June 3, 2016

Good morning, Mr. Chair, panelists and interested stakeholders.

Thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. I was hoping to make this presentation in Labrador however because of my requirement to be in the House of Commons it may not be possible, so I am pleased to bring the concerns and interest of my constituents of Labrador to your session here in St Johns.

I am Yvonne Jones, the Member of Parliament for Labrador. I represent the 30,000 resident of Labrador, the land mass of nearly 300,000 square kilometers, the most Northern region of the province and the communities adjacent to SFA 4, 5, 6

I want to thank you for the work you are doing as part of the MAP and for agreeing to two consultation sessions in Labrador in Mary’s Harbour and Goose Bay and for scheduling a site visit to Charlottetown, home of the one Shrimp processing facility in Labrador.

Leading up to these Panel consultations I’ve had many discussions with fishers, enterprise owners, quota holders both inshore and offshore, processing companies, Aboriginal governments and community members in Labrador.

Those discussions were focused on sharing of resource, policy of LIFO, stock status assessments and Labradors place in the industry. It was obvious that there are groups in Labrador that stand to gain from eliminating the Last-In-First-Out policy, and others that will benefit from keeping it.

I feel the industry should be governed on principles not policy and that is the perspective shared by my constituents. So while most people will either argue for LIFO or argue against it, we see it as just a policy that serves the interest of some. We strongly urge the Panel to look at establishing principles of resource allocation, principles that are based on fairness and balance to those involved.

Labrador has been left behind in the fair allocation of fish resources off our shores. We believe that two principles should guide the decisions around fish resource allocations in Canada and in this case Shrimp, the first being Aboriginal land and water rights, the second being the principle of adjacency – as others have provided a supportive position on.

The Northern and Southern coast of Labrador has century old dependence on the fishery, from the first processing in the late 1600’s until today it is the one industry that employs and sustains the regions coastal communities. Today Labrador has 6 full time seasonal fish processing facilities, along with a number of landing and holding facilities. All of these plants have been modernized and continues to operate because of the lucrative revenues of Shrimp. The cash subsidy of offshore shrimp, subsidies all coastal communities, from the Labrador Shrimp Company and Torngat fisheries, combined with inshore shrimp enterprises, they have created good jobs, strong businesses, and stable communities.

The story of the Shrimp Industry in Labrador is a bitter and sweet story of how a rural, remote northern Aboriginal region of Canada survived after the Cod disappeared from our shores.

The offshore allocations of Shrimp to the Labrador Shrimp Company generated the revenues needed to build processing facilities, increase the capacity of fishermen, modernize facilities, create jobs and grow communities, Torngat Fisheries follows a similar model. There was no pocketing of millions on the backs of Labrador people, or a Labrador resource, everything was reinvested in our communities. For those who think the fishing industry in NL is not a social industry then you need to change your lens, because it is just that. Without a fishery those very communities in my riding could not survive, if the Government of Canada had given all our offshore allocations to outside interest 40 years ago then we would not exist and be a thriving region today. In modernizing how we move forward in Canada we also have to modernize our thinking to maximize our benefit.

I was going to prepare a big PowerPoint presentation, but I think most of what I have to show you can be summed up in one image (below).

As you can see, Labrador is directly adjacent to the Shrimp Fishing Areas 4, 5 and most of 6. Yet Labrador accounts for less than 13% of the inshore quota allocations. Further, Labrador still holds less than 27% of all offshore shrimp resource in Labrador, Aboriginal interest hold only special allocations of the resource adjacent to their Land Claim. Labrador offshore and inshore combined access of 14% of the overall quoate in area 6 yet Labrador is adjacent to 50 percent of area 6 and 100% of SFA’s 4 and 5. Inshore enterprises in the Northern Gulf hold more Shrimp in Area 6 as non-adjacent interest than the Labrador inshore sector.

While offshore industry outside of the province holds 3 times the quota allocation of our adjacent inshore enterprises in area 6. Labrador offshore and Inshore combined access less than 14 percent of the overall quota in Area 6 yet they are 50 per cent adjacent and have aboriginal inherent rights in the marine jurisdiction.

Yet Labradorians hold no fish quotas for any species in anyone else’s adjacent jurisdictions.

Let’s look at fisheries across Atlantic Canada for instance, there is no cross jurisdiction of fish resource allocation like we have in Labrador.

PEI oysters are harvested by enterprises in PEI,
New Brunswick crab is harvested by enterprises in New Brunswick,
Nova Scotia lobster is harvested by enterprises in Nova Scotia,
3ps redfish is harvested in the adjacent area,
Gulf shrimp is allocated to Gulf region enterprises and so on.

