your freezer and you have for supper tonight, instead of having to go and buy the live one and cook it and have all that mess and smell and all that time doing it. Now in Nova Scotia that's the way to eat lobster but in other places in the world it may not be the way. Those things are all very important.

 

I think it's going to be an incredible opportunity for Nova Scotia, particularly in Nova Scotia. The other thing is in Europe - I did a lot of work in Europe and a lot of marketing in Europe and Europeans love working with Nova Scotians. They don't like Americans. Americans love working with Nova Scotians and don't get along too well with Europeans - a big advantage for us. So we will be able to take a top-quality lobster from Maine. Now Maine are taking lobsters from us and selling in the U.S. lobsters as Maine lobsters, they are actually Canadian lobsters. We will take some of the Maine lobsters, top-quality ones, and market them in Europe, where they won't be able to do it as easily. So it's a golden opportunity for us.

 

MR. LOHR: I guess I'm just wondering and I'm not sure that agreement has been fully ratified yet, I don't know if it has, but will you be planning trade missions to Europe or how will you be going about that?

 

MR. COLWELL: Yes, those have already started. There's a European seafood show in Brussels next month and actually we will be attending that. That's a marketing show that has been there for a while and we've been attending so it's very positive.

 

Mr. Chairman, if I could have a break for five minutes, I think it's about time.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay the committee will recess for five minutes.

 

[6:59 p.m. The committee recessed.]

 

[7:06 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. We'll call the committee back to order.

 

The honourable member for Queens-Shelburne.

 

HON. STERLING BELLIVEAU: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll use your guidance to stop me with two minutes remaining so the minister can read his resolution.

 

Thank you for the chance to have the second opportunity and I feel somewhat like a director here to a story that actually affects Nova Scotians, in particular rural Nova Scotians because I actually set that up that I wanted people to stay tuned and pay attention to the second portion of my questions. I am really honoured to have this opportunity.

 

I know if I was to hear or see the front page of the local paper or regional paper and it said there was an opportunity to create 1,000 jobs in rural Nova Scotia, I would have everyone's attention who gets that publication. I hope I got your attention and in the next hour I'm going to lay out where I believe we have opportunities in rural Nova Scotia and we have been victims of red tape for decades and we need to stop this. I'm going to start by just reading a simple paragraph. It's actually from your government's Budget Address and I just chose two or three paragraphs, so please bear with me. You can find this on Page 14 of the Minister of Finance's Budget Address that we just witnessed in the main Chamber a few days ago.

"On February 12 the Nova Scotia Commission on Building Our New Economy, led by Ray Ivany, released its final report to Nova Scotians. I commend the previous government for initiating this important work and all parties for supporting the report and its conclusions. . . . To support this work, we will create the ONE Nova Scotia Coalition. This Coalition will reach across party lines and sectors with the mandate of implementing the changes called for in the Ivany report and by Nova Scotians across the province."

 

Now when I listened to that and I read that and I witnessed that, I said, here's an opportunity for Nova Scotians. I'm not a great lecturer, I'm not a scholar, I'm an ordinary, simple individual. I read the Ivany report and it talked about how political attitudes must change in this province. It also highlighted that we need to attract and have the opportunity to keep and retain young individuals in our rural communities across Nova Scotia. They are leaving. We witness that on a daily basis.

 

I'm not here to condemn political Parties. What I'm here to say is what I heard and what I feel is that we must change the direction. Minister, in your opening comments - I'm going to be a few minutes in these opening comments because I want to get this message out and for you to have an opportunity to counter or respond to it, so I want to take the time and lay this out.

 

What I've observed in the Ivany report is saying that these attitudes that we see - a political system on a rotation basis - you're in four years, you're out four years. Let's change and let's go and we can continue chasing the dog's tail. It must stop. What I'm saying here in the next few minutes, I'm going to lay out an opportunity to create over 1,000 jobs in rural Nova Scotia.

 

Unless I've come from a different planet, then I think that I'm on the right course, but in order for me to be on the right course, I need all my other colleagues from the other political Parties to agree with that, or else we're condemned from the start. I'm going to tell you a quick story about being condemned from the start.

