1989 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 34th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

MONDAY, MAY 29, 1989

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

7033 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Oral Questions

Sale of Westwood land. Mr. Williams –– 7033

Condom-vending machines. Mr. Perry –– 7034

Fatt's Island Poultry Farms. Mr. Sihota –– 7034

Student support for China's students. Mr. R. Fraser –– 7035

International arms export mart. Mr. Perry –– 7035

Military research in universities. Mr. Perry –– 7035

Westwood land for social housing. Mr. Williams –– 7035

Sustainable log harvest. Mr. Miller –– 7035

Tabling Documents –– 7036

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Solicitor-General estimates. (Hon. Mr. Ree)

On vote 67: minister's office –– 7036

Mr. Guno

Mr. G. Janssen

Mr. R. Fraser

Mr. Rose

Mr. Sihota

Mr. Peterson

Mr. B.R. Smith

The House met at 2:06 p.m.

Prayers.

HON. MR. PARKER :

On behalf of the member for Shuswap-Revelstoke (Hon. Mr. Michael) and

myself, I'd like to introduce to the House a grade 4 and 5 class from

Len Wood Elementary School in Armstrong, led by their teacher Vicki

Green and hosted by Fletcher Challenge Canada Ltd.

Fletcher

Challenge operates a sawmill and plywood complex at Armstrong, and out

of recognition for the enthusiasm with which Vicki Green and her

students have pursued the grade 5 forestry curriculum, Fletcher

Challenge has sponsored an expenses paid trip for this outstanding

class and their teacher. Re resenting Fletcher Challenge is forester

Mike Sigalet and public relations coordinator Jan Bauman.

their tour they will see the UBC research forest at Maple Ridge, the

Forest Museum at Duncan, Government House, the Royal B.C. Museum, the

University of Victoria, the legislative buildings, B.C. Ferry

Corporation and other points of interest. I would ask the House to make

them welcome, please.

MR. PELTON : Hon. members, would you please welcome to the House today Elsie Hager and Ken Jones from North Vancouver.

HON. MRS. JOHNSTON :

I will start out by commenting on the shirt that I'm wearing today. I

know it's not normal wear for the House. We have a lot of exciting

projects in my ministry. You'll recall that earlier this month we had,

through the Royal B.C. Museum, the Jason Project, which was certainly

very beneficial to all students in our province. Wearing my sport and

recreation hat, May 26 to June 4 has been declared Canada's Fit week. I

would certainly like to acknowledge that this minister is not the best

example to be setting, but certainly the staff in the ministry are

excellent examples. I would ask the House to please recognize Canada's

Fit week.

MR. LOENEN : I'd like to take this

opportunity, on behalf of the Premier and myself, to introduce two

parties. First of all, in the members' gallery are constituents Harry

Schonewille and Lynn Schonewille, my sister and brother-in-law, who are

accompanied by my wife Jayne. Would you please welcome them.

The second party are again constituents. First of all is Marilyn Bevandick,

who is a trustee on the Richmond Hospital Board. She is also a member of the

board of revision in our municipality of Richmond and a former member of the

executive of the Social Credit riding association in Richmond. She's accompanied

by her husband Nick Bevandick and friends Don Eyre and Ines Turner. Would the

House please welcome them.

MR. CRANDALL :

I would appreciate it if the House would welcome Alf Lennox, who is the

religious liberty director for the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. He is

in the precincts today.

Oral Questions

SALE OF WESTWOOD LAND

MR. WILLIAMS :

To the Minister Responsible for Crown Lands, regarding the Westwood

lands. Would you deny that your staff have been carrying on

negotiations with only one developer for the past two months or so?

HON. MR. DIRKS : I will have to repeat what I said on Thursday. In the fullness of time this House will have a full report.

MR. WILLIAMS :

We may have to wait for the full moon. To the minister, did you not

consider breaking up the site into separate parcels rather than selling

the whole 1,400 acres?

HON. MR. DIRKS : Again, Mr. Speaker, I will say that in the fullness of time I will reveal that to the House.

MR. WILLIAMS :

To the minister, did you give any thought to the monopoly power you

would put in the hands of one developer if you sold it in one piece?

HON. MR. DIRKS : I appreciate all these questions, and I'll certainly provide the answers in the fullness of time.

MR. WILLIAMS :

To the Minister Responsible for Crown Lands again, Mr. Speaker. Did you

never consider holding back at least some of the land at Westwood for

social housing?

HON. MR. DIRKS : Again, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question, and I will answer that in the fullness of time.

MR. WILLIAMS :

To the minister responsible for transit, the member for Surrey-Newton.

Was the minister asked to review the impact on transit of selling of

the Westwood lands in one block?

HON. MRS. JOHNSTON : The minister was not asked to review.

MR. WILLIAMS : To the Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr. Vant). Were you asked to review the impact of this...? He's not here.

the Minister of Social Services and Housing. Were you asked to review

the social housing needs prior to the sale of these lands?

HON. MR. RICHMOND : Mr. Speaker, I will take the question as notice for the Minister of Highways.

[ Page 7034 ]

As for this minister, that member is assuming things that he has no knowledge of.

MR. WILLIAMS : I've been willing to give some of these ministers the benefit of the doubt, but I think that's been a mistake.

the Minister Responsible for Crown Lands. There was a May 31 deadline

for your response to deal with these proposals. Will you be meeting

that deadline?

HON. MR. DIRKS : Time will tell.

MR. WILLIAMS :

Again to the Minister Responsible for Crown Lands. You received letters

of credit from some 18 bidders. Have most of those letters of credit

been returned?

