Canadian fisheries policy needs a healthy injection of transparency

Not for the first time, another federal fisheries decision (or an apparent one) has resulted in outcries from industry participants and interested parties. And coming so soon on the heels of the surf clam decision, we can only wonder who comes up with this stuff?

Just a week or two ago, the union representing the inshore harvesters in the province got wind of a proposal to grant an allocation of sea cucumber resource in 3PS on the province’s south coast to new entity including a seafood producer.

On its face the proposal would appear to contradict some of what we know about this fishery.

First, harvesters trying to get into this fishery in recent years were told to get in line, that there was not enough resource to allocate to new entrants, or some version of that.

Second, one of the proponents in the new entity is a processing company and DFO has in recent years bent over backwards to argue in support of existing feet separation policies — which prevent companies from owning fish quotas in the inshore. The department has even gone so far to insert new language in a bill before parliament on shoring up fleet separation. That now appears turned on its head. When will other companies in the inshore be given quotas?

Third, where was the consultation? Not every decision coming out of Ottawa requires a consultation, but the new federal Fisheries minister’s own mandate letter from the Prime Minister of just a few weeks ago says “We have also committed to set a higher bar for openness and transparency in government. It is time to shine more light …. Government and its information should be open by default.”

Canadians concur and welcome that undertaking, but now the sentiment must be matched with action. Because no one saw this stuff coming.

And because, as the letter went on to say, “If we want Canadians to trust their government, we need a government that trusts Canadians.”

Again, the letter also lauded “constructive dialogue with Canadians, civil society, and stakeholders, including business, organized labour, the broader public sector, and the not-forprofit and charitable sectors; and identifying ways to find solutions and avoid escalating conflicts unnecessarily.”

If ever there was a sector in need of avoiding escalating conflicts unnecessarily, it would be the fishery.

I could keep citing it, because it really does say it all: “It is important that we (the government) acknowledge mistakes when we make them. Canadians do not expect us to be perfect – they expect us to be honest, open, and sincere in our efforts to serve the public interest.”

Industry welcomes that “clarion call” to constructive dialogue and to candid acknowledgement of mistakes. And we are prepared to engage with the Minister and his colleagues in government on the same footing.

As I told a senior DFO official the last Fisheries Council of Canada meeting, a dialogue is possible, but by definition it means sometimes you talk, and sometimes you listen.

Derek Butler

Executive Director, Association of Seafood Producers