 

Last February 2013, I went to Ottawa, and I had a different role than I have today. I went there with a commitment and the respect that I had from communities and I went there before the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I deeply respected the whole mechanism, the opportunity that I was going to have to lay out what I'm going to lay out here in the next few minutes, that what I see in my community, because people wanted to stay there - they just wanted an opportunity to get clear of this red tape. That was my main message. I didn't have any high paid speech writers - it was just a few bullet points about what I saw and observed of opportunities to create new jobs in undeveloped species.

 

I was prepared and in the dead of the winter I went there and I was so encouraged that I was going to get their attention. That's the attitude I had going and sitting in front of the microphone when that microphone was powered up. Just before that - now, I'm trying to make the scene - the Ivany report talks about changing political attitudes and working together, and this is exactly where I want to go. Before I got to that microphone before the committee, a Nova Scotia senator came up to me and very bluntly said who he was, why I was there and his intention - he hadn't heard one word yet - his intention was to make sure that I did not get elected or anything that I reported on behalf of my government - he was going to work with whatever I could do to make sure that it would not be fulfilled and our Party and our government was defeated.

 

Now, going into that with all the confidence and here was an opportunity and I'm going to present in a testimony to a Fisheries Standing Committee that wanted to hear testimony about how we could create jobs, this was the mindset of going into that political arena.

 

Now, the Ivany report - this is what I'm saying to you - identifies that that political arena must change. I couldn't agree any stronger. I couldn't agree with the attitudes that I have witnessed, and in the next few minutes I'm going to lay out - because in that particular presentation, I talked about opportunities in rural Nova Scotia and I want to tie this in. In rural Nova Scotia, the fishing industry - the people who are on the water who observe this on a daily basis - and this is one of the reasons why I asked about your commitment about science earlier because this is important. We have to have the commitment for science because what I reported in Ottawa is that your science is obsolete. It is 30 to 50 years old and you need to throw it out the window and you need to put some money there, and the federal government - no work from our senators have endorsed or tried to keep that science so some of this stuff can be created. That's why I asked that question earlier, is that we need to have this science so we can lay out the groundwork and get some of these species developed.

 

In that presentation, I'm saying here tonight, in Nova Scotia, fishermen have observed different species and I'm going to name you a few: stone crab, green crab, glass eels, whelks, hagfish, the recreational tuna fish, the recreational shark fishery as tournaments that can be "hook and release". With the technology we have today, I can go out on any sized boat in southwest Nova Scotia or across Nova Scotia and set up a video link and I can land a 1,000 pound tuna and have a video link and put a tag on it, and actually not bring that fish aboard the boat, hook and line, release it and I have got somewhere an estimate of what that fish weighs. I can enter a tournament. Everybody is happy that we've never landed a pound of fish, and we've given people an experience that they would pay high dollars for. That's just a little example.

 

Getting back to some of these commercialized species - the stone crabs, this is why I'm saying the science is obsolete. In the early 1990s, the cod moratoriums were introduced. Our cod fisheries had basically evaporated away from our Maritime waters, and when you remove a predator fish, or groundfish, the shellfish explode. What we've seen in shrimp, crabs, lobster is an explosion of shellfish because the predator has been removed from the food chain. This is something I wanted to explain to the advisory committee in February before the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. We need to get clear of your science. We need to get new science in.

So what I'm suggesting here tonight, if we as a province - our former government was committed to at least two species in the Province of Nova Scotia, we'll make the contribution and we'll get the science and the universities on side, and we'll go after and pay the science for two species. I've named seven or eight or 10.

 

Now, we talk about a partnership - let's have a partnership with our Atlantic Provinces, which is five of them: Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. If they were to join in this co-operation and do the same thing with two species, there are 10 species right there, and if the federal government was to match it, 20 species. Now, you want to talk about creating 1,000 jobs in rural Nova Scotia, I think I've laid the groundwork very clearly of how this can be done.

