HALIFAX, FRIDAY, APRIL 22, 2016

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

 

11:05 A.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Mr. Keith Irving

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I'd like to call the Subcommittee on Supply to order for our second day of work. I am chairing in the Red Room here for the first time. I would like to clarify that I will allow, after the initial recognition of the questioner with the speaker, I will not be re-recognizing those two parties unless the conversation gets a bit too rapid back and forth then I will at that point intervene if needed. If that's acceptable to the committee, I'll then proceed.

 

            I understand that the minister has the same staff as yesterday who have already been recognized. We will proceed then with the remaining 18 minutes from the Liberal caucus. Are there questions from the Liberal caucus?

 

The honourable Minister of Health and Wellness.

 

            HON. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to have an opportunity to ask the Minister of Agriculture a couple of questions. One of the areas that I certainly hear a bit about in my area from time to time is the abattoir capacity and whether we have a sufficient number across the province geographically located in the right areas. I'm wondering if there has been any kind of an inventory by the department and I'm just wondering how the minister and his department currently view abattoir capacity in the province.

 

            HON. KEITH COLWELL: Thank you very much, it's a very important question for the industry. One thing we do have is a shortage of CFIA - Canadian Food Inspection Agency - certified abattoirs in the province. We recently had Northumberlamb qualified to do lamb products. That means they can ship it into New Brunswick for warehousing, that Sobeys has, for instance, and other areas. They can ship it out of the province. It's a big economic benefit, having the CFIA-approved facility. We have chicken CFIA-approved facilities which are adequate for the province.

 

            We have a number of provincially inspected facilities. We'd like to see some of them, if they so wish, upgrade to CFIA levels. That would give us more capacity in the province and again for export. When I say export, we're not even allowed to move it outside of Nova Scotia at all if it's just provincially inspected. That's not necessarily a bad thing for some industries.

 

            We do need more abattoirs. We've been trying to encourage people who are in the business to either expand their operation or for new ones to start in some geographic areas. There seems to be enough capacity but just enough at the present time.

 

            MR. GLAVINE: One of the areas that I've had I've had very long interest in - in fact, I go back about 12 years, and I think it was former Progressive Conservative Member of the Legislative Assembly Mark Parent and I in 2004, we were probably two of the first MLAs to start talking on a regular basis about the local food movement.

 

            Over those 12 years, there has been very strong progress. I was just wondering if the minister could speak for a few minutes about the current status, where he still sees potential for growth in this area. I certainly keep hearing from more people wanting to know the source of their food, converting over to more of the traditional winter diet where they use local agricultural products - potatoes, carrots, cabbage, Brussels sprouts, parsnips and so on, entering more and more into their diet. I'm just wondering how the minister views the current status and where he would like to see some of the department efforts for the future.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I couldn't agree more. Twelve years is a long time to work on a project like this, but I think it's worth every minute that was spent on it. I appreciate the initiatives by yourself and Minister Parent at the time. We've really engaged a lot of the retailers in the province and the local markets - garden markets, farmers' markets. We actually have the highest number of farmers' markets per capita in Canada, which is really positive.

 

            We're trying to move towards a 20 per cent target of local food consumed in Nova Scotia, and we're getting there. We've struck a strategic program with Sobeys, and we're working on one now with Loblaws through Select Nova Scotia. We've done a lot with Taste of Nova Scotia to develop new markets and the businesses that they represent. It's very exciting. We have farmers now in some of the grocery stores talking about their produce. Last year, actually, if you bought strawberries in a Sobey's store, they were guaranteed during the season - they use day neutral plants, which have a long season - grown just outside of Truro. Those are strawberries that hadn't been on the market three years ago, local strawberries. That's the sort of thing.

 

            We've got a big commitment from the retailers in the province to produce more. I know two years ago, Sobeys had purchased $45 million worth of local produce from Atlantic Canada, and $25 million of that was from Nova Scotia. That's a very strong step forward, and I appreciate the work they've done with the local industry getting people qualified to supply product to their stores. They're finding that the product they're getting from the local farms is above average quality and they're very happy with the price and the service they provide. If they need something, the farm moves very rapidly to make sure the product is delivered on time and in excellent condition. It's a great partnership we're developing, and I think for so long that partnership hadn't been there - not because nobody wanted to do it; it was just never approached that way. It's pretty exciting. I had some discussions the other day - yesterday, actually - at the meeting with Loblaw senior officials. They're very interested in getting in on this process too. So as we move this forward and our staff, we've got a great team that's working on this out in the field all the time.

 

            As we move this forward, it's more and more awareness, like you were saying. You're exactly right when you say that more people want to know where the food comes from, how it's grown and what happens to it before it gets to the store so they can be assured they have a safe, stable food supply.

 

            MR. GLAVINE: Thank you for that commentary. I know you've also had a keen interest in seeing further developments here. I know when you took over as minister you were dealing with a crisis point in the strawberry sector. I know that there is no question that Nova Scotians certainly regard a Nova Scotia strawberry much higher than a California berry. Usually that's one of the first signs really when the new agriculture season is well in progress.

 

            I was wondering, has there been full recovery in the strawberry sector? I know you just alluded to the fact that with the ever-bearing varieties we're able to move into a longer season of local, fresh strawberries. That is certainly a huge advance for local agriculture. I was just wondering if you could give a little bit of a state of the industry - that sector - around recovery and growth of that area.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It's very interesting that the one of the first things I encountered was the complex strawberry virus and the problems that it created in the province. To make a long story short - and it's quite a long story - we ended up having to plow under every single strawberry field in Nova Scotia to get rid of this virus. Then we put in place a monitoring program through Perennia to monitor the fields and check for the virus. It's transmitted by aphids.

 

            Through the monitoring program and through the excellent work the farming industry did themselves - the farmers and their industry - we pretty well eliminated the risk of that virus. There is still some here, but it can be handled very easily with proper monitoring. The monitoring has been put in place.

 

            As far as the export of our strawberry plants, which was a really critical part of that as well, we've come up with a program that guarantees them to be disease free when they're shipped outside the province. With the four - I believe there are four - greenhouse operations that produce strawberry plants, they have recaptured the market they lost in the U.S. and the rest of Canada. One of those producers - probably one of the biggest ones in Canada now with a really good reputation for quality product - I believe they shipped somewhere around 25 million plants last year. So it's not a small business.

 

            The only way I can describe it - joined together with Agricovery, the federal-provincial program that we managed to acquire after we became elected - with that funding, with the funding we did around testing, we're now going towards a quality assurance system with one of the producers that produces plants that we're very excited about. Over time we will have the other producers involved as they see fit for their business.

 

            It's an exciting time. We've taken the industry - and I give the credit to the industry and our staff in our department for the great work they've done. They've taken a disaster - a true disaster that probably cost us $3 million or $4 million or $5 million minimum - and turned it into a complete success. It's probably one of the most exciting things I've done since I was minister - to see that industry come back and be stronger than ever. I can't say enough positive about the industry, how they've reacted to this. There were some difficulties.

 

            We met with them two Sunday afternoons out by the airport in a hotel and they couldn't believe the new minister was going to meet with the agriculture industry on a Sunday afternoon. I said, well it's the only day that you're probably going to take off, and I don't want to interrupt your work. I think they appreciated that. I appreciated that they took the time and met with us - heard their challenges first-hand and we listened to them and worked with them. It was good, co-operative effort. At the end of the day, we came out with a tremendous success for Nova Scotia.

 

            MR. GLAVINE: I thank the minister for that overview. I know my colleague - in the very short time our caucus has remaining, I'll turn it over.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Victoria-the Lakes, you have seven minutes.

 

            MS. PAM EYKING: Thank you, just very quickly then. I'm just wondering, we raised four children on a farm. Out of the four, three of them have opted to not go into agriculture, the fourth one is still deciding his career route - I don't think it's going to be agriculture. They understand the stress and the risk. They lived it, they worked from a very young age. It has always been a concern of mine that we're losing our agriculture specialists. There are fewer and fewer producers all the time. I believe that someone is less likely to go into agriculture if they are not raised in it or around it.

 

            I'm just wondering what the department is doing to mitigate that loss of future agriculturalists. How are we encouraging young people to look at agriculture as a career option?

 

            MR. COLWELL: You raise a very good point because if we're going to grow the industry we have to have young people involved. One of the things I did early on with the industry was I told them I want them to make money. When I did that I didn't know if I was making a mistake or not because the crowd went silent. I tell this quite often. They came up to me afterwards and said nobody ever told them that before.

 

            Quite honestly, if you have a business you don't make money with you can't sell it. You can't get new people involved. Not only that but if you can make money you can do things, you can expand things, you can improve your quality, you can improve your product line. You can take a vacation, which is very important for a farmer, most of them don't get to take very many vacations with the hours they work. It's a great lifestyle but if you don't understand that lifestyle.

 

            One thing in the province, we've seen an increase in registered farms in the province this year, which is very positive. So it's there. There seems to be a larger number of, I call them hobby, full-time farmers, if that makes any sense - someone who starts off as a hobby and realizes that it's a wonderful lifestyle, indeed if you do it carefully you can make some money at it and live very healthy. There's a lot of people like that.

 

            We passed organic regulations here in the province last year that ties in with the same as New Brunswick and allows us to use the certification for organic farms in Nova Scotia under the federal and provincial regulations. That's very exciting.

 

            We had a lot of complaints about people buying chickens at Sobeys and taking the wrapper off and calling them organic. Now we can police that. It's a very vibrant industry and I think that's a huge growing market. There seem to be a lot of younger people interested in that, which is very positive, so a lot of very good things.

 

            I know the Agricultural College and the community college - we're just in the process of signing an MOU with the community college to work with us at Agriculture and Fisheries and Aquaculture. They are excited about that and we are very excited about it. So get the young people when they come out as a career, it's an excellent career for people to be involved in.

 

            I know you have been involved in it most of your life and I was born on a farm that was started in the 1700s and was the first generation that hadn't farmed but I know what it is like to get up at daylight and work until dark. In the wintertime it's no fun at all, no income basically, unless you have some milk quota or some other product you can sell at that time. It's a hard task, it's like everything, you've got to be able to make money at it. If you can make money at it, then young people will come and do it.

 

            MS. EYKING: I understand, certainly my observation in my region is that the Select Nova Scotia program really ties in well with the hobby farms. I do see a great surge in upcoming hobby farms in the area so it's a great program.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It really is and, as I said earlier, we've got the highest per capita farmers' markets in Canada in Nova Scotia and that says a lot for the farming industry.

           

A lot of the hobby - I call them hobby full-time farms a lot of them - not the huge commercial ones that we have as well, which are both very important, it shows that they are getting niche products in the marketplace.

 

            The Minister of Health and Wellness just indicated people are eating more broccoli and they want to know it is organically grown and they want to see what is going on and that's the way it should be. Quite frankly, a lot of people don't have a clue where the food comes from and it's pretty scary, it's very scary. I mean, if you live in rural Nova Scotia you know, but if you live in the cities a lot of people never get to see a farm and if you don't see these things you don't understand where food comes from.

 

            MS. EYKING: I actually introduced broccoli to the Cape Breton market. They weren't eating broccoli before we introduced it 30 years ago so these small farms do make an impact with their niche products, that's for sure, though we were commercial, that was pretty exciting to break into the market with that product.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It's important, too, because they are hitting a niche market that is being supplied from someone outside the province so it's a huge economic impact to the province, even though they might be a small operation and they might feel that they are not making much of an impact but they are. For every dollar we can displace we are probably helping the economy by $7 or $8, so in dollars and cents. Not only that, but you can actually talk to your farmer at the farmers' market and find out how he grew the product he is doing, what other things they are doing. It's exciting.

 

            I know one of the restaurants in town here is buying fresh lamb. It's an interesting story; I met with them and they said one day the farmer, who had gone through the proper processing of the meat and everything, brought a side of lamb in at lunchtime and walked through the restaurant with it. He said he was absolutely horrified that this happened then he came to find out that everybody in the restaurant was saying, where did the lamb come from? It came from Nova Scotia, was that the farmer? That was the farmer. So now they deliver the lamb through the front door at lunch hour.

 

            MS. EYKING: That's nothing you wouldn't see in Paris, to walk through with a chicken clucking.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, people want to see and feel that experience and understand that the restaurant is supplying Nova Scotia products and the farmer was there delivering it.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. That concludes the time for the Liberal caucus. We'd now like to move to the PC caucus.

 

The honourable member for Pictou East.

 

            MR. TIM HOUSTON: Thank you, minister. I do want to continue along that same theme because we all know the importance of buying local and local food and stuff. I am curious about what the government is doing to assist young farmers to get into the business and to start up.

 

            I know the FarmNEXT program is available and I'm just wondering if that program is being successful in terms of how many people are accessing it. Maybe the minister can tell us how many people applied and how many people were approved and what's happening with that.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It's a very important program. It's a $30,000 grant that we can use on that program, if I recall correctly. Recently we changed it a little bit to ensure - when I became minister there had been some changes over the years made in it from when your Party would have been in power some time ago that weren't good and we had lots of complaints from the industry. If they had two sons or two daughters who wanted to buy property and take over the farm and have separate enterprises, only one of them could apply for it so we changed that program so that if there are two members of the family and they are going to start distinct farms and things, they can do that.

 

            We are presently reviewing the program because it is only available right now through our Farm Loan Board. Years ago it used to be available for anyone who wanted to get alternate financing. So we're looking at it now. I don't know where we're going to go with it but this year we had seven applicants with $230,000 worth of assistance we gave to those seven applicants. We had hoped there would have been a lot more but again, it's a program that does help.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So seven applicants, and were they all eligible and approved?

 

            MR. COLWELL: All approved, that's approved applicants.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So that's seven approved, so that's at $30,000 each.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Now I'm just wondering, I have a constituent who grows grapes and he didn't know about the winery program that was there for expansion of fields, but I'm wondering, is this the type of thing that he could tap into as well. He has a few acres of grapes and he would expand his farm, would this be eligible for FarmNEXT? Could he tap into that?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I'm not sure if we have ever had an applicant on that but it's classified as farming so I don't see why not. I would just have to check and see if we have an applicant under that section. As you're aware, it's a very expensive business to get into, and it would be very helpful. But all our wineries are registered farms. They can apply for it definitely.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So the winery program, is it in overlap with this? How are they different?

 

            MR. COLWELL: If you're going to start a new farming operation which would be a vineyard, not a winery - it's two different things - a vineyard would be an agricultural process, and you would be able to apply for the $30,000 for new entrants and the vineyard expansion program. But under the vineyard expansion program, you either have to have a contract with an existing winery to supply the grapes or you have to lease the land to a winery to grow the grapes - either way.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: I'm just wondering, under these types of programs that are available for young farmers, new farmers, has the department considered any type of land banking system that might be able to assist young farmers as they're going forward?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We're looking at that at the present time. Of course, as you realize, it's a very complex issue. Land, if you can buy it - that is always the issue in Nova Scotia, is land available - if you can buy it from people, it's still relatively inexpensive compared to other parts of the world, but again, expensive if you're starting off from scratch. It is something we're reviewing right now, and we're looking at land preservation as well; farmland preservation is all part of that review we're doing. It's going to be probably a year before we get that completed.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Just on the FarmNEXT program, can you tell us what the budget for that program is this year?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We have $540,000 budgeted for that every year.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Do you happen to know how many applicants were ineligible, how many people who might have applied that were turned away?

 

            MR. COLWELL: It will take us a little bit to find that information, but I'll let you know.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Under the vineyard program, how many people took advantage of that program?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I know we got 139 acres planted, which is very positive. While they're just looking for that - that 139 acres, with the money we put in it, the vineyards put in between $2.3 million and $3.2 million themselves. Anyone putting a vineyard in, they had to put in that much money themselves to build it, to put a vineyard in place. That's without the land cost. Land cost would be on top of that. It's a significant investment by the vineyard operators as well.

 

            We had 36 applications that were approved.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Did you say that those applicants put in $3 million-plus of their own money, and then the government program provided $2 million-plus, so it was over $5 million?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The government program was $1.1 million altogether. It was fully utilized. The industry itself put between $2.3 million to $3.2 million, depending on how they did the planting. Some of the people that are doing the vineyards have farming equipment and are used to doing for instance apple orchards. They can put them in cheaper because they've got the equipment and a little bit more expertise than probably someone else who hasn't been in the farming business before. The low range of putting an acre of grapevines in the ground with everything that goes with it - excluding land cost - is minimum $15,000 an acre, and it can go up to $30,000 or $35,000 an acre. It's a significant investment that the vineyard operator has to put in, even with what we have put in place.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Before your next question, member for Pictou East, could you just speak a little bit louder or pull the microphone a little bit closer? We need to hear you.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Yes, okay. Sorry, Mr. Chairman. The vineyard expansion program, will that continue again this year? I think it closed off in March.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It is closed. It's actually going to expand. It was $1.1 million. This year we're going to put in $3.5 million for the next four years each year. It's an important economic opportunity for the province. Our biggest problem with the vineyards - the Nova Scotia wine business - is we don't have enough grapes. That's the big problem.

 

            This year we made a huge step forward. We had estimates between 500 and 650 acres of existing vineyard in place and with another 139 we made a significant improvement this year. We hoped it would be far beyond that next year. The program for next year will also include some research and development. We want to look at some bud hardiness in the buds to make sure we don't freeze in the winter and lose investments that they have in the ground now and have had for years or new investments.

 

            We're looking at different varietals probably for different types of grapes, but that will be a small thing. We're going to go to some type of quality assurance - a VQA system. We've been talking to the industry about that now. Now is the time to do it when we have a limited number of wineries before we get too many and it gets too complex to put that in place. That is going to be necessary to certify Nova Scotia produce or grapes in the product, and also to a minimum quality standard.

 

            I will say on the winery business in the province, the standards they've set are very high, which is very encouraging to see. One of the key things with that is the products they've done, Tidal Bay is 12 different wineries making a different version of Tidal Bay with the same grape consistency. It even has to go through a taste testing, all kinds of testing, that they've set up themselves. So they're on the way to setting some pretty high standards. The Tidal Bay is probably one of the best wines of its type in the country. Not only that, but it's a little different version at each winery, but it's all the minimum standard they have to have for all of them and the standard is very high.