However Labrador Shrimp is allocated to every province in Atlantic Canada, Quebec and most all regions of Newfoundland, the last people to access shrimp were Labradorians and Labrador Aboriginal Interests.

Past policies of DFO have tended to serve interest groups, lobbyists, unions and political friends of the government, they are designed to meet the want at end of the day and provides for some non-substantive political argument to back up the Minister or bureaucracy, this has to change. Therefore a principle governed industry, based on science is a fair process. The two strongest principles founded on fairness are, as I have already stated Aboriginal Rights and Adjacency.

I’m sure this panel will hear, particularly in Nunavut, the importance of adjacency as a principal for all resource development decisions.

Right here in Newfoundland there are those making the case for adjacency – I find it unfortunate that often times adjacency is used by this province in makes its case to Canada but that principle is not always applied within the province.

I want to refer to the map I gave you again.

The red, green, and yellow areas on the map are Aboriginal land claims areas. (The blue is the Torngat National Park – shared by Nunatsiavut and Nunavik)

The red is the settled Nunatsiavut Land Claim, including a marine area that overlaps and is adjacent to SFA four and five.

The green area is the Innu Nation Land claim that is in the Final Agreement stage and, again, is adjacent to SFA 5. The Yellow area is the NunatuKavut Land claim which is in the process of being accepted by the federal government for negotiation – and again, is adjacent to and overlaps SFA 5 and 6.

Consecutive previous federal governments recognized the value and importance of Aboriginal rights to adjacent resources and using them to promote local and regional economic development. Our federal government has committed to the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and to restoring a Nation-to-Nation, Crown to Inuit relationship with Indigenous peoples. UNDRIP looks at the rights of adjacent aboriginal government and looks at fair resource sharing.

Not only do the three Aboriginal governments in Labrador (or their economic development arms) have special allocations for northern shrimp, but so do beneficiaries or members and member owned companies.

The economic stability for Aboriginal communities’ and individual enterprises is directly tied to the shrimp fishing industry.

When modernizing shrimp, and other fish quota allocations, off of Labradors coast the time has long passed to allocate based on solid, fair, and equitable principles. The time has come to create a distribution model on Aboriginal rights and adjacency, the time has come to make equitable allocations to inshore and offshore interest. Those next to a resource, particularly those with vested inherent Indigenous rights must come first.

Our Indigenous and rural people brought these lands into confederation, and they occupy and hold our northern lands. Making our northern and Indigenous communities economically sustainable is key to reconciliation, and paramount to maintaining arctic sovereignty.

In fact all other resource development in Labrador has been modernized to respect the rights and adjacent principles of those who live there. For example governments and companies must for impact- benefit agreements with Labrador interest and royalty sharing, the precedent exist for mining, energy, and forestry development.

It is now time to establish those principles around the fishery resource, for years Labradors fisheries have been exploited and raped, there was never nothing given back. That is not historic attachment it was a privilege, one that equates to a legal exemption to rape a resource on the coastal doorstep of Labradorians and our Indigenous people and never have to give anything back, I will not look to this as historical attachment but as a disrespectful act and service to our people by former governments which has to stop.

A fair and equitable shrimp allocation for Labrador interests will not greatly impact the sustainability of non-adjacent fishers, simply because as resource retention declined their revenues have grown immensely. But it will signal societies commitment to Indigenous people, regional economic development, as well as a principled, evidence based decision making approach to governance of resources.

Labrador interest in shrimp both inshore and offshore should be protected in area 6; the people of Labrador should take no reductions in allocations.

Based on principles of Aboriginal rights, and adjacency they fall far short on shrimp allocation compared to all others who share in the area.

If you were to use the model, cuts should apply to offshore and inshore non-adjacent stakeholders in the region, this cannot be helped as science is clear on the need for conservation of the resource.

It is important to protect the resource, and it is equally important to protect the people who are adjacent and to do so fairly.

The principles are modern and smart and the math is simple, Labrador is 100 percent adjacent to Area 4 and 5 and 50 percent adjacent in area 6 yet holds less than 14 per cent of the quota both inshore and offshore combined. Fairness means protecting Labrador’s interest in area 6 I trust you will make the appropriate recommendations without fear of change in principles. This approach benefits Newfoundland and Labrador adjacent enterprises that depend upon the resource for employment, income, sustenance and economic stability.

I am available for questions.

Thank you