 

Getting back to the industry, the industries have observed - and this is not hogwash - every one of those species, I have confidence that the biomass is there. The fishing industry knows that they're there. Things have changed in the last 25 years, and Ottawa sits there and says, we don't want to hear any of the above, have a nice day and come back whenever because we're not paying attention to you. That attitude has to change so I've set this up to say that in your Budget Address your government talked about forming a ONE Nova Scotia coalition. What is that? Is it an all-Party committee that's addressing the needs that I've just spelled out here of trying to create economic prosperity in rural Nova Scotia?

 

If I can go back to your opening comments, minister, you said yourself it is not working. We have to do something different in order to make these communities sustainable. I can look around this table and I'm confident that everybody is witnessing our youth leaving our communities. I've been challenged with it before and I'll turn this over to you in a short while here, but I just want to know the impact, the magnitude, of what we're dealing with here.

 

Fishermen across Nova Scotia come up to me and they say, I know that these whelks are out there and if you go in Cape Breton there are commercial licences for whelks - not west of Halifax; you can't go. The fishermen will say, I'll pay for the test fishery, I'll pay for the fuel. I know that they're there in Georges Bank, Browns Bank, LaHave Banks off Sable Island. That biomass is there but Ottawa will just drag you down with the red tape.

 

It needs to stop and this is my commitment here tonight, that we, and this is what I'm eventually going to turn over to you, minister, is that we need to be proactive. If we're going to listen to the Ivany report - I mean there have been similar reports made of this in the last 20 years, this is nothing new. So if we don't change these attitudes - and I keep going back to the senator in Ottawa, he's right, he's there to put myself out of work and the next time it may be you that he may want to put out of work.

 

That needs to stop, that attitude needs to change. The Ivany report talks about it, it's up to us to change it. To me, there is some factual information here where the industry is saying we know those species are out there. The green crabs are another one. It irritates me to see that the federal government has dropped a pilot project only in the Gulf area, including P.E.I. and northern New Brunswick and excludes the Scotia Fundy.

 

The fishermen who I talk to on a daily basis know that this biomass is out there, how can they justify having a policy that only targets a certain region? I would say it would have to be Atlantic-wide. I feel if we work together - and this is what I want you to comment on - are my comments from another planet? Isn't it what we're here to do? Isn't it that we are here to work together to create a better livelihood in our communities and to make sure our youth stay there.

 

To me our young people only want one thing and that one thing is to make sure that they have a household income that they can maintain and sustain their livelihood for their family, their loved ones, and if there's any disruption, if there's a downfall - and many of these communities are very dependent on one species; you can talk about crabs, lobsters, scallops or whatever, they are so dependent on one species - if they don't have anything to supplement their income, then that household income starts to waver. When that does, if one of those individuals loses their job, they are having difficulty to maintain it and we're seeing them move to that great economy out West and it has to stop.

 

To me, we have an opportunity here - and I'm going to turn it over to you saying there are opportunities out there and we need to be proactive and we need all Parties in this. I'm just talking about one primary resource that actually built Nova Scotia and there are a number of other primary resources and I'm not excluding them but I'm just showing by example that we can make a difference but we have to work together. Unless this Ivany report is totally not going to be used in the future, then I want to know. Please tell me that I am either wasting my time or we're going to have an opportunity to work together.

I'm interested in hearing your response to those remarks. Thank you.

 

MR. COLWELL: I'm going to ask you a question before I do that. Did you officially put it on the record about that senator who came up to you and his name? When you represented to the Senate Committee that's the first thing I would have done and what he said.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: What I said, and I know that you probably would ask it, I have no problem testifying before any commission about that individual. I have a witness to do that. I have confidence in what I heard and what the intent of that senator said. I was startled by that comment.

 

Now I am not here to get Brownie points telling stories like that. I tried to tie that in with what the attitudes and what the Ivany report talked about. To me that is a classic example. I have no problem defending what I just said and I feel confident of that. It's sad to be able to tell that story but the truth will set you free.

 

MR. COLWELL: I'm not questioning that. I totally believe you and I've seen this attitude before, but the point I was making is, the first thing I would have done, I would have gone to the microphone and I would have identified the senator and said exactly what he said because it would have been in the official record of the Senate. That's what I would have done.

