wildmanyeah
Crew Member
https://ipolitics.ca/2018/06/21/fisheries-act-overhaul-clears-house-of-commons/
Fisheries Act overhaul clears House of Commons
Fisheries management in this country could be headed for a course correction after the Liberal’s proposal to overhaul it cleared the House of Commons this week.
Just ahead of Parliament rising for the summer Wednesday, Bill C-68, which modernizes The Fisheries Act, was passed and is now headed to the Senate. Introduced in February, it aims to restore protections that were gutted by the previous Conservative government in 2012 and incorporate new safeguards to protect fish and their habitat.
For the first time since the Act was enacted in 1868, the proposed legislation directs the minister of fisheries and oceans to manage fish stocks sustainably and to put rebuilding plans in place for depleted stocks.
Before 2012, the Act protected all fish and fish habitat in Canada. That was until the Harper government introduced an omnibus that included measures to make life easier for farmers. The party’s rationale was that they’d no longer have to navigate a sea of red tape to alter what they deemed to be insignificant bodies of water or clear out drainage ditches.
“No habitat means no fish,” said Fisheries Minister Dominic LeBlanc in February when announcing the overhaul.
What’s been amended at committed and is now making its way through to the next stage in the legislative process has the potential to rebuild this country’s fisheries and coastal communities, says Oceana Canada.
“This is agood change for fisheries management in Canada, a substantial change,” said Josh Laughren, executive director of the ocean conservation group.
“This could be a course correction that puts us on a different path.”
Oceana Canada is applauding the step forward and LeBlanc’s leadership.
While the minister’s mandate letter only called for a modernization of the Act, what’s been incorporated into the bill exceeds that and includes direction on management for abundance and rebuilding stocks to healthy levels — measures that bring Canada closer to the kind of modern fisheries management laws other leading fishing nations have in place.
“You have to take a pause at times on significant milestones and celebrate them,” Laughren said. “This took work and effort on their part — the government and minister’s party. It’s a significant improvement that goes beyond the base of what they could have done.”
However, when the bill was introduced in February, it said “if” stocks are reduced, then the minister must “consider” rebuilding — there was no requirement.
“In our view that did not demonstrably bring it into realm of progressive fisheries management,” he said.
But to its credit, the House Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans significantly strengthened that language — with the government’s support.
“For the first time it sets in law that the minister shall manage the stocks sustainably, which needs to be defined. Now, should stocks fall below (certain) levels, they’ll take action to restore them. That’s a big, big change.”
Laughren notes traditionally, the Act has been “virtually silent on fish” except to say the minister has absolute discretion in how they’re managed.
“This brings Canada closer to modern fisheries management laws in other leading fishing nations.”
The bill still includes some ministerial discretion, however. It allows the minister to exempt stocks from rebuilding and sustainability requirements if it is deemed that there are adverse socio-economic or cultural impacts — as long as the reasons are made public. That brings some accountability and transparency to the decision, which traditionally has been missing from the Act.
“So if a minister wants to make a bad decision about fish, they can still do so. They can find a way,” Laughren said. “But at least the public and opposition parties will be able to see that and hold it against the exception that’s been set in law. That’s a big improvement.”
The key will be watching the breadth of the exception to see how often it is invoked and what the bar is — or whether it’s applied judiciously on rare occasions, he added.
The inclusion of rebuilding plans is also welcomed by the Fisheries Council of Canada. President Paul Lansbergen said they’re an essential party of ensuring fisheries management is sustainable, otherwise the entire sector and the health of the ocean is jeopardized.
“We want those decisions and policies to be based on science,” he said. “We don’t want the rules to be written so rigid so that as soon as a fish stock falls below the crucial zone that DFO is forced to develop a rebuilding plan that ties its hands on rebuilding their fish stock in a certain amount of time without recognition of what’s driving the health or lack there of of the fish stock.”
He said some fish stocks are challenged by other environmental factors — and the removal of the fishing industry could only be a minor contributor to that.
“That has to be recognized then they start to work on rebuilding plans. The requirements should be informed by what’s driving it. It shouldn’t be predetermined that every fish stock can be rebuilt to a certain level within a certain amount of time.”
Laughren said with the spirit and direction set in the proposed legislation, how the regulations are written and defined will be consequential — and should reflect that.
“Do we set up clarity on what we’re rebuilding to? Do we set timelines? What is sustainable? How quickly will they apply to all stocks? Those are big decisions,” he said.