 

            Just to answer your question on the FarmNEXT program, everyone that applied received it.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Okay. What is the budget for the vineyard expansion program for the coming year?

 

            MR. COLWELL: It is $3.5 million. That's all provincial money.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: I do want to thank the chairman because it feels like a lot of the time, especially in the other Chamber, people don't want to hear what I have to say, so thank you for saying that.

 

            I want to talk a bit about bees and the importation of hives. I understand, if I have the numbers correct, there are about 20,000 hives in the province and there are about 5,000 hives that are imported. Are those numbers kind of in the right scale?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The number in the province is estimated at around 25,000, if I'm correct. I just want to check on that. Last year there were 11,000 hives imported in the province. There is no moratorium on bringing bees into the province. There are protocols to bring them in. The industry seems to be under the misconception there is a moratorium. There is no moratorium. There has not been a moratorium. You have to bring them in under permit.

 

            This year they've applied to bring in 5,000 hives, which is 6,000 less than last year so we've got an increase of 6,000 hives this year in the province over the previous year. That's because of a program we put together and enhanced last year. The original program was $150,000, if I remember right, and you could access up to $25,000 and that would bring you quite a good number of hives.

 

            What happened is the large beekeepers all accessed it. So we had six beekeepers in the province that took all the money - didn't leave any funding left for the small operators. My philosophy of the small operator is he's small today, but in 20 years he may be the biggest bee producer in the province if he's given an opportunity to learn and provide it so we doubled the program and allowed for the small beehive keepers - if you had two hives - and we've got a list somewhere, which I can provide to you the conditions around what you could do. You couldn't get 25 new hives if you had one hive because it didn't make sense. One reason is you've got to learn to look after them and the other is resources to do all that, you have to have the manpower and everything else and you have to have the knowledge.

 

            The conditions were if you had two hives, I believe you could get one more hive but you had to take a course, a certified course that was approved by the Beekeepers Association and by the province. We worked with the Beekeepers Association to put that in place. I think it was up to 10, you could put in I think it was three new hives or five new hives. It was a graduated process. Again, I will supply that information.

 

            We put that in place and they had to take courses before they get the hives and we had a complete uptake on the whole program, both sessions, and we're going to continue this. It looks like we may continue it this year and see how that goes. I know we'll put the regular one we put out and we'll review the other one and put that out again. The goal is to be 100 per cent self-sufficient in bees in the province. That's our goal and it has been for the last two years.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Okay, that's a good goal. I just want to make sure I understand the numbers; so there's roughly 25,000 hives in the province?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I believe it's around that number. I'll have to double-check that number, there's a lot of them.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: And 5,000 are imported under permits so that implies we use or need 30,000 hives in the province, is that fair? I do hear that some of those 25,000 hives, if that's the right scale, some of those are sent outside the province for other purposes, while at the same time some hives are coming in. Is that a practice you are familiar with?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, it's up to the beehive operator where they want to use their hives for pollination. We're hoping that someday, once we get enough hives in the province, we'll have more of the hives being rented out to other areas in the province because it's revenue outside of the province and that's up to the business at the time to do that. That's not an issue, as long as the protocols of monitoring are in place. We have some pretty strict protocols in place and we actually enhanced them substantially this year.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So the hives that are imported are imported under a permit.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So how many permits would have been issued to import beehives this year?

 

            MR. COLWELL: One permit.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: One permit for 5,000. Were there other permits applied for or was there only one? There was only one applicant?

 

            MR. COLWELL: There's usually just one applicant.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Now that one applicant, would that applicant be somebody who is sending hives out of the province?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Possibly, they are the biggest beekeepers in the province so they would probably send them from time to time out of the province.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: If they were sending hives out and then also importing hives at the same time, would the department have evaluated that as part of that? Is there a permit approval process, I guess?

 

            MR. COLWELL: There is a permit approval process and the thing with it is too that typically when they import hives they have all their own hives in use here as well. They would import them outside of those times. It wouldn't be importing hives and exporting hives.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Well that's the question I'm asking.

 

            MR. COLWELL: They would put all their beehives in production here and they would bring 5,000 in to augment them. When that is all done, the 5,000 hives go back and then they can put their other ones out to other fields that they have in other areas.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So could we just confirm that under part of that permit approval that that's a definitive statement, that you won't import if you are also exporting at the same time?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, we can confirm that, that's no problem.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: You will - you are not confirming right now but you will.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, we'll confirm the numbers and we'll confirm that as well.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Obviously this is all to do with the small hive beetle. People are concerned about the small hive beetle finding its way to Nova Scotia, which could have a very negative effect on hives here, particularly for people who have only a few hives, let's say, so the small businessperson.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Possibly.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: In terms of the permit process and when the permit is issued, is there any consideration by the department to say you can't import from areas that are known to have the small hive beetle? Or does the permit allow the applicant to import from wherever they want?

 

            MR. COLWELL: They are not allowed to import hives that have been exposed to the small hive beetle. The program in place this year is like none ever before. We put in a mandate that we have to have a 100 per cent inspection, top inspection on the hives. I already forwarded to Mr. Lohr a copy of the study we had done by the foremost bee authority on the small hive beetle in the country, if not in the world, that we had done before we even considered any of this.

 

I said there's negligible or no risk of Nova Scotia being infected with the beetle but even saying that, we don't want to take a chance on it so we're doing 100 per cent inspection of the tops of the hives and we've actually invited, for the first time in history ever, the beekeepers in the province to participate in that. We're training them, right now I believe we're going to have two of them go, as well as our inspectors and some people from the blueberry industry as well because they don't want the beetle either. Nobody wants the beetle here.

 

            That's going to happen. We are paying 100 per cent of the expenses for that trip for the people to go there. They are also going to check 10 per cent of the bottoms of the hives and those hives have to be proven that they have not been exposed in the last two years to the small hive beetle. So it's a lot of documentation.

 

            Previously what would happen, we would have them inspected or the proponent would have them inspected by an inspector, our counterpart in Ontario, the hives come from Ontario. They would do a 10 per cent inspection on the hives, authorize them and when they come into the province we'd do some inspections. We're still going to do the inspections when they hit the province, on an ongoing basis. They're only going to be allowed to come into Cumberland County and nowhere else - just where they are needed, that's it. As soon as they are done they have to be shipped back again, that's it. We've got the tightest protocol ever in existence in the province for this. We're just hoping that next year or the year after, we won't have this problem, we will be able to have all the bees here in Nova Scotia.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: In terms of the inspection process, that inspection process would take place onsite, where the hives are coming from, and you mentioned some of the costs involved in that. Does the cost of the permit recover those costs to the province? How much is that inspection process going to be and what is the cost of the permit?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I don't what the cost of the permit is but I can find out. It's not something that I ever checked into. The idea of inspection of beetles has to be separate from the cost of the permit. When we're doing an inspection on a process and a process inspection has been totally independent of somebody's importing the bees. It has got to be two separate things - you can't be inspector and permit holder.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Not meaning to imply that the permit holder would do the inspection, I'm just meaning to ask the question if it will cost the province - I have no idea, let's pick a number for the sake of a discussion - if it will cost the province $50,000 to send people to the site to inspect and put them in hotels and all this type of stuff, if it will cost, just for the sake of argument, that amount of money, has the department looked at - you know we hear a lot about fees and fees are meant to recover cost to the province and the province is trying to move to more of a recovery basis on fees, whether it be drivers' licences or whatever the case may be.

 

            I'm just wondering, is it the case that this is a $100 permit but it costs the province $50,000 to issue it, let's say, right? I'm just trying to say, has the province - that doesn't imply who does the $50,000 worth of work but it's just a cost recovery basis - is that something that has been looked at by the department? Maybe you can make the numbers a little more real, too.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Well it's going to cost us $40,000 to do this inspection the way we are doing it this year. We feel it's well worth the investment. Our second biggest producer of fruit in the province, our export fruit, is the blueberry industry at $123 million export value to it. That includes the one large company which we all know about and many small blueberry producers in the province.

 

            We really want to make sure that the blueberry producers have the pollination that they need to have. We want to be confident we have it done safely, the inspections on the hives as they come in. It's a combination of things.

 

            I've got the numbers here on the beehives we have in the province. We had 23,000 hives last year. We increased the number of hives last year by 6,500 hives. This year, with the program plan we have, there will be another 7,500 hives. We should be bee sufficient by next year. That's a major change. Typically, we only have 2,000 or 3,000 new hives a year, so we've really accelerated this process, recognizing the need for bees in the province.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: How much is a permit to import 5,000 hives?

 

            MR. COLWELL: No charge for the permit.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So the permit was issued for free, but it cost the province $40,000, or roughly $8 a hive. Does that jive with you? It raises some questions in my mind as to why we're not trying to recover fees on that but we are on other licences and permits and stuff.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It's a program that hasn't cost the province that full $40,000; 60 per cent of it is covered by the federal government. But I get your point on this. The point is, we have to be confident that we're not going to get this beetle in the province, as confident as we can be. We feel it's well worth the investment of doing that. This is for thousands of acres of blueberry fields that need to be pollinated. If they're not pollinated, we won't have a crop. The crops, the yields in some of the blueberry fields, thanks to science and research that has been done in the province, our yields are five times and higher more blueberries than they were even three or four years ago. I feel it's well worth the investment to do that, to make sure we have that. This is the first time we've done it. We could have done it exactly the same way we did it before. We could have got Ontario to do it. There would have been some costs for our staff anyway that we would do for inspections in that $40,000 in the past. But we decided to do this program and to put it in place, so we do proper inspections on the whole.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: This $40,000 expenditure, the inspection process, is necessary because the hives are coming from an area that's kind of known to have the small hive beetle, right?

 

            MR. COLWELL: They're coming from Ontario. What you're saying is not totally accurate. What it really is: there are some areas of Ontario that don't have the beetle, and the hives have to come from areas that have a minimum of two years with no small hive beetle in the area they come from. So be very careful when you phrase that.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Okay. But there are other provinces that don't have the small hive beetle that the hives could come from, arguably, correct?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Probably yes.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So the department made a decision to issue the permit to allow them to come from an area that will require inspection when in theory they could have issued a permit that said they can't come from Ontario in this case. That would have allowed the applicant to get them from Alberta or Saskatchewan. I'm just trying to get my head around the taxpayers paying for this inspection when it seems like there were options available to the department.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Well, there's not enough bees in New Brunswick. The only other place, from what I understand, we can get bees would be from the U.S.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Alberta and Saskatchewan. There's a lot of hives in Alberta.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I don't think they have enough hives that aren't in use. That's a problem. We've got to find hives that aren't in use. Outside of Ontario - Ontario seems to be the most logical place to do it. Again, we could have done exactly what was done before. The permits were issued. There's not a moratorium on this, and there has not been a moratorium on it. They could have applied for the permit, got the permit, and imported the bees without the inspection we're doing. We did a study to make sure that there was minimal risk by the people involved. You can always question whether a $40,000 investment is worth it or not. I know some of the beehive owners are concerned about this, but they were consulted - the first time in history that has ever happened by any government, including your past government - so were the blueberry producers consulted. We brought the best science in that we had. The conclusion was that we're going to do 100 per cent inspection. That was our choice - not recommended by the beekeepers, not recommended by anyone else. We could have brought these in, not spent the $40,000. You're proposing we shouldn't have spent $40,000.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: No, I didn't propose that at all actually.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I would think that the beekeepers would be pretty upset about that.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: No, I certainly wouldn't want my words mischaracterized in that fashion. I was merely asking the question, with a government that has made it known that it is looking to recover fees that relate to the actual cost of issuing a licence and a permit and stuff like that, I'm just merely asking the question - did this department consider it - and the answer was no, and that's fine.

 

            The department also had other options. It could have possibly avoided the question at all by saying you just can't import from this area and the department decided not to do that. I don't know what analysis was made to reach that. You've indicated that maybe there weren't other hives available or insufficient hives available in other areas. I don't know if you were stating that as a fact or just surmising, but I would be curious to know if the department actually did that analysis or not.

 

            MR. COLWELL: We review all options, but again, this is an exceptional case. Hopefully we'll only have to do it one year. We could have easily just sent our own inspectors and not bothered sending the beekeepers, not bothered to send the blueberry producers to do this work. We feel it was an educational process for them as well. A lot of them have not seen the small hive beetle, exactly what it looks like or what even to look for in that case.

 

            So they've all received training as part of this $40,000. That training is well worth the investment for down the road when they're checking their own hives and they educate other beekeepers and blueberry producers in the province. It was the decision to make - the best thing we could do with the resources we had and the need for the bees. If we don't get a proper number of bees in here we'll reduce the pollination and reduce the crop. It's that simple.

 

            The $40,000, for our department to do this - and again it's federal-provincial. It's not just provincial money in this. It's worth the investment to be sure that we're doing this properly. We would have done the same thing if it was coming from another province in case they have it. It would have cost us more money.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: I appreciate that. The cost of the $40,000 - was it 40 per cent feds/60 per cent province?

 

            MR. COLWELL: It was 60 per cent feds.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: We'll move on from that. I appreciate your comments on that. I just have two more topics to touch on and I did want to follow up on the minister's questions about abattoirs. You mentioned that the department is encouraging the expansion of existing facilities and start-up of additional ones. I'm just curious if you can kind of be more specific on what the department is doing to encourage that.

 

            MR. COLWELL: One thing we did do, we worked with NorthumberLamb to CFIA approve - and I already spoke about that - for processing lamb. We worked very closely with them to get them CFIA approved.

 

            It's a long, hard process for a meat processing facility especially when somebody has not been used to that kind of rigour and inspection. That has been a really positive story. I feel without the help of Perennia and with our department, that would not have happened. I give a lot of credit to our staff that work with the owners of that business and now we're CFIA approved.

 

            We need more CFIA-approved facilities in the province, but we can't force people to do it. They have to make that decision themselves. It's all a business model that they have to go through. If they decide it's worth their while to do that and if they have a product that makes economic sense to go to a federally inspected facility or a provincially inspected facility, it's up to them to pursue that certification.

 

            We will help, under some of the programs we have, to make that happen because it is expensive. We won't invest in equipment. We will invest with knowledge, training and all the other things we need to do. We're quite anxious to have that happen. We have a lot of non-licensed facilities in the province we're well aware of and there are some issues around that. Unlicensed facilities and the issues, you should really talk to the Department of Environment inspectors about that now.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Can you give me an example of a program that's available to somebody who wants to bring themselves up to speed, I guess, and how much funding might be available to them?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Well the best thing to do if somebody is interested, and we've been trying to encourage them through outreach workers to get certified and raise their level up to CFIA or wherever they want to go. We would look at each case individually and see what the potential is for them and where they are in the process of that. Somebody may be very close and maybe just minor things they have to do and maybe major things they have to do. So I really prefer and we prefer not to put a program together because it's individual.

 

Someone may only require a small amount of work. They may have the buildings constructed properly, the drainage in properly, they have the documentation almost right but maybe not totally right to switch over from provincial to a CFIA facility and all the requirements that go with that. If someone isn't certified to a provincial standard and wants to get to a provincial standard, that's a lot easier than going to CFIA, they may just need some documentation, maybe different processes for cleaning and disinfecting and all those sorts of things, we would help them with those sorts of things. So it's each process individually.

 

            If someone was starting from scratch, we'd start from scratch with them and then work with them through the process. It's not something you can say one widget fits all, it doesn't really work that way.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: But most programs have some kind of a financial assistance element that would be up to a certain dollar amount. Is this one like up to $100,000 to help you get inspected or what's happening here?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We don't have a specific program. We tap into different programs that are existing programs that they would qualify under. They would take those programs and package them together to work for that individual and that individual company.

 

            Again, stressing that you've got to see where they are in the process. If they have a building that meets all the requirements, which is probably maybe the case, maybe not, they may have to change their interior wall surfaces, they may have to upgrade some of the equipment, training, it could be all kinds of different things and every one is different.

 

            I will say in the fishing industry it's not an issue. Every single fish plant in the province is CFIA approved, every one, there's no issue, so there's something astray in the agriculture industry that's not the same - not that people have to be certified to that, that it's not easier for them to get qualified because a fish plant is - we don't even get a call from a fish plant that wants to get CFIA approved, they just do it. The bacteria in a fish plant is far more difficult to deal with than any kind of a meat processing facility. I know some of the people in the industry would change their chemical, they have to change their chemical concoction of cleaning solutions every 24 hours because the bacteria mutates that quick and in a slaughterhouse there's not that kind of bacteria, so there's something.

 

            We've been trying to figure out what the difference is in meat processing, just the business part of it, what the problem is, why people - I guess maybe it's never having to do it, the fishing industry, it has always been there for years and years, maybe that's just the business process of it. We don't know but we're investigating it because we'd like to see everybody certified for their protection, as well as consumers' protection.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: How many facilities did the department help get certified last year?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Just the one, I believe. There was just one applicant we had. It was NorthumberLamb, they were successful in getting CFIA. We do have $100,000 available for three years building industry capacity and we can also tap into sections of Growing Forward too and other programs. The funding isn't the issue. The issue is having someone come forward and say that they want to do it and then work with our staff and CFIA staff to make sure that happens. That's the issue.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Nobody is coming forward? Only one person came forward?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The previous year we had two poultry farms come forward as well. We worked with them as well as NorthumberLamb. So there is progress being made.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: That's two - the previous year and only one last year.

 

            MR. COLWELL: That's progress.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: The last thing I wanted to touch on was the Nova Scotia crop insurance. I wanted to ask you about your knowledge about the process for getting wildlife claims adjudicated and approved specifically on blueberry farms. Presumably the farmer would submit a claim form and say they had some wildlife damage, and then what would happen next?

 

            MR. COLWELL: That actually isn't insurance. That's actually a program we have for the blueberry industry. What has to happen is they have to identify it as wildlife damage and then there is an assessment done. They come in and measure the damage and do a percentage of what the damage was and that would be the claim. There is a whole process for doing that.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: How long has this process been in place roughly?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Since 2008. It doesn't just cover blueberries. It covers other crops too.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So when you say they have to identify that there has been wildlife damage, who makes that identification?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The agriculture inspectors would do the inspection.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: So if somebody believed they had wildlife damage and they reported it, but nobody came and inspected it, then that's a breakdown in the system?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes. They just put in - they would call up, make the appointment for an inspection and they come do the inspection and do the evaluation at that time and then file a report with the appropriate people.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: But if it happened any time between 2008 and today, like if it happened a couple of years ago and an inspector never came, that's just something that went horribly wrong, I guess.