 

That's the kind of attitude that kills our province, and it's not just in the Senate - it's even locally. People think that people from away can do things better than we can do them and you should import somebody from Toronto to be the expert in the field. Indeed we probably have more experts in the field than they have - whatever field you want to talk about.

 

I agree, we have to handle things differently. I can guarantee you, I didn't have to run in this last election - I could have retired. I decided to run because I know we have to make a difference in the province. By the time these differences are in place, and hopefully they're positive differences, I won't be in politics anymore. I may not even be alive anymore, but it's important to me for my family, for the families of Nova Scotia and for this province.

 

This province has been very good to me over the years and I've managed to do a lot of things that most people never get a chance to do, and everyone has their own story and they can say the same thing in this province. I'm proud to be a member of this Legislature. I'm proud to be a Nova Scotian, and I wasn't born here - I was born in New Brunswick, but I'm very proud to be a Nova Scotian.

 

What you say is true - we have to work together. We have to make some tough decisions. I've been making tough decisions since I came in power. I've tackled some of the old issues that nobody else would touch in the previous governments. I've been so far successful in getting away with doing that. I don't know when that's going to end, but sometime soon it will end, I'm sure. They're going to hit me with an issue that I can't get the proper public perception on. That's what this business is - public perception and action to make things happen.

 

There is one today that's 25 years old. I issued the directive to the department to fix it now - a pretty tough decision to make in this particular case. Twenty-five years ago if the decision would have been made it probably would have been a whole lot better for the people involved, but nobody would make that decision. I made decisions on the Truro Raceway - a 25 year-old problem. That is going to be fixed.

 

I'm making decisions in the aquaculture industry, like I said earlier. The vet had been pushing for changes in the protocol to make it more accountable, more open, and better for him to work. The first meeting with him, I decided to move that forward. That was never done by anybody before. That should have been done before. So I'm making decisions we have to make to move forward. In those decisions I know we have to work together to do that, and I sincerely want to do that. I want to make that happen.

As far as under-utilized species, I know you've worked very hard in the past on that and I give you a lot of credit for the work you did. We're going to continue that work, but it's like I said before, we need the roadmap from DFO. We have to find out what the roadmap is. We've identified some of the species that we have to verify by science, but we've got to know what exactly DFO wants in the science. What are they looking for? We don't know. I mean, it's like taking a shot in the dark and hope like heck it hits something that makes a difference.

 

So we have to get that information. This is something we're going to push DFO for. We're going to keep pushing them until we get the answer. Once we get that answer, then the path is easy. You say, okay, we've got to spend two or three years doing science and the science has got to be this, so let's put the resources in, let's work together, let's make it happen. I know the industry is there, willing to do this stuff - willing to donate their time, their fuel, their boats, and that's worth a lot - and collect the information, that has already happened, as you're well aware, in a lot of areas.

 

We're getting significant information, but it's not targeted enough so we have to work along with them. That's why we've hired a lobster biologist - to work along with this science. That's going to be his main goal - to work on lobster and the science around lobster. We will hire whatever other staff we need to, to work on the under-utilized species. I think it's bang on.

 

You and I are saying the same thing about an income that's needed for families. If you have a family that can work six months of the year, say, in the lobster fishery and maybe do some herring and whatever else - if you can add one more month to that income of that family, that's the difference, making sure that that year that they live well; they can do the things they need to do, and make sure they want to stay in that community and make that community grow. You're absolutely right - I couldn't agree more. I said that 15 years ago when I was the Fisheries Minister before. I still totally believe in that.

 

So we have to move these industries forward. We have to do it in a concerted effort. We can't be bickering amongst each other about foolishness that doesn't mean anything, and in the meantime we hurt the industry we all treasure so much. I agree with that.

 

I already gave you and my other colleagues here in the Legislature an open invitation to work with me. That's why I invite you to go to the Boston Seafood Show, to make sure you could get there and keep up to date on what's going on and learn from that side of it. Every time I have an opportunity, that invitation will be extended. I think that's important. That's important for doing what we have to do.