“As we implement this, let’s make sure we get the regulations to put the meat on the bones.”
Fisheries Act overhaul clears House of Commons
Fisheries management in this country could be headed for a course correction after the Liberal’s proposal to overhaul it cleared the House of Commons this week.
Just ahead of Parliament rising for the summer Wednesday, Bill C-68, which modernizes The Fisheries Act, was passed and is now headed to the Senate. Introduced in February, it aims to restore protections that were gutted by the previous Conservative government in 2012 and incorporate new safeguards to protect fish and their habitat.
For the first time since the Act was enacted in 1868, the proposed legislation directs the minister of fisheries and oceans to manage fish stocks sustainably and to put rebuilding plans in place for depleted stocks.
Before 2012, the Act protected all fish and fish habitat in Canada. That was until the Harper government introduced an omnibus that included measures to make life easier for farmers. The party’s rationale was that they’d no longer have to navigate a sea of red tape to alter what they deemed to be insignificant bodies of water or clear out drainage ditches.
“No habitat means no fish,” said Fisheries Minister Dominic LeBlanc in February when announcing the overhaul.
What’s been amended at committed and is now making its way through to the next stage in the legislative process has the potential to rebuild this country’s fisheries and coastal communities, says Oceana Canada.
“This is agood change for fisheries management in Canada, a substantial change,” said Josh Laughren, executive director of the ocean conservation group.
“This could be a course correction that puts us on a different path.”
Oceana Canada is applauding the step forward and LeBlanc’s leadership.
While the minister’s mandate letter only called for a modernization of the Act, what’s been incorporated into the bill exceeds that and includes direction on management for abundance and rebuilding stocks to healthy levels — measures that bring Canada closer to the kind of modern fisheries management laws other leading fishing nations have in place.
“You have to take a pause at times on significant milestones and celebrate them,” Laughren said. “This took work and effort on their part — the government and minister’s party. It’s a significant improvement that goes beyond the base of what they could have done.”
However, when the bill was introduced in February, it said “if” stocks are reduced, then the minister must “consider” rebuilding — there was no requirement.
“In our view that did not demonstrably bring it into realm of progressive fisheries management,” he said.
But to its credit, the House Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans significantly strengthened that language — with the government’s support.
“For the first time it sets in law that the minister shall manage the stocks sustainably, which needs to be defined. Now, should stocks fall below (certain) levels, they’ll take action to restore them. That’s a big, big change.”
Laughren notes traditionally, the Act has been “virtually silent on fish” except to say the minister has absolute discretion in how they’re managed.
“This brings Canada closer to modern fisheries management laws in other leading fishing nations.”
The bill still includes some ministerial discretion, however. It allows the minister to exempt stocks from rebuilding and sustainability requirements if it is deemed that there are adverse socio-economic or cultural impacts — as long as the reasons are made public. That brings some accountability and transparency to the decision, which traditionally has been missing from the Act.
“So if a minister wants to make a bad decision about fish, they can still do so. They can find a way,” Laughren said. “But at least the public and opposition parties will be able to see that and hold it against the exception that’s been set in law. That’s a big improvement.”
The key will be watching the breadth of the exception to see how often it is invoked and what the bar is — or whether it’s applied judiciously on rare occasions, he added.
The inclusion of rebuilding plans is also welcomed by the Fisheries Council of Canada. President Paul Lansbergen said they’re an essential party of ensuring fisheries management is sustainable, otherwise the entire sector and the health of the ocean is jeopardized.
“We want those decisions and policies to be based on science,” he said. “We don’t want the rules to be written so rigid so that as soon as a fish stock falls below the crucial zone that DFO is forced to develop a rebuilding plan that ties its hands on rebuilding their fish stock in a certain amount of time without recognition of what’s driving the health or lack there of of the fish stock.”
He said some fish stocks are challenged by other environmental factors — and the removal of the fishing industry could only be a minor contributor to that.
“That has to be recognized then they start to work on rebuilding plans. The requirements should be informed by what’s driving it. It shouldn’t be predetermined that every fish stock can be rebuilt to a certain level within a certain amount of time.”
Laughren said with the spirit and direction set in the proposed legislation, how the regulations are written and defined will be consequential — and should reflect that.
“Do we set up clarity on what we’re rebuilding to? Do we set timelines? What is sustainable? How quickly will they apply to all stocks? Those are big decisions,” he said.
“As we implement this, let’s make sure we get the regulations to put the meat on the bones.”