 

            MR. COLWELL: If that happened I'd like to know about it, where it was and who it was that put that in and it didn't happen. We have a lot higher service levels than that today.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: How many calls a year do you get for wildlife damage that require you to send an inspector out to review it?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Last year we had about 60 claims, and they were all investigated.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Does that mean they had 60 calls and 60 investigated and approved, or 100 calls and 60 were approved?

 

            MR. COLWELL: It would have been a few more than 60 claimed but if the person who was seeking the compensation didn't provide all the information or they found out when they did the inspection there was not enough proof of wildlife damage, they weren't paid but most of them were paid.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Okay, that's it for me so thank you to the minister and his staff.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Kings North.

 

            MR. JOHN LOHR: Mr. Chairman, my colleague for Pictou East told me he had just a couple of minutes worth of questions so how much time do I have left, I'm just wondering.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Sixteen minutes.

 

            MR. LOHR: While we have the Crop and Livestock Insurance Commission represented at the table I just want to ask what new crops is the Crop and Livestock Insurance Commission considering adding and did they add any crops in this past year?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We did a new crop for grapes, vineyards, and we also extended the coverage for a loss in vegetables, especially for small farms that weren't covered before. Again, as you know, this is all voluntary insurance, they have to voluntarily apply for it.

 

            MR. LOHR: Right, I'm well aware of that. I did want to ask about - my apologies, Bill, no more questions about the Crop and Livestock Insurance Commission. I did want to talk about farms in general and a number of farms in the province. I know we've been one of the few provinces that had an increase in farmers and I'm just wondering if you could tell me where those - if that's still correct, are we still increasing the number of farms and where those increases have come?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We had some slight increases for a year or two and they are up again this year in 2015. I'm not sure if I can tell you where they are, I can tell you the numbers on them, though.

 

            I'll have to get that information for you. I know I have it but it's not in the books here.

 

            MR. LOHR: I guess where is a big term. I was thinking not geographically but in sort of size of farm. I think the answer is that generally speaking we've had increases in the number of very small farms more so than . . .

 

            MR. COLWELL: Some very small ones and I know for a fact there's some pretty large ones, too. I know one farm in particular, two sons have purchased substantial acreages in other farms that weren't in production. I know at least two of them and there's probably more. It's very positive and it's nice to see the younger generation taking this up.

 

            MR. LOHR: Mr. Minister, I know you probably are aware of FarmWorks, which I believe is a CEDIF that invests in agriculture. I wonder if you could comment on what Linda Best is doing in FarmWorks.

 

            MR. COLWELL: They are a very good organization. I met with them several times. They typically, from my understanding, take on some little bit higher risk operations than we would typically take on at the loan board or that Farm Credit Canada would but they've been very successful. I've got a lot of admiration for what they're doing. I believe they have really helped some farmers that would not have gotten started. They are in some very exciting things, like for hops, I know one operation is hops and that's a very difficult thing to make money at but it is needed for the breweries, and a lot of other issues. We co-operate with them very closely.

 

            MR. LOHR: My question about that would be some people have said that in effect FarmWorks is doing what the department should be doing or the Farm Loan Board in that they're offering loans maybe that were smaller than the Farm Loan Board was willing to consider and that FarmWorks is sort of filling a niche for possibly higher risk - I'm not sure if I would agree with that statement - but certainly smaller loans than the Farm Loan Board has done. Do you see changing the mandate of the Farm Loan Board to start dealing in smaller loans where we see the main increase in the number of farms - and I know there are some larger farms increasing acreage - but the total number of farmers in Nova Scotia has been increasing because there are more very small farms. Hence, a micro-financing type of thing would be kind of where this was heading. What would you comment to that?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I think that FarmWorks fills a very important position in the province. I feel, knowing what they do and how they work, that they would still be here even if we did smaller things. But indeed we have the tool now to do the smaller things in the province, in the credit union loan program. That has been expanded to the Farm Loan Board. You can get loans up to $500,000, not only for capital but also for operating money. In conjunction with the Farm Loan Board, that could easily cover pretty well everything FarmWorks does. But FarmWorks operates differently than we do. They would operate on a lot higher-risk loans, potentially higher interest rates, and that's fine. But they also work with the farmers afterwards, as we do, ones they support. I feel that they provide an excellent service and complement the stuff we do, and we can complement the things they do. It's very important to have an organization like that in the province.

 

            MR. LOHR: I'm sorry, but I didn't quite catch the name of that program you mentioned at the very first. What was the name of the program?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Credit union.

 

            MR. LOHR: Oh, the credit unions, okay.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, we extended it here last year, I believe it was, to cover that. The province guarantees 90 per cent of the loan, and you can use that on farms now. That filled the gap where small loans weren't necessarily available for some start-up farmers. We do have that whole area covered now.

 

            MR. LOHR: I just want to switch gears now to another topic. Last year, we discussed the provincial exhibition in Truro. There were some audits that were done. Have those audits been released? I haven't seen them.

 

            MR. COLWELL: They have been made public. I can get you a copy of the audits, no problem.

 

            MR. LOHR: Thank you, I would appreciate that. I just want to ask you, is the provincial exhibition on sound financial footing? Is it profitable?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I haven't seen the most recent financial statement. I know they were making lots of changes when they took it over. I can't tell you right now exactly where they're at. I know they're supposed to have a report in that I've got to present on their behalf to the Legislature, or the Clerk, sometime soon, whichever the case may be. I can't remember what date that is, but there's a requirement under the Act that they have to do that so that information will be supplied. We're supposed to receive it by April 30^th.

 

            MR. LOHR: How much money was granted to the provincial exhibition this year in Truro?

 

            MR. COLWELL: About $43,000 last year.

 

            MR. LOHR: What's in the budget this year for the provincial exhibition?

 

            MR. COLWELL: All the provincial exhibitions total some $200,000 altogether. We're presently working on an MOU which would include all the provincial exhibitions of the province, that they're very happy with and we're very happy with. It gives them long-term secure funding into the future.

 

            MR. LOHR: Another issue I think we mentioned last year was the cost of renovating the Northumberland Building in Bible Hill. Can you tell me how much money was spent renovating the Northumberland Building?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I think that comes under the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. I'm not sure if we have the number or not. I'm just checking here. I know they were doing the work, and they contracted and did everything. That building is scheduled to open in May.

 

            MR. LOHR: There was some question, I know some people questioned the cost of that versus a new build and the expense of renovating that building. Can you tell me why the choice was made to renovate that building and not build new?

 

            MR. COLWELL: That's something you'd have to ask TIR, they made the determination. They sent their engineers and reviewed it and did an assessment on the building and they decided that was the most economical way to do it.

 

            MR. LOHR: But it's still a building that's going to be used by the Department of Agriculture.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes.

 

            MR. LOHR: And what is the use of the building?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We're going to use it for administrative offices, I believe our loan board is going to move in there, crop insurance. This is only just learned, which is always good, it's going to be an agricultural centre of excellence. It's going to be a one-stop shop for a farmer or farming family to come in and get everything, all the services they would need, including the loan board, crop insurance, work with crop experts, whatever the case may be. That will reduce our rental fees that we're paying already to Dalhousie and the Agricultural College since the last government gave it to Dalhousie.

 

            MR. LOHR: Which was my next question. I know that some of those organizations are housed by Dalhousie. How much money was paid last year in rent to Dalhousie?

 

            MR. COLWELL: They're spending $30,000 a month, $360,000 last year that we'll save by going into the new building.

 

            MR. LOHR: It's $60,000 total?

 

            MR. COLWELL: No, $360,000. So basically in less than two years we get the payback on the renovation of the building by not paying rent. A very good investment.

 

            MR. LOHR: That does sound like a good investment we're giving Dalhousie. When I asked you earlier - I believe it was yesterday - about the total amount of money going to Dalhousie AC, I think you told me it was $19-something million.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It's $19.17 million or something like that but that didn't include the rent. The rent is all separate. Not only will there be less costs for the rent that we have, we'll save $360,000 a year, but we're going to have all our staff in one location, so for them to just work together it's going to be a difference, they are not going to have to go from building to building and from the Perennia park down to the campus and back again and all that inconvenience and time wasted there. We'll probably save another $300,000 or $400,000 a year just in staff travel time and the convenience of being able to go next door and talk to someone else; if you are the loan board and check and see if they've got crop insurance or whatever the case may be and also save it for the farming industry.

 

            We're going to a whole different service model in the department that I think was in 2002. In 2002 your government at the time decided to eliminate the outreach workers and some of the service. At the time it seemed like a good idea, I guess, but we are finding out from the industry they are not very happy about it so we're going back to more of a service model in the department that hasn't been there since 2002.

 

            MR. LOHR: So how many provincial government employees will be left still renting at Dalhousie AC?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The only rentals we'll have there I believe are labs, I think that will be it. We looked at moving the labs but the cost is astronomical to move the labs by the time we get all the air makeup units in and all the fume hoods removed and all the safety precautions and everything in place. It just didn't make sense to do it, it was millions of dollars, if I recall right, just to move the labs.

 

            MR. LOHR: So how much rent is paid for the labs?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The cost would have been $25 million to move the labs. For the rent on labs, just one second.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: You have two minutes remaining.

 

            MR. COLWELL: We still have to negotiate with Dalhousie, with the labs staying there. Dalhousie actually wanted the building that we're vacating, so they're going to be very happy that they get to use that again. That's still to be negotiated.

 

            MR. LOHR: So just to review, $400,000 was the cost of the renovation of the Northumberland Building?

 

            MR. COLWELL: That's what we had to pay, just over $400,000 if my memory is correct. Again, it was decided over two years ago, so that's why it's not on our books this year: we wrote it off two years ago as a cost at that time.

 

            MR. LOHR: I was under the impression that the renovation cost of the Northumberland Building was $5 million or $6 million.

 

            MR. COLWELL: All I know about is our contribution. TIR might have put more money into it, we don't know.

 

            MR. LOHR: Just knowing the size of the Northumberland Building and what renovations cost in my home, I highly doubt that it was a $400,000 bill to renovate the Northumberland Building.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I wouldn't disagree with you on that. We got a really good deal on this, we put in just over $400,000 and TIR just over $4.5 million.

 

            MR. LOHR: So the provincial government paid $5 million or $6 million to recoup $360,000 a year. The payout on that, at regular interest rates, would be almost forever.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time has expired for the PC caucus. I'll now go to the New Democratic Party. The New Democratic Party may want to allow the minister to respond to the last question, but it's now on your time.

 

The honourable member for Truro-Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River.

 

MS. LENORE ZANN: Yes, sure.

 

            MR. COLWELL: With the indulgence of the member for Truro-Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River, I will try to answer that question. There was a cost analysis done, and even the rate of rent we were paying, $30,000 a month to Dalhousie, was a very low cost for the square footage we had. The estimate that was done on the $5 million was a 10-year break-even. We already own the building; we own the grounds we're on. Once we have it, we'll just have ongoing maintenance, and a new building shouldn't be a lot.

 

            I would suggest that probably you should talk to TIR and get more details on that; they did the evaluation, not us. The only positive thing I can say about the whole thing - very positive - is that we've got our staff in one location, which is a lot of operating efficiency, and it only cost our department just over $400,000 to do that. It's a permanent location for us; we won't have to move again. Each one of these moves is very, very expensive.

 

            MS. ZANN: Good afternoon again. I didn't think I'd see you again, but here we are. I have a few more questions that I didn't get a chance to get through yesterday, so this is actually a good opportunity. Interestingly enough, after I left you yesterday, I went back to Truro to the Chamber of Commerce annual awards dinner, and the guest speaker was Mr. John Peller because we celebrated the 50^th Anniversary of Peller's wines in Truro this last summer, so I guess they are the oldest winery in Nova Scotia, I would imagine. No? Who would be older than them?

 

            MR. COLWELL: As far as I know, they are not. There was a pioneer for the wine industry in the province who started the winery business, very small, years before that. I'll have to find out. I'm sure, but one of the oldest operations in the province, a very good company.

 

            MS. ZANN: Well Andrés Wines they used to be called and his grandfather started it, so interestingly enough, he had a talk for about an hour about the history of the family, why they chose Nova Scotia - they started off in Vancouver first then they came to Nova Scotia and set up the shop in Truro - and how the wine industry has changed over the years. Because in the beginning people wanted only sweet, bubbly stuff. In fact I even remember as a teenager the Blueberry Mist and Baby Duck, those were some of their first products. People used to joke about how it was cheap and it wasn't very good.

 

            Now they've got these award-winning wines and he is going to be investing in the Valley. He is going to be investing in growing of grapes there. It just continued on our chat from the afternoon.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I was at the 50^th Anniversary in Truro. We've had a really good working relationship with Peller. We visited their main office in Ontario two years ago and we got a commitment at that time that they were going to make an investment in Nova Scotia. I got a call from their chief operating officer this winter and said they were going to invest in Nova Scotia this year. He didn't elaborate on it. I have a meeting with him later this month. We're very excited about that.

 

            I got to meet Mr. Peller and their chief officer and Mr. Peller's mother but I didn't get to meet the grandfather, he wasn't well enough to come down for the 50^th Anniversary. We are very excited about them coming to Nova Scotia. They actually landed at Pier 21 so that was very exciting. They are committed to Nova Scotia.

 

            MS. ZANN: Yes, well I mean he has already had this operation going in Truro for 50 years so they already are here but I guess now he's going to expand and go into buying some land in the Valley and growing grapes as well. They have been importing their grapes for the wines so now they are going to grow some, which is fantastic.

 

            MR. COLWELL: From what I understand, they brought in a new winemaker here a year or two ago with this purpose in mind, to expand in Nova Scotia. Their expansion, I believe if you look at what they did in Ontario, it would be a minimum of 300 acres, if not more. That will almost double our acreage in the vineyards in the province in one or two years.

 

            MS. ZANN: Let me ask you one or two more questions along those lines. Is there any concern in the Valley among apple growers about losing some of the lands there for vineyards and for growing grapes instead of keeping them for orchards?

 

            MR. COLWELL: There's lots of places in the Valley that are covered by trees now that would make excellent vineyards, it looks like. Those areas are not necessarily best for growing apples so you have to do analysis on the whole thing. It has to be really a business decision by the farmer, whether he wants to lease land to an organization, a wine-making operation, if he wants to sell it, what they want to do with it. At the end of the day our apple industry is very valuable to the province, extremely valuable.

 

            Unfortunately grape land is worth a lot more than land that you put into apple orchards so I think that over time you'll see some of the farmers - if I was a farmer I'd probably want to lease my land because knowing it is going up in value because there is a vineyard on it and as long as I can still produce the other products that I want to produce, that's a good source of revenue and basically I lease my land so I have no work. It's tremendously expensive to put an acre of vineyard in, anywhere from $15,000 to $35,000 an acre. Someone who owns an apple orchard would be able to do it for $15,000 because they have all the equipment and the expertise because they're basically the same thing now, they are all trellis systems.

 

            It's an opportunity, I think, instead of a negative thing for the farming industry if they just decide to take advantage of the opportunity. I'm hoping that we'll get some of the land and vineyard that is under-utilized land now. A lot of south-facing land in the Valley that's just growing up with trees.

 

            MS. ZANN: That's what they need is south-facing, right? Anyway, it was very interesting. It was a full day of agriculture and wine culture. As I said to him, my family had been into growing grapes in Croatia and we had very good wines - Zaninovich grapes. The family moved to California actually and they still grow grapes and have wine there. Tudor Wines is the name of one of our family, the Tudors. They're still doing that in California so it has been part of the family for a long time so I've always been interested.

 

            I'd like to move on to something in the budget here. I notice that there is a significant portion - about $40 million - of the department's budget that goes towards grants and contributions. It seems that this has increased this year by almost $3 million. Can you talk about what is included in grants and contributions and where that extra $3 million is going? Maybe explain the difference between a grant and a contribution.

 

            MR. COLWELL: The $3 million is really easy to explain. It is actually $3.5 million. It's a provincially funded vineyard expansion program - just exactly what we're talking about. We're very excited about that because we think there are huge economic development opportunities in vineyards for a small investment on our part in an acre of vineyard. Every acre of vineyard you can install, according to the industry, is 1.1 full-time jobs.

 

            MS. ZANN: Say that again.

           

            MR. COLWELL: The wine industry tells us that for every acre of vineyard put in the province it creates 1.1 full-time jobs. Last year we put 139 acres in and created 150 jobs and one-time investment.

 

            The vineyard, as you know being in the wine business, a vineyard can last for 50, 100 years, 500 years if it's looked after properly and some weird disease doesn't get it.

 

            MS. ZANN: Phylloxera or whatever that one is. That's a bad one. It's a really bad disease. They had it in the United States. You have to be really careful about it.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It's a very good investment. This is probably one of the best investments the province ever made - long term, one time. We need the grapes desperately in the province because we don't have enough grapes.

 

            MS. ZANN: I think you said that yesterday - there are not enough grapes. We did have some people come in and talk to us in the Resources Committee and we were talking about the fact that there are a couple of blights that you need to be careful of. In fact, one of them - this phylloxera something or other - had wiped out the entire stock of vineyards in Europe at one point in time and then recently in France, I believe, they were having some problems and also in the United States. If that happens, it can wipe out an entire industry very quickly.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Definitely, but that's agriculture. We've seen it happen in our strawberry fields with a complex virus. We've got that resolved now. It should never be a problem again.

 

            MS. ZANN: And then the fire blight.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Fire blight, again, came with a hurricane. That's under control now. The problem we had with the maple industry with the big snowstorms eliminating all the infrastructure they had. That's well under control now and hopefully this year with the weather we've had we'll have a bumper crop in Nova Scotia. It's like everything - everything is risky in agriculture, but it's well worth the risk.

 

            MS. ZANN: Could you explain the difference between a grant and a contribution?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, $3.5 million of that, as we already talked about, we also put down the money we give to Dalhousie University, which is around $20 million as a grant. We have $14 million going to Growing Forward 2. We have $2.5 million that goes to Perennia. We have a lot of smaller ones. We do some other stuff. We have one for apple orchard enhancements around $400,000 a year for six years. The first year we did $100,000, we put 54,000 new trees in so I'm just estimating about 200,000 new, high-value apple trees going in. That is happening over six years.