I'm interested in your ideas on how we can get the fishermen organized because that's the key to this whole thing. Tie that up with quality and then put some marketing after that and we're on the right road, but it's a long, hard road, as you know very well. You know how independent the fishermen are, and I think that's a positive thing. It's also a detrimental thing if they don't want to work together. Even if they don't agree with each other, it doesn't matter, but give us the tools to move forward so we're all moving the ship in the same direction. That has not happened in the past. It has been just a continuous disaster.

 

So how do I - and you had the same problem - go to DFO and say, this is what we want to do in Nova Scotia? As soon as the words are out of my mouth, some guy in southwest Nova Scotia or Cape Breton or somewhere is saying, that's not where we want to go, this is garbage and nobody believes this, and all this sort of stuff - and DFO looks at me and says, what planet are you from? You're sure not from Nova Scotia. Listen to your industry saying they don't want to do this. That's what happens. It happens all the time. So we've got to get these guys on side somehow. We're expending a lot of effort in that. Our staff that are working on it, we're actually holding them accountable now for how many people they meet with, what they do, and it's all about accountability.

 

We're moving in that direction. We have to go and visit, as one of the colleagues here in the PC caucus invited us to go talk to his fishermen. I dropped other things so we could actually take the time and go to an Opposition riding and talk to fishermen at the invitation of that member - nothing to do with politics - just to help clear the air, get the support for the things we're doing and we had an extremely good meeting. It was great for me; it was great for the fishermen in the area.

 

We did find out some very interesting things afterwards - very useful things for us; very useful things for the industry; and no more hearsay, rumours and all that stuff. We set that straight and I'm going to continue to do that every occasion I can possibly get, so if you have any colleagues who want me to visit in a particular area, in any of the three industries I represent - because there are really truly three industries - I'd be very willing to go and I will do that on a priority basis. I want to really hear what's going on in the communities.

 

Usually the simplest things that make the difference are some comments by a fisherman somewhere who will raise an issue - because they're very intelligent, very hardworking entrepreneurs - will all of a sudden create an idea that we thought about but didn't know how to approach it or we didn't even think about. You're very familiar with that, working in the industry so long. It's important we engage the industry in these things.

 

As far as working together, I think that's a key to making all this happen. It's going to be a long, hard road. We've got to make tough decisions. I'm going to make tough decisions. I'm going to make decisions that I feel are based on moving the economy forward. Some people aren't going to like them. I've already got an organization that isn't going to like me very much very shortly, but they're not financially accountable. It's all about politics with them - and I don't mean Party politics. I mean, just politics that you would have in a business or whatever, that kind of politics. It's all about getting money and looking after themselves. I'm not going to support organizations like that. I'm going to wear this one a little bit, but that's fine. I've got a back-up plan and I'm going to implement that very shortly.

That's what I've been going through on a regular basis and I've spent my last six months - besides trying to build relationships with the federal government, with the minister, and again, we've got an incredibly good relationship now. They're open to ideas, open to talk to us. Now, to get them to talking - as you're well aware, you've made really good suggestions. You know your industry and I'm hearing that as I talk to the federal people, but to get the whole bureaucracy on side to move this stuff forward is a really big problem in Ottawa. We've got to address that.

 

That's why we need this roadmap, so the bureaucracy in Ottawa knows what the roadmap is, and if we meet all these milestone marks and points, we know at the end of the day, here's the goal and we'll get to the goal because we've made these 25 or 30 steps or five steps, whatever it is, to get there. That's what we have to do.

 

To figure that out is going to be very complex - let's put it that way. It's something I'm going to raise at the minister's conference we have with the provinces, territories and the federal minister. I'm going to raise this issue because it's a very important issue. You're absolutely right, I think we can create maybe 1,000 jobs, maybe more, or we can maintain more than 1,000 jobs, and have people stay in the province, which is just as important as creating 1,000 more. We need to do both things.

 

We're both on the same page exactly. How we get there - we may differ on how we're going to get there, but that's good too because that may stir some new ideas. I'd be willing - any time you want to discuss it with me, I have an open door. Give me a call, drop in, whatever you want to do, and I'd be glad to talk about it and see where we can move from here.

