i;: cT)NsiiiTArivi ARRANcrvii n in 



Carclul prcpiiratu»n and diKumcntation in ai.lvaiKc ol 

 nicclmgs also taLiIitalc ilcliK-ialioiis. Hani tacts can cut 

 through s(X'culaiivc ainl iiiipnH.liiclivc argimiciil, and 

 explicit propositu>n.s tbcus discussion. While some have 

 cntici/cd the IX'partincnt ti>r tornnilatmj; |X)licics before 

 discussions, the criticism isjiistilieii only it decisions have 

 already been made, so that ensuing debate will have no 

 influence. 



In designing ci>nsultative structures, I am concerned 

 first, that they maximize the eflectivene.ss of consulta- 

 tions; second, that existing structures be preserved and 

 adapted where p<issible to minimize disruption; and 

 third, that the system will funnel representations to pub- 

 lic officials in an orderly way. In this connection I am 

 particularly concerned aKiut the representations and lob- 

 bying that circumvent the consultative .system, through 

 delegations to the Minister, meetings and interviews with 

 senior officials, and endless phone calls with demands 

 and complaints. The Department apparently tries to fol- 

 low an open-dcx)r policy, accommodating all these repre- 

 sentations; but the appeal of this approach is superficial. 

 The Department should, of course, respond to private 

 concerns, but by tolerating and encouraging all these 

 informal representations, which are usually not public 

 and are often between acquaintances, the consultative 

 structure is undermined. It also exhausts the time of sen- 

 ior public officials, who seem to spend an inordinate pro- 

 portion of their time in meetings. 



These methods cannot provide the Department with 

 balanced advice. Clearly we need a consultative system 

 that will relieve officials of the flurry of unstructured lob- 

 bying so they can attend to their responsibilities in the 

 context of publicly articulated advice from interested pri- 

 vate groups. For this to work, interested individuals and 

 groups must have confidence that the channels provided 

 for this purpose offer the most effective means of exercis- 

 ing influence. 



In the present context of fisheries policy, reforming the 

 consultative structures is especially critical; they must be 

 flexible and adaptive, but they should also be as simple as 

 the varied requirements permit. My proposals incorp- 

 orate a number of suggestions made by participants in 

 the Corrmiission's hearings. 



A Pacific Fisheries Council 



The highest-level consultative structure needs to be 

 reorganized urgently. The existing Minister's Advisory 

 Council is far too large to analyze and reach conclusions 

 on complicated problems. It is also badly constituted; 

 although individual members are knowledgeable leaders 

 in the fishing community, they are, in effect, delegates of 

 special interest groups. So it is difficult for them to avoid 

 defensive posturing, to agree to compromises without 



"going back to the executive," aiul to ilisciiss problems 

 and proposals in contiilence. Thus, the council cannot be 

 expectetl to [irovide a consensus on complicated policy 

 questions. Moreover, it has insufficient autonomy. 



I therefore recommend that a new high level council be 

 appi>mted: 



2. 'I1k> goveriiiiK-iil sIuhiUI replace the existing Mini- 

 ster's Advis4»r\ Council with a new Pacific Fisheries 

 C (Hincii with IIk- following cliaracteristic-s: 



i) The council sJKHild be provided for in le}>islation. 



ii) The OJunciPs femis of reference should embrace 

 all matters that fall within tlie responsibility of 

 the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans as they 

 relate to Pacific fisheries, and it should he 

 empowered to consider industrial policies, inter- 

 national arrangements or other queslions when 

 they are referred to it by the Minister. 



iii) It should consist of not more than eight members, 

 appointed hy the Minister for staggered three- 

 year terms. They should be appointed in their 

 personal capacities and selected for their knowl- 

 edge, experience and judgement, and not for their 

 affiliations. Membership should not be restricted 

 to those who have a special interest in fisheries. 

 The chairman should not be a public official. 

 Members should be reimbursed for their 

 expenses and paid an honorarium for the time 

 they spend on council business. Adequate office 

 and secretarial facilities should be available to the 

 chairman. 



iv) A senior official of the Department should be 

 appointed as a participating but nonvoting mem- 

 ber of the council, and to provide administrative 

 support and information. 



v) The council should determine its own agendas, 

 taking account of any matters referred to it by the 

 Minister. It should meet as frequently as it deems 

 necessary, but not less than four times each year. 



vi) It should he required to issue a public report to 

 the Minister at least annually, and it should make 

 other reports to the Minister as appropriate. 



Balance and perspective in the council's deliberations 

 are likely to be enhanced by including one or more mem- 

 bers whose interests and experience are not narrowly 

 focused on fisheries. The Salmonid Enhancement Board 

 (among many other consultative groups in other fields) 

 has demonstrated the value of broader public viewpoints. 



I intend that this council be given a high status, that it 

 become the central forum for consultations between the 

 Minister and public interests, and that it be the channel 