 

            MS. ZANN: And these are all grants, are they?

 

            MR. COLWELL: They are grants.

 

            MS. ZANN: So what are contributions?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We just basically pay something like $5 a tree and then all the infrastructure has to be put in by the apple orchard themselves. Our $400,000 - I can't remember the return on it, it's something like $2 million or $3 million they have to put in to get the $400,000 we're putting out, so it's a huge investment from the industry.

 

            You'll find that unless it's a federal-provincial program, unless it's something we have to support fully, we really want the industry to put in more than we put in. That way we know they're committed and it's not just somebody doing something because it's a grant. I don't believe in that, we've got to make sure we get a return on investment.

 

            MS. ZANN: So actually going back to that, you mentioned yesterday that the dairy industry - you said they don't want any grants, they don't want any help. So there's nothing in the budget there that goes towards dairy farmers?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Well no but they can access Growing Forward 2, which they do on a regular basis. What I was talking about is under the TPP - Trans-Pacific Partnership. They were quite offended that the federal government at the time was saying we're going to just give you money and tell you to go away. That's when they said they didn't want a grant and they mean that.

 

The stuff that the Growing Forward has invested in, some of the projects have been some remediation of - stuff around environmental farm plan to make sure that the products coming out of the farm are properly looked after and don't cause any environmental problem, we do things like that. We have helped them out some I think with some biomass stuff that has created electricity using the gas from the manure and several other things - maybe some enhancements in the fields, whatever the case may be, whatever they feel is appropriate for their business, the same as any other agriculture industry would do.

 

            MS. ZANN: Under Programs and Services, the budget for that, Programs and Risk Management, that has gone up by about $3 million. What is covered under that line item and why has that budget increased by almost $3 million?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Again it's still the same thing, it's the wine industry, it is all rolled into one big thing. It's several places in the budget but it's all the same.

 

            MS. ZANN: And it's risk management for those.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, some risk management. The business risk management is really the AgriRecovery program we have to set money aside for. I remember a few years ago we had to put some money away for mink. We may have claims on other ones through the year, if there's a serious crop failure, we put a - it's a reserve, really, in the budget because we build the reserve and we keep adding to it each year if we don't use it, just in case, because we don't want to hit a year we're going to hit $10 million we don't have accounted for.

 

            MS. ZANN: Okay, so it's sort of just put aside in case there's another Arthur or something, okay.

 

            Now I know you mentioned this yesterday but again I just wanted to ask about the agriculture protection. So the program's risk management versus agriculture protection, that was cut by $500,000, so what is the difference between agriculture protection and risk management?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The $500,000 was research money we had for the mink industry and we cut it this year because we do have an academic chair at Dalhousie at the Agricultural College on mink and the money wasn't required this year. We put the money in it the last two years and so did the industry but this year it is not in there. The industry may not be able to fund it this year so we left it out just for this year.

 

            MS. ZANN: Is that partly why you left it out, because they couldn't fund their portion of it?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Part of it, yes, and they hadn't spent the money that we already had in there so we didn't want to fund it if it is not exhausted.

 

            MS. ZANN: Actually then going on to mink, I am interested. So there's a downturn in that industry obviously. I was at Resources Committee a few years ago when they came in and were telling us that they were at the heights and they were doing so well and their black mink was being sold all around the world. What's happening there? What's going on? Have sales stopped? What's happening with the mink industry?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The price of the pelts went down. There's all kinds of factors in that and it's really complex, from the small amount I know about it, but it's a very complex industry. We visited the mink auction house here a week or so ago and they have their hands on the pulse of all this but basically the Russian dollar went to almost nothing, their oil sales have dropped, the value for oil sales, and they were one of the biggest customers for the finished products.

 

            China also, two years ago I believe they had a really warm winter so people didn't buy the furs they would normally buy and all kinds of things like that and there's a reserve of mink that have already been bought, just sitting there waiting to process from last year. So it's a combination of all kinds of things.

 

            The other problem we've had in the province is we had a reduction somewhat in the quality of the mink because of Aleutian disease on the fur. If you look at the fur, underneath it, it is sort of - if you have a water dog, when you pull the fur back there's another layer of his fuzzy fur and the fuzzy fur keeps their skin really warm in the water and they don't get so cold. Now in a mink that's not natural and that's what happens with Aleutian disease, it sort of gets an off-white - not even a white colour but fur underneath there and it makes the mink worth less.

 

            What the market needs now is a short nap, which is short fur, with nothing underneath it that would cause anything else and a bigger mink, with a high gloss. We have the high gloss because of the fish we feed the mink, the scrap fish.

 

            MS. ZANN: And the fish pellets, too?

 

            MR. COLWELL: And the fish pellets. Mostly it's sort of a jelly-type - not really jelly but not liquid. It looks more like jam that you would get out of a jar, a little bit less restricted in solidness in that and they put it on the cage. That diet, they adjust the diet to get the shiny coat and the growth and everything they need.

 

            The bottom line of the whole thing is that the price has dropped out of the mink. They are still getting some good prices and some of the producers will do okay this year but a lot will be in some difficulty.

 

            MS. ZANN: I'm hearing basically that it's collapsing, that the industry is collapsing.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It hasn't totally collapsed but this is normal, this happens about every 10 years. There's a big peak when you talk to them. The last time it was the highest price ever paid for mink and the business, if you put money away from that, that the industry would eventually bottom-out again and then they go back up. It's a cycle it goes through. It's typically 10 years but the industry is saying it takes a little bit longer each time it goes through the cycle to recuperate and a little bit longer for the price to go down when the price goes high. It's pretty complicated.

 

            MS. ZANN: Does your department actually subsidize the mink industry now in any way?

 

            MR. COLWELL: No, the only thing we did, we had to participate two years ago in AgriRecovery, which is a guaranteed income for a farmer, they access the federal program, we pay 40 per cent, the federal government pays 60 per cent. That's that risk management money we had, that $3 million you talked about. It cost us about $9 million or $11 million. We had to pay under that program and it's a program that we don't control. It's done by the federal government and we paid in the first year $11 million, our share, and last year we paid about $5 million. That's why we have that in our budget, to cover it. Last year we had it all budgeted for, and it was in the budget. But the first year I had to go and get extra money out of the budget and put it in our budget to cover it. This year, we don't know yet. The $3 million we've identified is probably going to cover any expense this year.

 

            Again, that's very complicated, how it works. They have to prove what their income was for the year before or two or three years before. Then they have to show what their losses are for that year. I think 30 per cent of that amount - is that correct? (Interruption) I got the number backwards. They can top it up to 70 per cent of their projected income, what they might have lost. Each year they're in a loss, the claim is less and less and less because they didn't make the money the years before. If they make more money than they anticipate, that money is payable back to the federal and provincial governments. We do have one file now that has been overpaid because of the income in the previous year, so that money will be reclaimed by the federal and provincial governments. The federal government does the whole program. We just contribute to it.

 

            MS. ZANN: Do you know how many mink farms there actually are now? Are there less mink farms now than there were before? Has the number gone down over the last few years?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I'm not sure at this time that we actually know that number because we don't know how many mink farms will still be in operation for all kinds of reasons - business reasons really. Some farmers may decide with the low price that it's time to get out. Some may decide to reduce the size of their operation from where they were, seeing what the market is. It's hard to say. We're still waiting for that information; we've asked the industry to give us that information. They've given us some, but nothing that we can say actual numbers on yet. I don't think they know, themselves.

 

            MS. ZANN: I know a lot of people are - and I am still receiving letters from people who are concerned about the environment and concerned about the rivers, especially in the Yarmouth area and some of the lakes there.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I think that there are other issues besides the mink in those areas. Mink was a problem in some areas . . .

 

            MS. ZANN: Yes, and I know we put some restrictions and things, which helped.

 

            MR. COLWELL: The compliance with the new environmental regulations is very, very high. We talked a little bit about that yesterday. We're getting around 80-some per cent now that are in compliance, so that problem will go away over time as it naturally cleans itself up. Some farms, again, have made a decision not to continue, so they're going to shut their farms down, for all kinds of reasons - mostly I would say because of the low price of the mink. Some of them aren't quite compliant, and you'd have to ask the Department of Environment for these details because they do the enforcement now; we don't do it anymore. From what I understand from the briefing we had, some of them may be just as simple as the eavestrough they hadn't had time to put up yet, some simple things, and they will be in compliance. To get the actual numbers, I would suggest you talk to the Department of Environment when they come through with their estimates so you can get more detailed information on that.

 

            MS. ZANN: I just have one more question, and then I'm going to pass it on to my colleagues. The Farm Loan Board, can you explain how it is funded?

 

            MR. COLWELL: What's that again?

 

            MS. ZANN: How it's funded.

 

            MR. COLWELL: It's through the general revenue fund and through the interest they earn from the loans they have out.

 

            MS. ZANN: Say that again, please? Sorry.

 

            MR. COLWELL: The general revenue of the province funds part of it, and the rest of it's funded by the interest they make on the money of the loans they put out.

 

            MS. ZANN: What is the largest loan they can give?

 

            MR. COLWELL: They're authorized to give $2 million, I believe, on their own and anything above $2 million has to go to Cabinet for approval.

 

            MS. ZANN: So they're allowed up to $2 million and anything larger has to go to Cabinet.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: Are you aware of a new business that they're starting in the Truro area by Mr. Evan Price, which is a medical marijuana growing operation that he has been working on?

 

            MR. COLWELL: There is a couple that approached us. Their problem is not with getting the money to do it so much, per se, it's getting the licence from the federal government to grow it. That has been an ongoing issue with them and that will be as this whole thing unfolds, whatever the federal government decides they're going to do, if they're going to legalize it or not. We'll see how that works, but the loans that qualify for a farm, I would think that they would be able to get.

 

            MS. ZANN: It would be an agri-industry?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, they have to register as a Nova Scotia farm and it's a grown product so I wouldn't see why we couldn't fund it. It's not a discussion we've had around the Cabinet table. Again, if the federal government approves it for use and whatever the rules are around that, we would definitely look at it at the loan board to see if it's a good investment. It sounds like.

 

            We were in Colorado with the National Conference of State Legislatures and they call themselves international but actually it's Canada and the U.S. We toured some growing facilities and some processing facilities for marijuana where it's legalized. It looks like there is a great opportunity for government to make some money off this, same as you do basically with the liquor store and the way that's controlled.

 

            I would think, again, I've not got Cabinet approval on this or anything, but I would think that we would fund it like we would normally any other agriculture business because it's a growing crop. What the crops are used for is different but that's fine.

 

            MS. ZANN: Have you ever had any offers or requests for growing hemp in Nova Scotia?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We've got some people interested in that. That would fit under just our regular business every day.

 

            MS. ZANN: Do we have any hemp-growing facilities, farms or anything yet?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We have one company that has invested in some hemp weaving equipment in the province, a farm. I know that so they must be growing the hemp. I really don't know, but it would be a natural progression from the other, I would think.

 

            MS. ZANN: Thank you, that's it for me today.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: I understand from all three caucuses that concludes the questions for the minister so I would ask the minister if he would like to make some closing comments.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, I would. I first became involved in the agriculture business years ago when I was born, but when I was appointed to the Department of Agriculture almost three years ago, I was very pleased to do so and I didn't realize what a vibrant industry it was in the province and how important it is to our economy and how much growth opportunity there was at that time.

 

            Two and a half years ago there didn't appear to be a lot of growth opportunity initially, but when we started looking at possibilities and talking to the industry and understanding where the industry is, we soon very quickly realized that if we changed how we did business a little bit, we would indeed grow the Nova Scotia economy.

 

            I'm very proud of what we've done. I'm very proud of my staff that have worked so hard to make this happen. I'm more pleased and proud with the industry itself. They have really stepped up to the plate. They have come up with new ideas and innovation, and indeed challenged our staff and myself to go along with them and work with them and make things happen.

 

            I want to have it on the record, if it wasn't for the industry in this province and the farmers working hard every day on how they produce and will produce products and look at new innovation - I want to commend them. I want that on the record.

 

            We saw in 2015 that 21 per cent increase in agriculture food exports to $385 million. That's the highest, I believe, in the history of the province. Without even counting the displaced imports that we are having through programs that we are working though Select Nova Scotia and the farmers' markets and all the other things in the province that the farmers have done, I feel that our economic benefit is well beyond $385 million when you factor those in. If you can displace imports, you are actually creating wealth in the province. We have to create wealth in the province on the farms, we absolutely have to do that.

 

            I'm very excited about the wine industry, our four-year plan this year. We started last year with $1 million in the vineyard expansion program and when we started we didn't know if we'd get enough acreage planted in the first year to indeed utilize the $1 million. As it turned out, we used all the $1 million. The industry stepped up, they are changing now from a hobby business, for a lot of them, to a full-time business. The ones that are really commercializing themselves are really expanding so we're very excited about that.

 

            Last year was strictly to put vineyards in and we're going to continue that at a higher level than we did last year but we're also going to do research and development on such things as overwintering the vines to make sure we have a better survival rate, less damage. We're going to look at bud healthiness on the buds to make sure it's properly done. We'll look at a whole gamut of things that the industry has identified that we need to do research in. We're not going to go away from our prime objective to put more vineyards in the fields. The vineyards and the grapes create wealth so we have to grow more grapes.

 

            We're going to look at market development for our products, both in Nova Scotia and export market opportunities. We exported some grapes last year, some wine last year but not a lot and we hope to improve on that as we grow the vineyards bigger.

 

            We're going to move towards a quality assurance system, somewhere between a VQA system and a quality assurance system, somewhere in the middle, the industry has already been talking about it. We have to do that now when we have just a few wineries that we can get consistent agreement on how we're going to do this. They are ready to talk about that now.

 

            I know when I initiated the wine board two years ago, again it's the only one like it in North America, they didn't want to do any quality assurance VQA system, they didn't want to expand and a lot of things they didn't want to do. Now every time I go to the meeting, they are challenging me for things they want to do and they have to do and they've really come around to a whole different type of thinking. I want to congratulate them for that and wish them all the best as they do this growth in the industry. I know we've got some very capable people in this industry and some of the people that retired to grow some grapes and have some fun making some wine have realized that this is a great way to make a living in Nova Scotia and they are indeed turning this over into very successful businesses.

 

            We've done some research analysis on how many acres you need to make money in the vineyard business and the vineyard business itself, never mind the winery. It is better to have a vineyard and winery tied together, that's why our program is that you have to have a contract with a winery if you're going to grow grapes, if you are a farmer or somebody who just has land and wants to have a contract to sell the grapes, or you have to lease the land to the winery for an extended period of time and they'll put the vineyard in and enhance your land, so you have to have the two to really make money.

 

            We're approaching 20 acres or more if you are going to pay back in any reasonable time. A lot of our vineyards and wineries are getting to that level now. Once they hit a critical mass, and I don't know what the critical mass is, I don't know if it's 50 acres or 100 acres, 200 acres, whatever it is, then they can expand upon themselves. It's like everything. We're hoping with this four-year program that we'll get some of the vineyards up to that level.

 

            I was glad that the member for Truro-Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River mentioned Peller. We hadn't announced that but now that she has brought it up, they are going to make a significant investment in Nova Scotia. We've very happy about that and indeed, it will make a difference in the industry. It's going to bring a big player into the field and will help the other smaller wineries with the other things we have.

 

            Part of them coming here is the work that the community colleges have done on analysis of the land. That was a big part in their decision. That's one question they asked - the first question they asked when they were here: do you have climate information? We said, yes, we do. We tied them up with the community college, and indeed, they've got that information. They're very happy with that.

 

            Also our lab that we announced this year, that was all part of the whole industry growing. All these tests were being done outside the province, and the turnaround time was way too long. Plus, we need that expertise in the province. We've also made working arrangements with an Ontario university, I can't recall the name right now, but Acadia University is working with a university in Ontario - we'll find out which here in a second. We did visit. It has a state-of-the-art wine lab that services the Ontario wine industry, which is a huge industry. We're learning from them. We're learning from their mistakes and equipment they need. We're also going to look at lab services we have in our department to see if we can help Acadia with any kind of tests or equipment they don't have when they get the new lab set up.

 

            We're going to work on all those things to help this industry grow. We feel that this can be a major industry in the province. We've mentioned earlier that according to the industry, for every acre of land we plant in grapes, every acre, there are 1.1 full-time employees. When you take everything into consideration, the vineyard, the winery, the tourism part, it's 1.1 full-time jobs. A one-time investment of $64,500, every time we do that, we employ 1.1 more Nova Scotians. We put in 139 acres last year; 150 new jobs for Nova Scotia - one-time cost - and they will be there for 30, 50, 100, or maybe 200 years. These are the kind of developments we need to have.

 

            I can go on for a long time about the wine industry. It is so exciting. It's more exciting to see the industry itself realize what the potential is for them. They're starting to come back - I remember the first wine board meeting I had. I told one of the participants I wanted to make the industry five times bigger in five years, and he almost fell off his seat. He said, no, we've got to do marketing. I said, no, you need grapes. We had quite a discussion about it. He said, I'm not expanding anymore.

 

            Well, let me tell you a little story that's unbelievable. He needed a sign put up on the 100-Series Highway. He had been fighting and fighting with Transportation and Tourism for a couple of years to get this sign up - a little sign with his name on it. I got the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal and the Tourism people in to one of our meetings. The Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal committed to putting the sign up, and Tourism agreed to it at that meeting. The sign was put up shortly after that - at a great cost, by the way, I will admit, to the vineyard, which he didn't have any problem paying, but bureaucracy had blocked this whole thing. The following year, he increased his sales by 30 per cent from one sign on the highway - one sign. He made a commitment to put in nine new acres of vineyard that he had no intention of doing a year before. That's what's happening to our industry.

 

            You look at the winery tours, the tours through the Valley, the company that does these tours. From what I understand, they're all booked for this year, for the whole year. That tells you the interest in the local community in the wine industry.

 

            We also have some emerging wine industry on a smaller scale on the South Shore of Nova Scotia. There's some very high quality people in that area who are doing a smaller scale, a little bit different type of function. But I think over time - the municipality had sort of a farm organization meeting twice in that area now, and it was a pleasure to be down there twice to it. There's a lot of excitement about the industry, the wine industry, and agriculture in general on the South Shore.