 

If we don't start this dialogue and we don't start the process and make the tough decisions, we're never going to proceed. As I said earlier, I'm looking at problems that are 25 years old now and nobody had the political will - I'll put it very politely - to do these things. I'm going to rectify these because I've got to get them out of the way so we can concentrate on the important job we have ahead of us to put Nova Scotians to work and grow our economy - and they're distractions, but we've got to clear them up. I'll be darned, I'm going to clear them up.

 

As we clear those things up, I can tell you that since I've come into this position, we've been having interesting discussions with staff, trying to get staff on side with the direction I'm moving in. They've stepped up to the plate and I'm pleased to see that. It took some time. They were demoralized. The morale in some of the departments is very low and they didn't believe that I could deliver the things that indicated they might be able to deliver.

 

We made an announcement of $200,000 for the apple industry and they said, well, we can't get that, we shouldn't ask for it - we can't get it because nobody would give us money in the past. I said, well, you let me worry about that; you put the programs in place. We got it. The $500,000 we put in the mink industry - again, I asked for it, I got it. So we're going to ask for more things and next year I hope you come here complaining I put the budget up in the departments and we're getting results. That's what I hope. If we get $0.25 million in marketing for lobster, we're going to grow that. We're going to do some other things in the industry and see if we can't.

 

If we don't make these strategic investments now, we cannot grow the industry. I can tell you, we're committed to growing the economy in rural Nova Scotia. So as we move forward, we have to use all the assets we have, all the expertise, including your expertise and Mr. Lohr's expertise in helping us move these things forward. Beat up on me in the Legislature - I don't care about that, but when we walk outside the Legislature, let's do what we have to do for Nova Scotia. I'll work with you on those things and I'll commit to doing that, but I need real ideas, real positive things we can move forward, and I'll move them forward. You don't have to worry about that, but we need to get these things done.

 

So we're talking exactly the same thing. How we do it we may differ on, but I think we can overcome that and move forward. I was asked three times to go to the Senate committee; I've declined three times. The reason I declined was because I didn't want to upset the positive relationship we have with the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada at this point - it was on a fisheries issue.

 

When the time comes and I feel it's right - not the Senate feels it's right - I will go there. If a senator says to me that we're going to do everything we can, the first statement I'm going to make is, this senator said this to me - is that what the committee has me here for; if it is, I'm leaving now.

 

These are the things we have to do. We can't let these people get away with this stuff because they're there to represent us for the betterment of the country, and the country can't be bettered unless Nova Scotia is in better shape, and all the provinces are.

 

That's why I asked you that question very directly. Anyone who says that Nova Scotia can't do something, I will take them to task, and I know you will too. We have to do that. We have to stand up. We have to be counted and we have to push and push for what we need, but we need the roadmap. We've got to build the roadmap. I'm not sure what that map is, and we've been trying to figure it out. I would say probably that the other provinces in the fishing industry are in the same boat we're in - very frustrated. I know they were 15 years ago when we rewrote the book on how the territories, provinces and the federal government worked with each other.

 

We need that roadmap and if we can get a commitment on something like that at the next ministers' meeting we have, that would be a very positive step forward. So it's all these things we have to work together on and get in place. I'd love to see that list you have of the under-utilized species. We're already doing some continuing work that you started in that area - very frustrating, as you know.

 

I'd like to see every one of those explored to see if maybe eight of them or something we can commercially exploit to a certain extent - maybe two of them, maybe limited, but at least even limited if we could add some value to a rural community on a seasonal basis, like you said, it will help someone be able to put their daughter or son through university. Maybe they can stay in the community; maybe they will come back and work in the community. Maybe they don't want to do that. Maybe they want to get involved in the enterprise because it's profitable enough to make sense, and that's the sort of thing we have to do.

 

I talked to one lobster fisherman - he was out West - and his first year he told the boss that he had to go home to lobster fish for lobster season. He said, "You're fired." He said, "Fine, see you." He wasn't home two weeks and the guy called him up and said, "Look, I didn't want to fire you, I made I mistake. I'm going to send you a ticket to come back when you're done lobster season." So lo and behold the ticket came and the guy got a raise because he wouldn't go back without a raise. Now when lobster season comes, the guy says, "Here's your severance slip, see you after lobster season; here's the airplane ticket home and here's the airplane ticket back." That's how interested they are in Nova Scotians because Nova Scotians are hard workers.