 

            I would think, from the information and the excitement I've seen there, that's going to be an area that's going to grow agriculture more than probably anywhere else in the province in the next four or five years if the excitement follows through, and people are following through. I've seen a change this year as compared to last year in that area, so it's very exciting. They're also there too.

 

            These programs are good. It's a program that will move the Nova Scotia economy forward, and it's an industry young people like to work in. It's a neat industry to work in. You're working at a vineyard in a winery as compared to someone maybe working at a fish plant, it's not a very glorious job but it's a good job, so you are going to have people.

 

            The other thing we're doing around the vineyards, Perennia has recently hired a viticulturist. It took us over a year to find the individual we wanted. We did find somebody from Chile who is going to move to Nova Scotia and work here. It just so happens that his wife is a viticulturist as well so we may be getting two for one here and she is coming with him. We've very excited about that, one of the experts in the world on viticulture.

 

            We've seen the wineries here in Nova Scotia, they don't talk about it but they've been training their staff and it's unbelievable. One winery in particular has a staff member that they've had in Chile for two years. They're paying their salary, their expenses the whole time they are there. They are working in the vineyards and they are learning how to make wine at a winery there. Then that person had already been in Europe for a couple of years to try and develop their own master winemakers here in Nova Scotia and they're Nova Scotians who are learning that. So the industries are really realizing the value of these highly-skilled people and these are highly-skilled people.

 

            I know one of the wineries I spoke about here advertised for a master winemaker and they are the biggest ones in the province. They figured there would be 50 people in the world at the level they wanted to hire, maybe, and they figured they would get one or two applicants. Well they came to find out there were about 100 in the world and they got 50 applicants from the 100 people. The reason was because Nova Scotia is the emerging wine industry in the world. We've got some of the best bubbly wine - I'm not allowed to call it champagne - but champagne and some of the best white wines now and now we're starting with some really good quality red wines. I can see somebody experienced to sample those.

 

            Ice wine, it is interesting, someone told me one of our employees in the department said a friend of his was on a tour in Quebec and they asked a question, where is the best ice wine in the world? In Quebec, you are in a tour in Quebec wineries and stuff and the tour guide said Nova Scotia. He couldn't believe it, actually what they said, Quebec cheats when they are making their wine, they freeze the grapes in a freezer and then they make ice wine, they don't do it the way we do, so we've got very high quality ice wine.

 

            Ice wine in China, when I was in China, sells for $600 US a bottle, that's what it sells for in China and there's a big demand for it. So our wine industry has a tremendous opportunity to grow and indeed, add real value to the province. It's going to make our scenery nicer in the province, it's going to make our environment better in the province, it's going to create high-quality jobs with a very small carbon footprint. It's going to do all the things that you ever would want an industry to do and it's going to be home-grown, here in Nova Scotia, with a lot of expertise being developed.

 

            I'm not going to say too much more about the wine industry but I've got to make this point and I want this on the record, the highest price ever paid for a Canadian wine is wine that was produced by Benjamin Bridge, they sold 500 bottles for $288 a bottle in 24 hours. That's all made in Nova Scotia - Nova Scotia grapes 100 per cent. Just think about that, a small little industry in Nova Scotia, probably the best wine in the world, that's something we can be proud of and it's going to get better. I can tell you, the producers in the province are hiring the world's best experts and they are listening to them and we are going to be able to do the research to help them now develop new products and indeed, grow.

            Another very successful thing I want to talk about, if anyone hasn't tried it yet, if anyone likes Baileys Irish Cream, you should try Pomme d'Or. Pomme d'Or was developed by the Grand Pré winery by Hanspeter Stutz, and Perennia. I can tell you, if you like Baileys Irish Cream, you'll love this. It has an apple flavour to it, just a hint, a really nice, beautiful product. I would say that when they get in full production of this, and they've already sold out all the production they've got, once they get production up, they are going to be a challenge to Baileys Irish Cream on the world market. It's a beautiful product and I'm one of its biggest supporters, and I'm not really a big fan of Baileys Irish Cream.

 

            So it's a great product and we can see that over and over again. As our department works with them and Perennia to develop new products and new added value products, that's going to make a lot of difference to the Nova Scotia economy. This is very exciting.

 

            There are a few other little things I'm going to talk about here. One thing, we did a $600,000 two-year soil management program. That's soil drainage and other things that are important to all our industry and there was some discussion around that here.

 

            We're also doing - we had a brief discussion about this - $400,000 a year for the next six years for apple tree enhancement that's probably close to 200,000 to 250,000 new trees a year, such as Honeycrisp, SweeTango, Ambrosia - those apples. That industry has been a tremendous amount of economic benefit to the province and again, a really good product.

 

            Anyone who hasn't had a chance to talk to Scotian Gold about the storage system they have, it's state of the art in the world. They can hold a Honeycrisp apple that actually tastes better after it has been in storage for a while than it does when they pick it. They've got it down to that fine a science. That's a lot of work that was done - research that they did themselves and I want to give them a lot of credit for that.

 

            The blueberry industry in the province - exports last year were up 10 per cent over 2014, which is fantastic. The agriculture, again, I've talked already, about 21 per cent this year overall. The blueberry industry in the province - there was a lot of discussion earlier about bees - the blueberries in the province are now $123 million of exports of 32 per cent of the total of all agriculture products in the province - of the whole market. So our blueberry industry is very important to us.

 

            Along with the blueberry industry, I also want to thank the Department of Natural Resources for working with us and the blueberry industry to make Crown land available to grow blueberries on and also for maple production so you can make maple syrup on Crown land.

 

            We've got to stop thinking about Crown land as just trees to cut down and ship overseas or ship wherever you ship them. It's better to get a value-added product to get a crop every year and really add employment, value and wealth to the province. Blueberries can do that and so can the maple. We're looking at other things and the Department of Natural Resources is very open to that. They've changed their process for doing it and they're going to even fine-tune it further.

 

            I would suggest that when the Minister of Natural Resources comes in you get more details from him on what they've done there, but it has been a really good co-operative effort between our two departments. I want to thank their staff for making that possible for the industry. The industry is very excited about it and again, it's another one of those success stories that we don't talk about enough.

 

            Everything we can do to get more agriculture land in use - in this case it's forestry land into agriculture land is even better. So we are making real progress.

 

            We're working with one of the large blueberry producers now - more than one actually - two or three of them, to add value-added products for export. I was in China last year and we witnessed the sale of blueberry juice called Just Juice. It's made by a local company here. I don't know how many thousands of bottles they've shipped so far. That's a market that has been opened up in China that wasn't there a year ago.

 

            These trade missions really do pay big dividends. On that one trip we sold over $30 million worth of produce in one trip. So it was well worth it and business is still benefiting from it today.

 

            We're looking for quality programs for new trade deals that we're working on and quality assurance is something we're going to have to move forward more and more, certification to new standards that the industry has to get to in order to market outside the province.

 

            I want to also talk about - when we talk about external trade, we talk about the Canadian-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement and agriculture. It's a really positive program. We can see a lot of tariffs that are going to be dropped in agriculture. Tariffs will eliminate 93.6 per cent of agriculture lines immediately - currently at 18.2 per cent duty in several countries in Europe, at all the countries in Europe, and the supply management sectors will be milk, and other ones will be untouched, with the exception of cheese, within two years some cheese will be allowed to be imported into the province. That's a really good trade deal and over time it's going to make a difference to our farmers in the province in being able to get to new markets that they didn't have or they had but the tariffs were so high on them that it wasn't worth doing.

 

            The Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, I was in Atlanta with the deputy minister and the industry. We're very glad that we went and talked to the whole industry about it. We talked a bit about the supply management, we were there to help protect supply management in the milk and the chicken, eggs, turkey, hatching eggs, all those different commodity groups. Really we did very well on those negotiations and the industry is very happy with it.

 

There are some dairies, the hardest hit one was 3.25 per cent reduction based on the 2015 year quota. That can easily be absorbed by the industry. Chickens were down 2.1 per cent, table eggs 2.3 per cent, turkey 2 per cent and hatching eggs 1.5 per cent. None of those are going to be negatively affected in the province over time, it's going to take some time to get that in place. The previous federal government said there will be some kind of compensation, but as stressed before, they don't want a grant, they want to be able to diversify their businesses and grow their business into something else they can make money at.

 

            All in all, when this agreement is done, 100 per cent of the duty on seafood is going to be eliminated. Malaysia is a big win for the seafood sector which I also represent, and 65 per cent of the duty on seafood exports to Japan will be reduced immediately and 100 per cent within 15 years, and 83 per cent of the seafood exports to Vietnam is immediate and would reach 100 per cent in 10 years, so it's a huge deal.

 

            These markets that we're looking into now represent $28.1 trillion of trade opportunity, 40 per cent of the world's economic economy and the 12 parties to this agreement have really - it's really a forward step for our industries and we should see great things in the industries as we move forward as these trade agreements get in place and the barriers start to drop.

 

            We also talked some about Select Nova Scotia and Buy Local. That has been a real success. We put about $0.25 million a year into that program and over the years we have seen a real uptake in buying Nova Scotia products. It's important that we buy Nova Scotia, keep people employed, keep our young people here working and also for food security. We don't talk about food security. I talked a little bit around this table about it since we started. We need a secure food supply in the province, a safe food supply. We have safe food in the province with the standards we take. You never know, if lettuce is being imported from another country, what kind of treatment it received before we got it. We see lots of recalls from those sorts of things happening. So the more we can grow locally, the more we can help our economy, the more we can be assured we have a food supply. The United Nations tells us that within 20 to 40 years, with the emerging market and population growth in Asia, we're not going to have enough food to feed the middle class and 65 per cent of the middle class is going to be in Asia - not here, in Asia. That's going to be a total game-changer and it is already underway and it may even be before then. So imagine, we're trying to feed the Third World, we're not even going to have enough food to feed the middle class in the world, so it's going to be a game-changer.

 

            When we talk about land protection for farm lands, we really want to take this seriously because we're going to need this land for production. We talk about other sources of protein which we'll talk about under Fisheries and Aquaculture, I'm sure, there's other sources we have to look at, too, and we have to exploit all these to the point - I shouldn't say "exploit", we have to utilize them to the fullest extent while looking after the environment and making sure we have a healthy environment to live in.

 

            We really appreciate the agreement we have with Taste of Nova Scotia with local companies that have banded together. We help them as well and work with them. They do a lot of work jointly with us in the province to promote Nova Scotia products on the world market. They've done a great job. Their membership is increasing every year, and it's a pleasure to be with them and see the aggressive approach they've taken to promote Nova Scotia products.

 

            We did talk about crop insurance. We're happy in the past year to be able to include grapes, the risks around grapes, in case of accident or some kind of a problem so that they couldn't get the crop off so that the businesses don't go out of business because they didn't have any income from the grapes, insurance on those.

 

            One of the bigger ones, too, is the small farm that couldn't access their insurance for their crops. I think that's very important because there's a lot of small farms in the province, and if a small farm loses $10,000 or $20,000 of the crop, it has a serious impact. If a large farm does that, that's the normal cost of doing business. But some of these small farms could be completely wiped out.

 

            I can tell you, in my area, the one farmer who was left - he has since passed away - told me one day when he visited me, I had $8,500 worth of broccoli all set to go to the farmers' market, and the deer got into my field and ate it all in one night. That's exactly what happened. That was a huge economic impact to him. If this insurance had been available to him at that time, he could have recuperated some of that and had a decent income that year so he could have survived into the next year. He really suffered from this. He had electric fences up and everything, but they got in the field. He said that they seem to know when the crop is ready better than I do because they always eat it before I can harvest it. That didn't always happen, but he was very frustrated.

 

            But wrapping up, it has been a very exciting year in the Department of Agriculture. We've seen some huge economic benefit from it. As you can see, our government is committed to growing the agriculture industry in the province - a little bit different than we did in the past, but I think that's a sign of the times of where we're going.

 

            But we're not ignoring the traditional industry, either. They're the backbone of agriculture in this province, and we respect their hard work and dedication to make sure that our families are fed, and we have exports, and we keep our young people working in the province.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E1 stand?

 

            Resolution E1 stands.

 

            With that, I suggest we perhaps take a five-minute break to allow the minister to gather staff for Fisheries and Aquaculture. We will reconvene in five minutes.

 

            [1:28 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

[1:45 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll call the Subcommittee on Supply back to order.

 

Resolution E10 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $12,464,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: I will now ask the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture if he has some opening comments and would introduce his staff.

 

            HON. KEITH COLWELL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Again we just finished our estimates on Agriculture and it is a very exciting industry, as the fishing industry is. Too many times the fishing industry is not viewed in this province as being a real economic driver to the province and indeed, we are proving again that the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture and the fishermen and the industry in this province - not the department but the industry in this province - is the number one exporter in the province of products. That says a lot for the industry, the hard work they do, the daily routine of the fishermen going to sea and putting their lives at risk and getting the harvest in and the quality that goes with that, processors, the whole value chain around the fishing industry. Nova Scotia is known for one of the best industries in the world when it comes to fresh fish and indeed, we are seeing that in the international markets.

 

            Over the past few years we've been looking at many things to see if we can grow the economy and the industry and it seems to be paying off. A lot of it is mainly due to the industry itself. As we move forward in the next few years there's lots of opportunities for growth and we see a large opportunity for growth in aquaculture in the province, which we'll be moving forward in a very careful and planned way that best protects the environment, as we do it with consultation in the communities.

 

            Saying those few words, I will turn over to questions now. I will have to take a break shortly for probably 10 or 15 minutes so I'll just let the individuals know that, when they start their questioning. Thank you.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, minister. I'll now move over to the Progressive Conservative caucus for one hour of questions.

 

The honourable member for Argyle-Barrington.

 

            HON. CHRISTOPHER D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Minister, a pleasure to see you, a pleasure to see your staff here. This year it was good to see the Agriculture staff as well, as I also was one of those guys who was lucky enough to have the departments for a very short period of time. The three years seemed to fly by because it is an exciting number of industries that you get to take care of or help shepherd or stay interested in. Fishing, of course, is by far the most important industry in southwest Nova Scotia and in many parts across the province as well.

 

            As you know, in southwest Nova Scotia, especially in Argyle-Barrington, the Barrington side of my constituency is, of course, the lobster capital of Canada, between the Cape Islands and the Woods Harbours and the Shag Harbours, there's a lot of lobster that is landed there. Quite unbeknownst to them, just across the line, the Pubnicos, down in through the Wedgeports, there's an equal amount of lobsters that are brought in through there that are, of course, shipped all over the world.

 

            I thought I would start off with this issue, you mentioned in your opening comments about fishers going out to sea, in a lot of cases putting their lives on the line. I know we have the Minister of Labour and Advanced Education here as well. I just wanted to maybe inform the folks here that we lost a fisherman the day before yesterday, a guy who I knew from my constituency, Alderic Deviller, a 50-year-old gentleman who died as a hero. One of his crew members fell overboard. I don't know if they were on their way in or on their way out or if they were out fishing, maybe the minister knows more than I do. He went to save his crew member - and did save his crew member - but he suffered a heart attack afterwards and died. Maybe we're lucky enough to have him to bury as I've seen too many of my friends lost at sea. It just sort of underlines the importance of safety in our industry and one that I hope that you, as a department, continue to advocate for and work with the Minister of Labour to make sure that we can continue to make the industry as safe as we possibly can.

 

            I am going to start off asking questions about the Supplementary Detail, but maybe a quick comment on safety, some of the initiatives the department is looking at working with its partners - the Fishery Safety Association and the Department of Labour and Advanced Education - and how you're interacting with those groups.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Thank you very much for that question, it's very important. One thing that I will say from the start is it's the first time in history that the Workers' Compensation fees have been dropped for fishermen. I think that's significant.

 

            I think it's significant to recognize the effort the industry itself had to put in to have that happen, a reduction in accidents. It's great to see that the safety associations have done such a great job. The fishermen now are talking all the time about wearing life vests and safety equipment and being more and more conscious about safety. I want to commend the industry for doing that because I know from years working in the industry, in the past, it was sort of a badge not to wear a life jacket. It's really good to see that they are understanding now that they have to do that.

 

            I feel very, very bad, and it's unfortunate that gentleman died in the industry. That is very unfortunate. The work we've done in the Safe at Sea initiatives that we've worked with the industry on has been very successful, and we hope to continue that success in the future. I want to, again, if you would, send condolences to the family on my behalf and our department's behalf. We always hate to lose an experienced member of our industry at any time.

 

            We're very excited working on the safety part of it. It has been a success, and that's success that successive governments have been working on. I know you worked on it when you were minister. It has taken a long time; it's an attitude change, and the change is happening very positively.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: I thank you for those comments, and I will pass them on when I have the opportunity.

 

            Looking quickly at the budget, it's a pretty short one - for those who are listening, it's two pages - so we don't have a lot to talk about here. As far as the departmental issues of course, listed off in Supplementary Detail, Page 12.3, we have the Office of the Minister, Funded Staff, Aquaculture, Inland Fisheries, and Marine and Coastal Division, for a total budget of $12 million or somewhere in that range. That is a little bit of an increase over what we had last year.

 

            Maybe I'll ask you where that increase is and how that's working because I see Aquaculture has an increase year over year of almost $3 million there. Maybe you can talk about what new programming is being stuck in place there for those kinds of dollars.

 

            MR. COLWELL: The increase in our budget is all around aquaculture. We see tremendous opportunities for development of the aquaculture industry. As you're aware, we put new regulations out in place, a new Act, and I appreciate your caucus's support of our Act and what we've been trying to do there.

 

            The key to the development of this industry is public consultation and public trust and also the environment. We really have to make sure the environment is looked after when these things go forward.

 

            When it comes to shellfish, there's really no issue. Oysters in particular clean the water up, not that we have to clean very much water up in Nova Scotia because it's pretty pristine anyway. That's very positive.

 

            All the controversy is always around salmon farming, unfortunately, because it's one of the best protein sources we can get with omega 3 in it, basically - there's something I didn't realize when we first started all of this: the waste from salmon and trout has no E. coli in it, none, which is very good news. So it's only the sewage from human operations or human living conditions or whatever it is that causes E. coli in the water. That's very positive.

 

            I think we're the toughest, if not, close to the toughest, in the world in our new regulations. There are new containment requirements and all of those things that go with that. As a result of that, we've got an additional $3-plus million in our budget for the minimum of the next three years to work on the list. We've got to do a lot of research, a lot of development work. There are a lot of myths out there that may or may not be myths. In other words, one thing we're looking at right now, we've contracted the Université Sainte-Anne to look at the interaction between lobster fishermen and finfish aquaculture sites. That work is ongoing.

 

            We appointed a science committee with Dr. Gray from the Agricultural College's chair of that committee. They will review the findings. They will review the proposals we put out to see what the best way is to do this. They are engaged also with the fishing industry to talk about this, to see if there is a negative impact. If there is a negative impact that we can find, we'll put a regulation around it so that's considered before anything happens and we'll monitor for that condition.

 

            If it's not, we'll put the myth to bed once and for all. All the other myths that are commonly known around the fish farms, we're going to do research on those, find if they're accurate or not. If the myth is accurate, we will take appropriate action to make sure that those are taken into serious consideration - not only consideration, we will set our regulations to make sure that happens.

 

            So that, in a very short presentation, is where aquaculture is and where the $3 million is going for the next few years. We'll be doing several more things than that. We've invested in some new equipment. We have an ROV on order that we can inspect and do samples underneath the sites without hiring divers. It will save us a fortune in a very short time. That means we can do also more sampling and we won't have to wait until a diver can come.

 

            We've got a new boat on order that we can work in all weather conditions. That's very positive too. We are training staff to operate the boat. We're doing everything - lining up everything we need to do now to move this industry forward. In order to that we're going to have some new staff in our department - an equivalent to five new ones. Actually, they're not new hires. The positions were there but the funding wasn't there for the positions. We're providing the funding for the positions.

 

            So it's a pretty exciting time for the department. We have a young, vibrant, excited group of people that really care about the environment, care about the industry, care about our province that are working on this. I can tell you, we've accomplished in a very few months what would normally take several years to achieve in our regulations and processes. We still have some final things we have to do - we're working on them daily.

 

            One of the other things that we are doing with our Aquaculture office in Shelburne, we're going to have it certified to ISO 9000 for operation of the facility. That would be for our business operations and stuff. I believe we will be the only government department in Canada, if not in North America, to be ISO 9000 certified. This is how serious we are about this business.

            We put in a new lab in Truro - our fish health lab. We also did some upgrades to our lab in Shelburne. We have some excellent fish vets on staff. We are going to announce some new regulation requirements around fish health that we are working with a veterinarian association right now.

 

            We are also going to go for an international qualification on our lab that has never been in existence in Nova Scotia before to give credibility to the great people we have working there and give them a standard that they can be proud of. They're already working to those standards but to give them certification at that level.

 

            So this money is going to do a lot of different things. A lot of it to get it ready for us to do. We're going to do a lot of water tests, float tests, temperature tests in the water. A tremendous amount of research around where is a suitable site for finfish farm, a shellfish farm - where not to have one. We don't want to find out by putting one there that doesn't work. We want to stop that in the beginning.

 

            Those are roughly things we did. If you want any more details, please ask and I'll fill you in.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: So as we continue to work down the regulations, working the bill, you are becoming the regulator and a well-informed regulator, how is the work going on the promotion of the industry and who is going to be responsible for doing that? There is always a challenge of being a regulator and a promoter at the same time, so I'm just wondering how we're going to be enticing others to set up farms, to set up oyster farms, to set up salmon farms, trout farms - whatever they happen to be, how do you see that being split off and how are we promoting the industry to try to get it to grow?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We have a pretty solid plan around it. We're going to be the regulator but not the enforcers. The enforcement is going to be done by the Department of Environment. It's two distinctly different things. Even before that process was started, the overall government going into one department, we were already in negotiations with another department to do the enforcement for us around this. That arrangement is going to work very well.

 

            We are really going to set the standard and then hold the industry to it. The enforcement section will be enforcing those standards. If we see anything that's out of order or if the reporting that we require for fish health or anything else is not being done, that will be turned over with all the evidence to the enforcement department and they will follow it through from there, to lay charges or have them make corrective action, to give them a fine or whatever the case may be. Hopefully we don't have many of those.

 

            I would think that with what we've seen in the industry as a whole, they are very anxious to do the things that should be done properly. We really had no rules before. I was minister 18 years ago, you were a minister as well, you knew at that time there was no need for the rules we have to have today so I think it's a total game-changer. The only thing the industry has told us is tell us what the rules are, make them consistent and fair and we will do them. That's what we're hearing from the industry. They are very excited about it and we've even had some inquiries from outside the country from people who are interested in developing some industry here, which we will pursue when we are ready. We are not ready yet - very close but not ready.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Inland fisheries, we can talk quickly about that. That's something you do on a regular basis. I guess this is the time of year when we are putting fish in the lakes and in the area so maybe just talk quickly about fish-stocking programs and basically how we're looking at inland fisheries this year. Do you have an overarching look at what's going on?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We've got some pretty exciting things happening there. We have a new director. We hated to see the previous director leave. He did a great job for a long time and you would have worked with him. We have a new one, Al McNeill has been appointed director there. He has really good ideas and approaches.

 

            We have some programs underway which we will announce shortly around some enhancement we are going to do in some salmon rivers to try to bring the salmon back because we feel there's a huge opportunity there for sports fishing that we are not utilizing yet. Those announcements will be out in the next two or three weeks, outlining exactly what we're doing and how we're doing that. We're working very closely with the Nova Scotia Salmon Association. We're presently in the process, as you are well aware, we are stocking 400 lakes this year under the program, mostly with trout, and we're doing some salmon stocking in some areas under our programs. We're trying to build a really good relationship with the sports industry as we move forward.

 

            We're going to do some more promotion around our sports fishery to try to get people to come to the province and, when they are here, sports fish. We see it as a great opportunity here for economic growth. It doesn't have the dollar value that aquaculture necessarily has, or the potential, but it's a great opportunity because if we can tie a day's fishing in with somebody who comes on a two-week vacation, that's a real bonus for us because that experience will stay with them and hopefully they will come back for that experience again, whether it be striped bass or tuna or salmon or trout, whatever it is. We're going to really start working towards that. We have a great group of people in the inland fisheries who see some opportunities and we're going to try to capture those ones and move our industry forward.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Under the next one, Marine and Coastal Division, there's a little bit of a change here. I see there's a few people who will be - I'd say about nine people will be missing out of that part of the staff and maybe $200,000 missing out of that budget. What is the adjustment that has happened to Marine and Coastal Division?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Those are the people who went to environment enforcement.

 

            MR.D'ENTREMONT: An easy transfer there.

 

            MR. COLWELL: That's where the money went, too. Some money went with them and the full-time equivalents.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Did they get special training to be over there? I've heard of a few already, we'll talk about that later.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yeah, we'll talk about that later. Actually you have to talk about that with Environment.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Yes, because I think they go somewhere else and they forget where they're from sometimes but that's a whole other discussion.

 

            Let's move into the issue that we talked a little bit about earlier today during Question Period. I don't know if you want to start that one right now? How long do you need before you have to go?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I don't know.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: So we're just playing it by ear?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We'll just start it and then we'll pick it up where we stop anyway, I may not have to go.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Okay, lobster handling course. Where did this one get dreamed up? Because I know you've said it was with consultation, we talked to people, yet when I talk to my industry, they were completely caught off guard on this one. So, who did you consult with? Where did it come from?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Have you talked to your industry in the last week?

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Not in the last week, no.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Okay. Things have changed in the last week.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Okay, but let's talk about this history for a minute. Where did this come from?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I'm going to be very careful how we approach this. There is a need to get better product to market, I'll put it that way. In general terms. I think our industry is doing a great job. They've developed some really exciting markets, they're doing well supplying those markets but some of the conditions that they have to deal with themselves, beyond their control, have really caused some grief in the end market. The idea is that we've got to improve how we ship the product. How it's shipped, you know, with the shippers of the product that, once it leaves the processing facility or the holding facility, that is a problem. We've identified that. We've had extensive meetings on this now by the way, with the industry, since the first announcement of this.

 

            There are issues with what's landed. The industry doesn't think I know what a soft lobster is but, I was hauling lobster pots before some of these guys were ever born, and I know what a soft lobster is and a hard lobster, and a full-bodied lobster, and one that's not full of meat, I know all those things. So, I may not be a fisherman but I've been hauling lobster traps since I was a little kid. I guess most of the people of Nova Scotia who live on the coast have done that. There's a need to work with the industry to improve the product when it gets to the final customer.

 

            So, that's where this started from and the one place, of course, as you both would know, being former Fisheries Ministers, we can't control what the fishermen do, that's strictly DFO, and so we had to start some place with some kind of a program to start addressing some of the issues that are not necessarily caused by the people on the wharf, or the processors themselves. So, that was why this started and it was driven partly by complaints from customers, and the complaints are still coming in but, the industry is reacting to those and I'll just leave it at that.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: I have a couple of emails that I'll provide to you that I've received. I mean, this dates back now to the beginning of March when all of a sudden we found out, the world found out, that our lobsters weren't great, and you felt that everybody needed to take a training course. So, bringing the issue up yourself not only concerned the buyers, because this was being imposed, and we'll talk about CFIB and all that stuff, and red tape but by announcing this to the larger buyers - so the buyers in the U.S., the buyers in Europe, the buyers in China . . .

 

            MR. COLWELL: I'm just going to stop you for a second. We did not announce this. It was never announced by us.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Well, I've got a letter that you sent up to everybody.

 

            MR. COLWELL: No, no it was not announced. A letter was sent out to the industry, the industry went to the media. So, we did not announce it. We had no intention of announcing it.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: I'll take that for what that's worth. So, the letter went out to everybody and then - I'm going to guess that soon after that, let's say Ray in this case, which is Ray Belliveau from Charlesville Fisheries, the minute he got that letter he was sending a note to Amanda and copying me and trying to figure out what was going on. And then it went from there.

 

            So the international community looks at that and says well, if the minister feels, or if the department feels that people need a handling course then maybe the lobster isn't good and maybe we should look at this closer and question the lobsters we're receiving from them.

 

            Ray says very well that we know how to handle lobsters. We've been in the business since 1980-whatever. He employs over 10 people within his facility. Those people are making $100,000 to $500,000 a year, whether it's the boats that are selling to him or whether it's the people or the 30 full-time employees that work for him. For the past 25 years he says we have neither received or asked for one dime of government assistance.

 

These are the kinds of people who the Ivany report called on to have in our communities. They know how to handle lobsters. They know what a soft lobster is, just like you do; they know what a hard lobster is, just like you do, et cetera. They know how to leverage their dollars with their lobsters. They know that these ones are destined for canneries and these ones are destined for international markets. They wouldn't be here since 1980 if they didn't know those things, as well as Sears. I've got W. Sears Seafood Limited from Cape Island that bring up exactly the same things. So as much as we have a challenge with soft lobster in southwest Nova Scotia, we also have the main lobster fishery in Canada there that has been jeopardized by a letter that went out to buyers.

 

            I know you are saying well, there's something coming up and buyers are onside now so I guess maybe I'm going to have to make some phone calls but what's next? How are we going to fix this issue now where on one side we have lobster buyers that are saying we don't want to do this because we don't need to, get out of our business please, and on the other side we now have an international market that is looking at us closely. So how do we get out of this box that, with all due respect, was created by your department?

 

            MR. COLWELL: The international market is complaining about the quality, point blank. This is not something new, New Brunswick already has a fish-handling course that they have to take in New Brunswick right now, that's in place, has been for some time.

 

            There's a process that we have to - we're losing a lot of money in the industry. You are well aware of that and I don't really want to put those statistics on the record, for obvious reasons. The industry that we met with and myself are not going to go to the media with any more of this. We have a mutual understanding that that's not going to happen because it does hurt the industry. We know it hurts the industry, that's why we did no announcement - we sent a letter out for the training.

 

            I'll stress again, it was the industry that got in front of the media. As far as the questions that were asked in the House today around the regulatory stuff, it's clear that the Federation of Independent Business has not talked to us, doesn't understand the issue or the concern that's there and probably those questions hurt our industry again today so I'll just leave that at that.

 

            It's a whole industry we have to consider. We agree with the buyers and the processors on that, how do we bring the whole industry in. If you can tell me how to do that, tell the industry how we can do that, how we can get the harvesters involved in it, how do we get Air Canada involved in it - we're going to work on that. We've already made a commitment to the industry that we'd work with them on that, not only Air Canada but any freight system.

 

            We are investing this year and last year, $1.25 million in marketing lobsters - $1.25 million. We're going to look at packaging for shipping, we're going to look for identity in this product, and this is all part of improving the profitability of our industry. We're losing probably $100 million, maybe more, a year, that we could be getting in the pockets of Nova Scotians if we were to get our whole value chain properly operating. I think there's a little bit of slip in all the chain. Some of them are well beyond the control of buyers, fishermen, or processors - all that stuff. We've committed to the industry now; we've met with them. We're going to help them resolve that problem, and we're going to work together on it. As far as we're concerned, we'll make no further comments on the issue. Any questions you ask in the Legislature will get just generic answers because we don't want to draw any more attention to this, at the request of the industry. The more we hype this up, the more the international market is watching us, as you've already indicated.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: That goes to my other issue: you talk about the industry in general. Who is the industry? Who are you looking at today as being the spokespeople for the industry? Is it the Fish Packers Association? Who are you working with? Who should I listen to at this point? I'm hearing it from all sides. Who is your contact now that's supposed to be speaking on behalf of the industry?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We met with Nova Scotia Fish Packers Association, ASPANS, lobster processors association, and SPANS all at the same time. We've got an arrangement made, a very positive arrangement.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Maybe you and I can talk about the arrangement without the microphone.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes. It's very positive - very, very positive.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: You're sure?

 

            MR. COLWELL: We have an agreement made. We were going to announce it, and we changed our minds because we didn't want any more attention to this issue. But it's very positive from the standpoint of marketing top-quality products, very positive for the industry. We've got buy-in from those organizations, and we've got buy-in with their opinion on it. We're on the same page exactly, and it's exciting to see. This is the first time, and you know how difficult it is to get someone to represent the industry properly and get the right thing. We had one very interesting meeting, as you can imagine, and one that was interesting but very productive. Both meetings were very productive. 

 

We've committed to working together now in the future. I think it's a huge step forward for us as a department to be able to get that kind of feedback from the industry for a goal we all want to have. Our ultimate goal in this whole thing is we want to have more money in the pockets of Nova Scotians. That's what we're after. That means the wharf, the fishermen, the guy that picks the fish up, the guy that ships them, the exporter, the people working in the plants; that's what we're after. I feel we have at least $100 million that we can get by adding value to the product we have. I've got some ideas around that we could talk about later, with both of you, actually.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: I appreciate that from you, I do. But I hope we've learned that trying to impose something rather than trying to work with the groups - really, you got caught a little bit by trying to tell people how to do their business, rather than saying, hey listen, we can work with you and try to figure this out. I think that letter that was sent out was just the wrong way to go about it. I think the industry would agree that that was probably the wrong way to go about it, but I think they appreciate now that you're going in the right direction. So I'll move on from this issue, for now.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I'm not totally disagreeing with you about where we need to be now.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Okay, that's good.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: If I may, I've received information that the minister has been called away right now. I'd like to call for a recess for 10 to 15 minutes. The committee is now in recess.

 

            [2:19 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

[3:03 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

MR. SPEAKER: I now call the Subcommittee on Supply back to order. We are continuing with the time allotted to the PC caucus. I will call on the honourable member for Argyle-Barrington to continue.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Minister, it is good to have you back.

 

            Maybe, just to finish off where we were in a bit - since you had a chance to make a phone call and I had a chance to make some phone calls too and what I would suggest to you is make sure that the communications on this issue get out to the buyers because from what I can see maybe we've talked to the associations but we have not really got out to the buyers yet because the buyer I spoke to has not heard a thing and I know that the member for Queens-Shelburne spoke as well, I am sure he will bring it up in his discussion, but they did not know about it either, and these were two really, I would say, relatively large buyers whose number one issue is saying forget about the whole idea of a lobster handling course and imposing it on us and trying for a cash grab is what they see as an impediment on their business.

 

            I'm sure on the other side that they would be more than happy to participate in a process that works on lobster quality.

 

            Again, I don't know who you've talked to and how you've done it but let's get it out to the people who need to know about it.

 

            MR. COLWELL: We intend to do that and we are preparing a document now to send out to all buyers, that it will be approved by the organizations mentioned earlier. We will indicate in that letter that we met with those people and I think they'll be happy with what was agreed upon.

 

            The most exciting part of this, and there is an exciting part of this, is that the industry has come forward with some great ideas, ideas we've adopted and will continue to adopt. It's going to be good for Nova Scotia's lobster industry and the whole province.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: I want to move on to another issue that is important in my area. There are two other issues that I'm hearing on a regular basis when it has to do with the fishery and ones that you can - not necessarily deal with but you can advocate for at the FPT table with your provincial colleagues, with your federal colleagues, that revolves around the issue of cusk.

 

            The whole issue of cusk box is basically the blocking off of large areas of lobster bottom - we'll call it lobster bottom - to basically the lobster fishery, or a drop in the number of pots that a fisherman is allowed to use. There are some large implications about the whole issue of designating cusk as an endangered species.

 

            Let me talk about cusk for a minute. I've got a really great document done by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and I'll give it to you, too. It's the update on the recovery, potential risk for cusk in Canadian waters, done by Fisheries and Oceans science. It is dated October 2014. This is an issue that has been floating around for a little bit. Actually it predates 2014 because COSEWIC and the endangered species people have been talking about cusk for a very long time. It was actually one that crossed my desk when I was minister, one that I had to bring to my FPT table, one that I had to fight for to make sure it was shut down because there is no endangered species called cusk.

 

            The reason that DFO, by their data, is calling this an endangered species is because it was misreported for a very long time. Even if I look at the fishing years, there's a great chart on Page 7 of this document, it shows the actual landings of cusk by catch process - by gill net, bottom longline and bottom trawl. When those quotas were basically taken from fixed gear to mobile gear, there was a period of time when I think the mobile gear was misrepresenting what they were actually catching.