 

So I totally agree, we have to plot this course ahead of us and if we don't - we're not going to pay for health care anymore - we just can't. It's growing out of control. We've got a growing debt and it's a disaster just waiting to happen. Most of the population is not going to be working soon. If you put all those things together, we're in real trouble. Anyone who thinks we're not hasn't been watching what's going on. I'm going to retire in a few years, and most of the population is so who is going to pay the bills in the meantime? It's not an easy solution. I'm interested in working with you on this stuff and we've got to make progress.

 

MR. BELLIVEAU: On the closing comments here, there have been a number of points and I welcome and thank my colleague for bringing some of these important points forward. To me this is an important issue, and to just clarify, if I was asked three times to appear before the Senate, which I heard you say, I would be there with bells on the first time. I understand you're trying to protect this relationship that you feel you have with the federal minister but relationships need to take a distance from the protection of Nova Scotians. I think there is an opportunity there.

 

That paragraph on Page 14 of your Budget Address talks about reaching across Party lines. The Ivany commission talks about reaching across Party lines. We all sit here with our little political flags and we wave them at certain times during the year and that has to stop. The time we're wasting because each and every one of us watch more and more of our youth leave our communities, and we watch our seniors pass away. To me, it is a disservice that we are here on this planet for a very short time and we're simply caregivers. We're given a chance to take care of our constituents, our communities, our residents, our families for a very short time in life and, yes, I had that same question. I could have stayed home, retired and been a fisherman, and very satisfied with my income and, like my wife said, go play golf, but knowing that I have an opportunity to represent my constituency - there was only one checkmark that I could not check off in this whole evaluation.

 

If I was fortunate to live another 20 or 30 years and I had the opportunity to do this, to represent my constituents, and never did it, I could not live with my conscience. I know that those jobs are in this community. I know those undeveloped species are out there because the fishermen tell me and they observe them.

 

I know what that senator told me before I made that presentation in February 2013. I know that political attitude has to change. The Ivany report talks about it. Your budget summary talks about it. Yet, we continue - as I said earlier - the dog chasing its tail. That, ladies and gentlemen, has to stop. We see it - we see our parliamentary system bogging down. We've seen at Law Amendments Committee how we manipulate and we don't use that and we don't listen to the public who we are here to serve. We are here to serve our constituents and our communities.

 

I know that those resources are out there and and I'll close on this - if I or any of my colleagues were ever offered an opportunity three times, like I heard you say, to stand before the Senate committee, I would be there with no hesitation the very first time, whether I had to walk to Ottawa to make sure I would take the voices of Nova Scotians.

 

Minister, I encourage you to listen to and actually do what your document says. Form that coalition, form that working group and take a strong voice to Ottawa. Remove this red tape so we can put people back to work in these communities because, as I say, the young people are simply voting with their feet, and it's not a pretty picture. I grew up in the 1960s and early 1970s where the free enterprise was alive and well. In 1968 there was a limited fishery put on here by the federal government. It has dismantled a number of communities across - I don't want to get into that, but if you allow the policies to be directed from Ottawa, we're going to have a continued dismantling and erosion of our communities in rural Nova Scotia. It is time for all of us . . .

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The time is up. Thank you. Minister, you have two minutes to wrap up.

 

MR. COLWELL: Thank you. Just on that point, the member should realize that the person who makes the decisions in the fisheries is the federal minister and not the Senate. The Senate has absolutely no input. So it would be worthwhile going to the Senate sometimes, but you've got to know why you're going and the benefits that you hope to receive. Evidently your trip there didn't work out too well.

 

I'm committed to working with the other Parties and to grow our economy and I think that's important. I want to thank you for all the questions and input you had. I think that's very important and we will take those under consideration. Anything we can do in that direction, we will. I'd ask you and your caucuses to keep informed with us and we will be offering some briefings to your caucus on some of the stuff we have started with, and look for further input after that.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E10 stand?

 

Resolution E10 stands.

 

The Committee of the Whole on Supply will rise and report to the House.

 

[The subcommittee adjourned at 7:49 p.m.]