 

            Now this is not an attack on them but there weren't as many fisheries observers out there at the time and maybe the dockside monitoring wasn't there like it should have been at that time so instead of putting other species, they would just maybe put some haddock down as cusk or they were putting some cod down as cusk or whatever they were doing. I don't know exactly what they were doing but this is what I've been told.

 

            Really the stock of cusk has not changed for years and years, but we talk to our fishermen, especially in those areas, they are catching a lot of cusk in their lobster pots. Some, depending on where they are, depending on what kind of bottom they are using, they are catching three or four of those fish in their lobster pot and we know what happens when we bring a cusk up, they are more of a bottom fish so their swim bladders blow up when they hit the surface. You really can't use them, they're not a very good bait apparently - I can't understand that one, I figure they could stick them back on the spike and use them but they're not allowed to do that. What they have to do is chuck them overboard. Well what do they do when their swim bladders are all busted? They just float behind the lobster boat as they go along and the sea gulls are having a great time at it. That being said, that's a quick little history about cusk but how are we going to fight this issue to make sure that DFO understands that cusk is not an endangered species and that if they do start to impose sanctions or changes to how we fish or how our fishermen fish, that it's going to have a detrimental effect on our industry?

 

            MR. COLWELL: You bring up a very good point and I totally agree with you, absolutely without question. Two of our deputy ministers, the Deputy Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and the Deputy Minister of Natural Resources, who are presently the people who look after endangered species, have written to the DFO and checked into these cusks and the alewives as well and the American eel being on the endangered species list. The information you've provided here is consistent with what I'm hearing from the industry. Unfortunately, years ago people reported things that might not be not the right thing when they did it and that's causing trouble.

 

            I can recall one gentleman when I was Fisheries Minister before, years ago, coming and crying because he didn't get a quota because he sold his fish to his buddy for cash and then he said well I sold it to my buddy for cash and now the buddy has the quota. So these things, people don't realize how much of a negative impact it has down the road when you are dealing with science because science tries to base its decision on fact.

 

            We are adamantly opposed to the position that is being taken on making this an endangered species. We have and will be talking to the federal minister about this and it will be a topic of the upcoming meeting we're going to have with him and the other provincial ministers. We're going to do everything we can to make sure that doesn't happen. I know the detrimental effect it will have on our industry and it could really cripple part of our lobster industry, which we cannot afford to have happen.

 

            If it was a real threat, and from what I understand, it's no trouble to catch a cusk if you want to catch one, so that's a pretty good indication that there's not a shortage of them. We're going to do everything we can and if any suggestions that either one of you two have because both are former Fisheries Ministers and how you tackled it in the past, we would gladly accept that advice as well. This is something that is going to affect our whole province, this is something all of us should work on together. I appreciate you bringing it up today. Your analysis of it is very, very accurate.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Because we've lived it already, it has come back to us again. It's funny how these things come back. The meeting that I sat in was with the Minister of Fisheries of the day, which happened to be Geoff Regan - I think everybody heard he is the new Speaker of the House - Geoff was the Minister of Fisheries at that time, who did have an understanding of the Atlantic fishery and listened to the fishery and the ministers who were sitting around him.

 

            I'm hoping that, with Minister Tootoo, you are going to be able to make him understand what is going on. I invite you and Minister Tootoo and whoever else can come down and I'll show them how easy it is to catch a cusk. Well, I won't show you, I'll probably be seasick on the side of the boat but I have a number of friends who have boats who could show you how to catch that cusk.

 

            MR. COLWELL: We'll take you up on that. We're going to make you show us.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: I'll have to take a couple of those pills. When fisheries and science - and I know there was a big discussion about this during the election and I'm not going to support one side or the other on this one with the whole issue of science and yes, we need to do some smart science in this country and DFO is no different than the science you are going to be doing in aquaculture, we need to know how things are working. But every once in a while these things show themselves up again, so when that scientist was pushed down once, eventually that science shows back up. We just need to find a way to make sure this one is gone for good and anything that I can do to help support that.

 

            I've got an article here that was in the The Vanguard, with a number of fishermen. It was a meeting that was done about the cusk box by LFA 34 a number of weeks ago and there were some really angry people in that because they see those cusk and they look at it as being basically a nuisance, they catch so many of them.

 

            So again, I'll lend my hand on this as best I can to support you to make sure that DFO and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans understands that this is a non-starter. This one would be very detrimental to our lobster fishery.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Any support you can help with this, and I think support from your caucus would help us as well, as well as the NDP caucus on this topic. This is one that we all totally share the same opinion on. I think that would be a help for us as well so if you would be kind enough to send me a letter or send a letter to the minister, and if the member for the NDP caucus would do the same thing I would appreciate it - to the minister or to me and I'll forward it to the minister with a letter to go with it. Anything you can do to help would be greatly appreciated.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: That's very good, and like I said, if you can keep us up to date on your process as well - I don't know when your meetings are happening with the FPTs. I know we used to meet a couple of times a year. I don't know where you are on that cycle of meeting with your federal counterparts.

 

            MR. COLWELL: We have one booked for New Brunswick in June. The last meeting we had I brought up about science and innovation - directed science. I got unanimous support from all ministers, including the federal minister on that approach. This is old science and this is stuff that's not accurate. That's not the kind of stuff we're talking about. I think any concerns you can lay out like that would be greatly appreciated. It would be nice to have that kind of co-operation for the industry. That will go a long way, as far as I'm concerned.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: You'll have my support on that one. So while we're talking about cusk and lobster bottom, let's talk about windmills and lobster bottoms. There has been a proposal by Beothuk Energy, a company out of Newfoundland and Labrador, that is interested in putting a number of offshore windmills in the Atlantic Ocean just off of my constituency.

 

            Basically they would fill up a very important piece of lobster bottom off of Woods Harbour and off of Cape Island heading towards the U.S. It's not talking about one, two or three windmills; their proposal actually talks about 200 or more.

 

            I don't know where the hell this is all coming from. It seems to be a bit odd, but it still worries a whole bunch of people that there will be a lot of structures in their way. To add insult to injury on this whole issue, it looks like every electron out of that process would be shipped directly by undersea cable to the U.S. So we wouldn't actually be a beneficiary to that electricity that we produce offshore Nova Scotia.

 

            I'm just wondering if you've had a presentation or can you maybe talk to the Minister of Energy about this and see if we can get some more information flow into the community? It kind of scared people a little bit.

 

            MR. COLWELL: We have not been approached on it ourselves, but it has gone through the Department of Energy through the committee that has a lot of representatives on for the fisheries on that committee. I don't know if you're familiar with that committee or not. Do you have a list of the names that we can provide them with the contact information?

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: If you could give me the list, I might be able to do it. There are a couple of fishermen that I know . . .

 

            MR. COLWELL: We'll supply the list with their contact information. I think it's important to contact them. This is an issue we're concerned about too, but again it's best to address with the Department of Energy because it's one window for all those energy projects - whether it's offshore oil and gas or wind turbines or water turbines or whatever they're going to do.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: This one is a little different. Yes, there is the whole discussion about offshore exploration and oil and gas, which we will continue to hear about, I'm sure, for a long time. I think the industry is - it's probably wrong to say acceptance of offshore exploration, but it's one hole being drilled in one place, so it doesn't necessarily impact the fishery as such. They're always worried about what happens if there is a blow-out like what happened with the Deepwater Horizon, but you know and I know, and you look at the science - and we talked about science a few minutes ago - the probabilities of those things happening are so minimal, but at the same time they're concerned about it. That's just how it's going to go.

 

            In this particular case, because it just basically takes big hunks of bottom out of play for them, they are really worried about it.

 

            The company itself was in Yarmouth probably a month ago, many a little longer than that ago. They were making a presentation to the chamber of commerce, or it was Rotary, I can't remember which organization they were talking to. Everything seemed rosy and they were talking to industry and all that stuff but again, I can't find who they were talking to, so if you can pass that concern on to the Minister of Energy, and I'll make sure I do the same thing, but it does have a huge impact on what's happening in the fishery in southwest Nova Scotia.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I'll definitely do that. We did have a presentation put forward by one processor, very eloquently put together, did a great job on this whole offshore oil issue, he had done his homework. We were impressed with what he brought forward and we asked him to forward it on to the board that the Department of Energy has that looks after this with the fisher representatives. We gave him all the names and the contact information.

 

            We asked him if they wouldn't meet with him or didn't get the information to contact us and we'd make sure that his voice is heard because he was making very good points. I'm sure that's for the whole industry as well.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: It's just that concern and how that interaction is going to go. I mean you can stand on one side and say look at the economic impact or the economic possibility of having a multi-billion, almost a billion dollars' worth of infrastructure being built in your area, versus the impact on the multi-billion dollar industry that is right next to it - which one do you pick? It's always a challenge to figure how that goes.

 

            This one here doesn't sound quite right so if something doesn't sound quite right in my world it's probably questionable.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: That moves into probably my final issue and God forbid that I talk about ferries but let's talk about the Digby ferry for a few moments. I know that's not necessarily your side of things but your product that your industry ships every day uses the Digby ferry or gets trucked around through the Cobequid Pass and through New Brunswick to get to its markets, either in Boston or Gloucester or Portland or wherever the heck it's going because it flows around. Actually there are products that come from there and come back this way as well.

 

            I'm just wondering, have you had any discussions with regard to the Digby ferry and the capacity problems that the trucking industry is talking about today?

 

            MR. COLWELL: I have personally spoken to the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal regarding this issue. It was brought up to me by more than one processor in the area who have trucks there and if they don't get there in time, they have to drive around, which is a huge expense and they have to have two drivers instead of one, which is another big problem and also it doesn't get the product to market as quickly as they possibly could. It's an issue and I will pursue that further with the minister and I would ask you to do the same thing.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: I appreciate that but anything you can help with at the Cabinet Table is great, too, because I'm hearing it mostly from fish plants, again some of the same people we talked about on the fish buyers' licence are the same people that I am hearing from who are completely challenged by the Digby ferry.

 

            I don't know if there's a huge fix there. I do blame the previous federal government for this one, when they went and looked for a vessel I think they picked the wrong vessel but there's not a lot we can do about it, it is the vessel that we have today. If there's anything they can do in adding second runs or allowing - especially during the lobster season. When that lobster season hits in December, they better have the double runs and be ready to accept those trucks because we're limited at about 13 at this point on the Fundy Rose, when they were used to having 20, then we put a second run in. There's a lot of product that gets shipped during those periods so if there's anything you can do to advance that issue I think would be a great thing.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I think, too, if they would change the policy maybe a little bit around the Saint John-Digby ferry that they could even carry a couple more trailer trucks each trip. That would help alleviate it some, especially with the Yarmouth ferry coming on stream, and the passengers can go that route instead of the Digby ferry. Put more priority on the trucks. That's an approach I'd like to see happen. Even if we can get a few more trucks every trip, it'll be a big help.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: The challenge as I understand it with the Digby ferry revolves around how it's configured. At best, they can get 13 trucks on it, depending on if they can get them really tight and pulled in and all that fun stuff, regardless of the number of tourists who are going to be on it because there's a second deck for that. They send the cars and light trucks up top and then try to jam the trucks inside.

 

            What's happening is you have companies like Cooks that pre-register all the time because they know they have this many fish to get to Blacks Harbour. There's Reynolds Trucking that knows it sends two trucks every day. There's Chebogue Fisheries, which knows that it's shipping. All of a sudden, anybody that's extra doesn't have access to the boat because they're being blocked by the trucking companies being a little smarter and making sure that they're booking ahead of time. I know the province is a partner in that process, along with its federal partner and along with New Brunswick. We were waiting, sometime in March, for the boat to go to dry-dock, but that hasn't happened yet, so I don't know what's up on that whole process.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I was just informed that the fish packers did meet with the Minister of TIR regarding this issue, which is good. We agree with you on this. We need to move more of these trucks. The more we can put on the ferry the better.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: How much time do I have?

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Five minutes.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Great, that times out pretty good. My last issue for this round does revolve around how licensing is going. I've heard from a couple of people who are a little angry at the folks at Environment for giving them a hard time for not posting their licences up on their buying stations and things like that. Maybe a general thought on how licensing is going, and are people in compliance to what they need to be doing?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Licence in what regard?

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: The particular case that I got a couple of phone calls about revolved around lobster-buying licences, which you guys give. I guess the rule is, if you have a lobster-buying licence, you need to have it posted at your buying station, and you need to have it posted in the truck you're using, et cetera, et cetera. What happened to my guy - I think I talked to you or talked to your executive assistant about this one.

 

Here we are on the first week of lobstering if you can imagine - I don't know how many lobsters would have been coming in on that dock. Roderick Murphy, P.J Murphy - I can't remember the name of his company. Anyway, Roderick Murphy - Junior Murphy, councillor for the Municipality of Argyle - was on the wharf on the buying station. He had a whole load of crates sitting up there. He's trying to clear that stuff through, and the guys from Environment show up. They see how much work he has. One guy is being the bad cop, and one's being the good cop. The bad cop asks, where's your licence? It wasn't posted. Roderick being Roderick, as most people who are busy on a wharf are going to be a little gruff about something, said, listen, it's back home; I'm sorry, but I'm busy right now because I've got to unload this and grade it, and I need to get the bait on them next time. Right now is a very bad time. You had the one guy saying, well, no, listen, you've got to have it there, I'm going to fine you. Then you had the good cop going there on his little iPhone or whatever he had looking at the database and seeing very clearly that he had a licence and it was up-to-date and paid for. Yet he still got fined the $400 or whatever it was. He was taken off the wharf for a little bit trying to deal with all this.

 

            I'm just wondering, is there a little better way to deal with some of these things, especially when they're busy? I know this is an Environment issue now; it's not your issue. You just print the pieces of paper.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, it actually is an Environment issue, and it's an issue we were a little bit concerned about when we first transferred it over because our fisheries inspectors in the past had really understood - and I believe hopefully it's still some of the staff who used to work for us - what it was like to work on the wharf. I would strongly suggest that you talk to the Minister of Environment when her estimates come up or talk to her before that to see if there can be some way to make sure that the enforcement is done in a way that still allows people to work. If they can find that indeed the person did have a thing and just didn't have his paper that day, it would make more sense to say well, "We'll be back in two days, bring your paper." I think that that conversation needs to be had with Environment, but we will pass those on as well.

 

            MR. D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much and I appreciate the fact that we have the Minister of Environment sitting over there, too, so I hope that she can take that back to her group and talk to that as well.

 

Thank you for the opportunity to ask questions today. I'm sure I'll probably come up with some more for Monday, but I've enjoyed our discussion, and if we could have some more discussions around some of the things that were brought up, I would very much appreciate that as well.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I look forward to that. Again, I respect the experience you have in this field and also the fact that you represent a community that's a major contributor to Nova Scotia's economy, the lobster fishery. So any conversation you'd like to have, I'd be only too pleased to have it. We're all about growing the economy and helping people make a good living. That's what we're all about, and we're all in that together. If you gain in your area and your people gain, we all gain.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: We now will move on to the New Democratic Party. We have 39 minutes remaining in our work today.

 

The honourable member for Queens-Shelburne.

 

            HON. STERLING BELLIVEAU: Just a clarification, Mr. Chairman, did you say 39 minutes?

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: To the minister, certainly, again, I want to echo that I appreciate your knowledge - the minister is the most senior MLA in the House, and I mean that in a very generous, kind way - your expertise, your knowledge, your longevity.

 

            I also want to acknowledge that the previous government shuffled some of those jobs in the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture to some other communities, notably Shelburne and Digby, and I am really privileged and honoured to be part of that decision. I really appreciate those jobs moving to rural Nova Scotia.

 

            I have a number of questions, but because I only have a limited amount of time, I'll follow up on the lobster handling course which the minister announced back in March. I have a feeling here that we are at different spectrums on this particular issue. I'll get into my comments just quickly here to give a chance to respond.

 

            I truly believe in my heart that the minister is feeling some outside pressure from other issues, notably that the lobster levy didn't go that well in Nova Scotia, and I just want to recognize that as a potential pressure point for the minister in his department. I also want to recognize that my instinct, my political work, I actually feel that the minister is feeling pressure from his own Cabinet Ministers. I want to paint that picture before I get into my question.

 

            I say that because earlier with the comments from the member for Argyle-Barrington, it was noted that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture is confident now that he has the support of the lobster industry across Nova Scotia on this proposed lobster handling course. In the recess that we had a few minutes ago, we each had time to contact our constituents, and I feel more confident now than I did when the minister made that statement because I didn't actually have the time to reach out in the last day or two, but this is where I want to start my question. I think that there's a serious miscommunication issue here, and the minister talks about quality of lobsters and the lobster handling course should not talk about quality. The issue is regarding science and the issue is regarding our warming waters, and the lobster molting process, particularly in our Fall/Winter seasons. I suggest that maybe where we want to hit the reset button and start talking about a science issue about our waters warming, and lobsters are molting near that Fall opening season, and there within lies the issue.

 

            When you have these lobsters, those lobsters must be graded and go to a processing plant. This is not about quality and I heard the minister's statement. So, I want to open up with that, I think that we are miles apart on the spectrum, who is speaking for the industry, and with all due respect, Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister I heard your comments saying that you had the support of the industry. Now, I would like to have some confirmation, if you can produce that, if there are letters endorsing this decision I'd be more than pleased to review them over the weekend. So, that is my first question. Can we have some of these letters of endorsement from the industry? I look forward to seeing them.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, I full well know the difference between a soft-shell and a hard-shell lobster, and I know the conditions with the warmer water and whole issues around that, and that those lobsters indeed have to go for processing, and that's fine. That's one market, but we also have the live market with the hard-shell lobsters that can be full of meat, and some can't be because they're not far enough through the molt process. So, I'm familiar with all that and I was familiar with all that before we did anything in the industry, or tried to move anything forward in the industry.

 

            This handling course is more about science and the way lobsters are constructed, and really takes into account how you should handle a lobster based on its condition. If it's a soft-shell lobster you have to handle it a little bit different than a hard-shell one but there is a lot of common ground in the whole thing. This course was developed by Université Sainte-Anne, that has got a lot of expertise in lobster handling, and I can tell you from the people who have taken the course that I've talked to, every one of them say they've learned a lot from the course, everybody, and these are industry people. They range from fishermen to buyers, to processors that have taken the course, and a lot of the industry, in at least some parts of the province have signed up several members of their organization to take the course, not just buyers. Other ones are talking about training more of their people, because this is a pretty straightforward course. It talks about a lot of things of lobster that I definitely didn't know and it's surprising when you talk to some of the fishermen themselves, they didn't know. It's like everything, the more you can learn about a product, the more likely you are to get some more money at the wharf.

 

            That's the whole game and the whole idea here is to get more money at the wharf, because if these lobsters are destroyed before they get to market, the fisherman at the wharf pays the price for it. He may not realize that but, he pays the price for it, because if he has been paid for that lobster that doesn't meet whatever kind of standard that the buyer or processor has, and that product doesn't make it to the marketplace and he gets paid for it, it's got to come out of where he buys the raw material from. That's only common sense and that's the same in every industry.

 

            The price has been high in the last couple of years which is fantastic and we hope it stays high but, probably if we could've gotten more lobsters to market - and this is real - the price at the wharf might even be higher, it might be another 25 cents a pound - I'm just speculating on a number.

 

            We've seen a lot of opportunities for growing the economy and this is one area where we can grow the economy with a resource we already have. We've done a $100,000 study on lobster molting, we've done that. We've done a lot of other things and it's good now to engage the industry in this process. They've raised a lot of issues around how the lobsters are handled before the buyers ever get it in their hands. They've raised issues about when the lobster is shipped from their facility, properly packed and everything. Those are issues we're going to work on with them to see if we can help resolve and that's what this is all about, if we can get more produce either processed - if it's a soft-shell lobster or even a hard-shell lobster, if someone wants to process the hard-shell ones, and the hard-shell ones in the live market that we get a premium price for.

 

            If you ship into the market with some soft-shells and some hard-shells into a live market, you know what the customer is going to do, they're not going to buy from us any more. We don't want that to happen so we want a premium product going into a market that we can get a premium price for. The higher price we get, the higher price at the wharf, it's just that simple. That's really the drive behind all this.

 

            As I say, we have been consulting with the industry, we have come to an arrangement with the industry that we haven't publicized. There will be a letter going out to all the buyers regarding what was agreed to and who agreed to it. I think they will be very pleased with the letter when it goes out. We unanimously supported this with the organizations I told you earlier that supported it and if there's anyone else in the industry who wants to consult with us, some other organization, we'd be only too pleased to talk to them and get their opinions on it.

 

            We all want the same thing, all of us. Every person, every fisherman, every buyer, every processor, every shipper wants the same thing, they want to get maximum return on their investment. In other words, if they can get another two or three cents per lobster with the large quantity of lobsters we are producing now in the province, we need to get those two or three cents and it needs to stay in Nova Scotia. It needs to be there to help grow our economy and help people do things in their lives that they can do if they make extra money and we want to see that happen.

 

            If we don't do anything and we just sit back and watch this golden opportunity go past us, then we haven't done what we need to do to protect the resource for the people who make their living from it, which is critical, and also for the rest of the province and the country. This is the resource that is owned by the Canadian people and it has to be managed properly. I've got a lot of faith in the industry that is there now and I know you do, too, but it has to be done. If there are some ways we can do it a little bit better, we should be looking at ways to do it a bit better.

 

            We're very, very happy with the meetings we've had with the industry and we're going to continue with those meetings and work towards achieving even higher standards for the products we have. Again, it's all about putting more money in the hands of the people who are doing the work on the wharf and on the boats everywhere, all along the value chain.

 

            It's an exciting possibility but we've really got to work together to make it happen and that has started now.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have been here long enough to know that there are some little games going on here and I can suggest, burning the clock, you eat the clock up and the Opposition member doesn't get a chance to have his questions heard.

 

            I'll repeat the question; the question I asked was, and I didn't hear a response to it, I asked who has contacted you and endorsed this particular lobster handling course? In the earlier comments you suggested two groups and I asked you point blank, Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister, can you produce, can you confirm, can you show a letter that we can have in our hand - the Opposition members here today - endorsing this lobster handling course?

 

            I'll repeat that question one more time and I hope the minister does not burn the clock on this response.

 

            MR. COLWELL: Well we're not playing games here, we'll be here as long as you want to be here so the time is yours to use however you want. If you had been listening carefully before, it wasn't two organizations we talked about, it was four. I'll repeat them again; the fish packers, the lobster processors association, SPANS and FPANS, all the people that really work with the industry and represent the majority of the buyers.

 

            We met with people from one end of this province to the other at this meeting we had on more than one occasion and I really appreciate them coming in on short notice when they're really busy to talk to us about this to come to a resolution. We have come to a resolution, which we're very happy about, the industry is happy about. The most important thing of it is we've got a working relationship started now that should have been started several years ago.

 

It's very positive, we can see some really good things coming out of this, we've committed to doing some research around things and we're looking at packaging for shipping, for air freight that has never really been done before, to make sure that the customers on the other end can get the quality product they were shipped and will have minimum impact by the airline company that might leave the lobsters out on the tarmac for two or three hours instead of putting them in refrigeration, as you know they have to be. There's lots of things, there's lots of issues here that have to be addressed and I can tell you that I have a great respect for the industry in this province. They share the view of trying to increase their profits, increase their benefits from the lobster, this valuable resource we have and they understand this very much.

 

            I remember when I was the Fisheries Minister before, coming in on the tail end of the great cod crisis we've had here and then all the issues around that. We want to avoid this with the lobster industry and really work towards a top-quality product, which we have in 99.9 per cent of the cases, get to the marketplace what is preferred product, instead of being commodity product.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: Okay thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, the minister suggested that there are four groups and I asked - I think this is my third time - I asked for confirmation or to produce a letter for the Opposition to confirm that the industry is endorsing your lobster handling course and I think that we're at two ends of the spectrum. I'll do that and I'll continue on this theme. I'll be going home and doing my homework and talking about the industry, as I did in just the most recent phone call. I'll continue on the theme that the lobster industry, particularly the buyers, feel that this lobster course is an insult.

 

            I'll go back to when this earlier announcement was brought to the media's attention and I'll make reference to March 10^th - this was done by CBC News and it was posted at 4:52 p.m. It was reported that buyers were not - I repeat not - consulted before introducing this new mandatory licensing fee. On the same day, March 10^th, in the Yarmouth Vanguard it was reported, however, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture - and I can't say his name but we all know it is the minister before us - said there wasn't consultation with buyers before this requirement was announced.

 

            So we have the documentation that we read, the industry reads and no consultation. We come to where we are today, at the latter part of April, and we sit here in this process, the Budget Estimates and we have a minister suggesting that we have the industry in our back pocket, Mr. Chairman, and as we get prepared to wrap up and go home, and we all want to speak with our constituents, there's a large gap. I've asked very politely, diplomatically, to produce these documents and try to narrow this gap, and I'll repeat, I'll turn that over to the minister. So, are these news reports of March 10^th wrong? Could you elaborate on those particular points please?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Number one, we don't say, or ever indicated, or ever will indicate we've got the industry in our back pockets. I want to be very clear about that. We met with the industry, as I've told you we have done. Those are facts. We've met with the organizations we just told you, two times now. We've made changes based on suggestions and input from the industry, those changes and suggestions are going to be implemented in the industry at their request, and I think it's a very, very positive change we've made in this process. I think it'll achieve what the industry needs to achieve and what the industry needs to achieve for world markets.

 

            The more rhetoric that we have around this topic - you'll notice there have been no more press releases, or no more comments from the industry on this in the press, and that's an agreement we have with them, because the more rhetoric we put around this and in the press, the more trouble we're going to have in international markets. That's the bottom line. You've got to understand that, if you don't understand that, the industry will be soon telling you, because this is a serious problem. I never went to the press with this change, it was brought out by the industry and when the industry came out with it then their customers started calling them and saying, what's going on in Nova Scotia? They brought it to the media, I did not. I responded to those responses. We have an agreement made with them that we're not going to bring in any more media on this. No more discussions on it in public. We've got the problem resolved and it's an excellent arrangement we have made. So, the more rhetoric that comes out of this establishment around this issue is only going to hurt the industry. It's that simple. If you want to pursue that, we will pursue it but I'm not going to be a part of it.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, but I think I got the minister's attention. Again, I asked for the consultation, when did this consultation take place? I repeatedly asked, can you produce some dates? We have media releases here suggesting that earlier there was no consultation, and you're suggesting that now you have that support of the industry behind you, and I, with just a few phone calls, there's a big difference. I think it's fair to ask, when is this consultation taking place? Again I'll repeat, that it's the minister, Mr. Chairman, who is talking about quality, and I have repeatedly said that this is a science question regarding the warming of our oceans and molting of our lobster. The minister needs to understand that, the industry understands it and they need to sit down together to address it.

 

            I can assure you that they're going in the wrong direction by suggesting that people like the President of Clearwater, Mr. Risley, or some of the people in my community, that has five generations of history, and suggest that they're going to have to go in and do a lobster handling course this Fall, before they get next year's licence. My question is, who is going to teach these people? Who is going to have more experience than them? To me, it's an insult and I'll be surprised if those letters are produced so we can simply clear this up. If the minister has this support of the industry that he says he has then he should produce it today, and what I've heard repeatedly from this minister in the last two and a half years, is talk about mystery groups and never produced evidence of who he is talking with, and we hear it again and again. So, again, to the minister, can you produce these documents that say that you have the support of the industry?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Well, evidently, you did not hear me the first time. Mystery groups are not mystery groups. Four organizations - I will repeat them so maybe this time you will understand who they are. The fish packers, SPANS, the lobster association, the Lobster Processors Association - did you understand that? Those are the four people we dealt with. They are not mystery people or anything like that. We will be forwarding very shortly a letter to the buyers in this province that has been agreed to by these four organizations which we are very, very happy about; we have consulted with them on this, we have taken their suggestions and we are going to be continually meeting with them in the future. My question to you is do you know the difference between a soft-shell lobster and a quality lobster? Evidently not. That quality in lobsters is part of the soft shell, is part of how you handle lobster, is part of maintaining the quality from the time you pull the trap until you get it to the customer, whether the customer is a processor or somebody that is going to put it on their dinner plate.

 

            There are two different issues here, and you continually talk about soft-shell lobster that is the whole cause of the problem here. It is part of the problem, but some of the soft-shell lobsters are not making it to processors. That is a problem. That is value we have lost. This is stuff that the whole industry is well aware of, and the whole industry wants to do something to change it. We have been dealing with them, and we like the approach they are taking on it. We are in this now for the long haul on this quality, and the quality that they want to see in place that they make sure that they get a top-quality product to give to their customer whether it is a processor or whether it is a live market or something that they are going to do themselves with the product. That is what we are in for; that is what we are doing and that is what is going to happen in the province.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and, again, I think I will try a little different approach here. I am going to ask one more time. I understand the names of the associations, but I asked for a confirmation or a letter describing their support. I will ask that one more time, and I understand the names of those associations very well.

 

            Just moving in a different direction and I will let the minister consider that in his response but as we move into this lobster-handling course process, can you tell us now the plan, the schedule, to get these individual buyers and their, you know, the people that they have on commission or whatever - you know what I am saying - their designated buyers also, can you tell us the schedule in the next few months because we are getting into this particular year and this has to be done by December. So, what is the schedule; how is that going to unfold here in the next few months for the buyers and their designates across Nova Scotia?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Yes, I can understand the member's frustration with this, maybe not understanding what we are trying to do here. We have had 92 people take the course already, and everybody that has taken the course is sending more people to take the course. I think that is an indication that we are getting buy-in on this and that the community colleges are going to deliver this course. There will be a registry that they will maintain and provide to our licensing people for a licensing process. We are going to change the time that you have to be qualified for the course which the industry has suggested and we agreed with and some of the other terms that we have had with this and beyond that we are looking at other things that are going to improve the industry and the quality in the industry and the opportunity again to put more money in the pockets of the people that deserve it for the hard work they do.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. We seem to be moving along here now. We are going to have an opportunity to revisit this particular topic over the weekend and think about it so, I am going to ask the minister over the weekend, or until we have a chance to meet next week, would you consider reversing this idea? While you contemplate that, my follow up question is, you said there were 92 people already participating in this course as we speak. Of the 92, how many of those are veteran lobster buyers?

 

            MR. COLWELL: Every one of them is actively involved in the lobster industry, everyone that took the course of the 92. I would say probably close to half of them, but I don't know the exact number, would be experienced buyers or processors that have taken the course. One company in particular are sending 29 members of their staff, way beyond the buyers.

 

            Another one is talking about, after they've seen the course, sending all their staff and maybe doing some training on-site, so they don't have to send their staff, and that can be arranged. The other thing with the course too that's a bit of concern for people that for various reasons don't want to write a test, they'll be able to take a verbal test instead of a written test. There may be some people in the community that don't want to do that. So, all of those sort of things will be accommodated. They can register online now if they want to, or they can contact a community college to arrange courses, and we're getting pretty good take-up in it already. As we roll out the rest of this, you'll be happy with what we've done, I guarantee you and we've done this in co-operation and with discussion with the industry, but the most exciting part about this is, we've committed to working together to really get more value out of the product we have and recognize the industry for the great work they've done in the past.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Again, my question, I think was very general but I'm interested in the fact, and the minister probably knows where I'm going with this, that we have different sets of seasons as we move across Nova Scotia, and we're two or three months into this year already. My concern is that some of those particular seasons are opening up on the Eastern Shore as we speak, and the time frame of getting people in the classroom is of concern to me. Getting that done before the end of the year, so, I think you know where I'm trying to go with that question. It's a two-part question, and I didn't hear the cost or the fee related to the individuals taking this course.

 

            MR. COLWELL: The cost of the fee is going to be $85 and the training part of it will be, I'll put it to you this way, you'll be very happy with the process. We've taken into consideration when the companies are busy, that they can't be doing training, they've got to do training on downtime and that's critically important to us. We don't want to, in any way, cost companies money and productive time when they need their staff doing the full job they're doing.

 

            So, all those things have been taken into consideration and it's important that we do that. That's why I'm so excited about working with the group that we've got together now and if there's any other organizations in the industry in your community, or the member for Clare, that would like to join our group, we'd only be too glad to invite them to come. You're going to find over the next year, you're going to see some major changes and the changes are going to be because the industry wants them. This is a major step forward in working with the industry and we're very happy about that, the industry is very happy about it, and we've committed to do some things to help them with problems they can't resolve themselves. I'm looking forward to having those meetings and indeed, at the end of the day making sure we get our premium quality product when it leaves the facilities that we have, to the customer, in premium quality condition.

 

            So, those are things we've been working on and I truly believe once you see what we've done and how we've done it, that you'll be very much onside with this and appreciate that we've listened to the industry, we've carefully listened to the industry and it has opened a door for us and for the industry to work together as one unit to really help our industry grow, prosper, and get more value out of the lobsters we are landing and that's the goal.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I do want to move on. I know that I look forward to some questions next week but I want to end on a positive note. The earlier speaker, my colleague for the PC Party, raised the issue about cusk, the fish, the cusk box, the minister is really familiar with and I really think there is unanimous consent here of support and I just want to go on record that some of the suggestions are probably as scary as the topic that we were talking about earlier, that some of the suggestions by some of the officials are saying a 30 per cent reduction in the trap limit to address this.

 

           I can assure you there is unanimous consent and I encourage you to bring that to the federal minister, Mr. Tootoo, the first opportunity that you have. Again, the member earlier talked about the misreporting back in 1980. That was part of the culture at the time and I just made note when that was being discussed that if you have garbage going in, you're going to have garbage coming out.

 

            Again, this is wrong. Unfortunately, the science of the day is using that data and it's going to have a really detrimental effect on southwest Nova Scotia. So if there's a letter that needs to come from our department I can assure you - or from our caucus - I'll be doing everything I can to get that to you, minister. I just want to hear your comments and I guess the industry would be more than interested to hear that you are going to be taking that to the minister in early June, I thought you said.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, we have four minutes remaining.

 

            MR. COLWELL: We've already started to take it to the federal minister. A process and a letter of support from yourself and your caucus would be greatly appreciated, either directed to me or to the federal minister and copied to me, however you want to do it. It would be nice to be able to go to that meeting and indicate that we have full support, which I understand we have here, that's going to help us a lot.

 

            I think the federal minister is concerned with this as well, from what I hear in initial conversations. I haven't had a chance to talk to him, unfortunately. I was supposed to talk to him yesterday afternoon at 5:00 p.m. but we were in estimates and I couldn't do that so we're talking about that and several other issues that are really going to be detrimental to the fishery if it goes forward.

 

            I appreciate your comments on that, I appreciate your comments on the lobster handling. You will be very pleased to see what we've come up with. Unfortunately I can't discuss it any further than that at this point but we will show you some documentation on Monday that I think will make you happy.

 

            MR. BELLIVEAU: I know we have only a few minutes left but I wanted to end on a positive note. I know that I pushed but again I emphasize the science and I know that the science has to be up-to-date and the cusk is not up-to-date. When you look at the lobster I think the science needs to be up-to-date.

 

            Our waters are warming and I'm trying to tie those two issues in, that the industry understands that but there needs to be an opportunity to sit down and to consult together and together we can have a path forward that is going to be to the benefit of all. Sometimes we get ahead of each other and we have this gap. Now we need to close that gap, minister, and I look forward to going back and talking to the industry over the weekend and between now and then and the discussions in this estimate process of closing that gap and making the industry better for everyone, thank you.

 

            MR. COLWELL: I couldn't agree more, that's where we're headed. We're very excited about these organizations we've named here, about the positive relationship we've started with them now. We've got them talking to us and to each other and improving that dialogue. I know we can accomplish a tremendous amount working with these very professional people who are very passionate about their industry as you are. At the end of the day we have to maintain this industry, we have to make sure we get every single benefit we can from every lobster we land.

 

            On the issue of the cusk, we couldn't agree more, so we anticipate your letter, however you want to process that. We will make sure that if you direct it to me, I'll send a cover letter with it and say here's copies of letters that we received from our caucus colleagues and other caucuses supporting our position on cusk. I think that's going to be very, very positive for us all, and you will be happy with the lobster issue.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, minister, and thank you to your staff. It has been a long afternoon, and I appreciate you being here and responding to the questions. We've come to the conclusion of the required four hours, so I would like to adjourn the committee until Monday, April 24^th, in the late afternoon. Thank you all.

 

            [The subcommittee adjourned at 4:10 p.m.]