HON. MR. DIRKS : In the fullness of time, Mr. Speaker.

MR. WILLIAMS :

Could he advise the House whether those letters have been returned?

Have you reconsidered selling completely? Have you considered keeping

these lands in the hands of the Crown for development by the Crown for

the people of British Columbia?

HON. MR. DIRKS : I would thank him for that question and say again that in the fullness of time we'll reveal everything.

MR. WILLIAMS :

Maybe on the behalf of the member for Vancouver-Little Mountain I could

ask the Minister Responsible for Crown Lands if he has ever learned

from experience.

CONDOM-VENDING MACHINES

MR. PERRY : I'm hoping I'll receive a more pointed answer from the Minister of Health than we've heard in the last exchange.

think the minister has heard of the saying that an ounce of prevention

is worth a pound of cure. Yesterday the minister referred to a plan by

a Qualicum high school to combat the spread of AIDS and other sexually

transmitted diseases by introducing condom-vending machines as a

"stupid idea" or "rather ridiculous." Does the minister not agree that

it is irresponsible to torpedo this proposal with his own personal

opinion, especially when the school board is dealing with this issue on

the basis of full public participation and the best medical advice

available?

[2:15]

HON. MR. DUECK :

Mr. Speaker, the member for Vancouver-Point Grey fully knows that it is

a school board matter and that it will be discussed at length I'm sure

that my influence, either way, will not be reflected in their decision.

MR. PERRY :

Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I'm relieved to hear the minister's answer

now. But I wonder whether the minister, in his comments in the media,

hasn't simply been imposing his own narrow personal point of view on

the school board in the same way that he has on other health issues on

the medical health officer and on the parents of this community. I'd

like to hear a more definite reassurance that he will not interfere and

that the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Brummet) will not interfere

with local control in health issues of this kind.

Interjections.

HON. MR. DUECK : There was a lot of noise in the House. I did not hear the question. Would you repeat it, please.

MR. PERRY :

Mr. Speaker, I'd just like to hear a more a definite reassurance that

the minister will not interfere, with his own personal opinions,

against the best medical advice offered to school boards. Can you give

us that reassurance, Mr. Minister?

HON. MR. DUECK :

Mr. Speaker, I guess personal opinions do appear from time to time on

both sides of the House and from all members. I think it's on the

record that I have not interfered in various areas of health with my

personal opinions. That was a personal comment, and I made it as such.

It is strictly a school board issue, and they will deal with it. I'm

sure they will have much discussion, and I'm sure the parents of the

children will get involved. Let's leave it at that.

I would

also say, since the question was asked, that I hear many personal

opinions from that side of the House, and even from that member.

FATT'S ISLAND POULTRY FARMS

MR. SIHOTA :

By way of a letter to me dated February 13, 1989, dealing with the

matter of Lilydale and Fatt's Poultry, the Minister of Agriculture said

that in providing the loan guarantee of $500,000 to Fatt's, the

ministry had been provided with "satisfactory evidence of grower

commitments to supply its plants with 50,000 birds per week on a

continuing basis." Could the minister tell this House whether or not

Fatt's has been able to provide those birds, as he says, on a

continuing basis at the rate of 50,000 birds per week?

HON. MR. SAVAGE :

Mr. Speaker, I believe on occasion Fatt's Poultry has had up to 50,000

birds per week, but I don't think it has been consistent.

MR. SIHOTA :

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that over the last 15-week

period Fatt's has been averaging 39,600 birds per week and that on most

of those weeks it has not been able to meet the minimum requirement of

50,000. In light of its failure to meet the most basic condition of

getting the loan

[ Page

7035 ]

guarantee, is the minister now reassessing the government's financial support for Fatt's?

HON. MR. SAVAGE :

Mr. Speaker, that loan guarantee was an issue with my colleague the

Hon. Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Couvelier). If it needs

reassessment, I'm sure it will happen.

MR. SIHOTA :

Is the Minister of Agriculture saying that it was the Minister of

Finance and not him who supported and approved the loan guarantee?

HON. MR. SAVAGE :

As the member opposite should know, in the field of agriculture the

applications come through the line ministries, and all applications are

dealt with by Treasury Board.

STUDENT SUPPORT FOR CHINA'S STUDENTS

MR. R. FRASER :

Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Advanced Education and Job Training.

Canada enjoys a good reputation around the world for its impartiality —

the UN peacekeeping forces and things of that nature. Among other

things, we don't interfere with the internal operation of most

countries. But we see recently in the TV coverage that we have students

visiting from China taking

part in supporting the student revolution — if you want to call it that — in

their homeland. Does the ministry provide students with any counselling

about the fact that that might not be welcome in Canada?

HON. S. HAGEN :

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the hon. member for the question. I

believe that these demonstrations were taking place on the campuses of

universities which are governed by the University Act. We fund these

universities, of course, but we try to give them the authority to

operate independently I'm sure the students would welcome any sort of

input they get from their professors or from other students on campus.

Interjection.

HON. S. HAGEN : No, we don't directly counsel those students or any other students on the campuses.

INTERNATIONAL ARMS EXPORT MART

MR. PERRY : Mr. Speaker, I'll resist the temptation to comment on that previous question.

This

is a question for the Minister of International Business and

Immigration. Now that the minister has returned from ARMX '89, can he

inform this House how much taxpayers' money was spent to host the

British Columbia delegation at this international arms export mart in

Ottawa?

HON. J. JANSEN : I don't have those figures available to me, but

I'll take the question on notice and get back to the member.

MR. PERRY :

Supplementary. Can the minister make a commitment to this House that

the government will support only those businesses engaged in developing

non-weapons technology and not those directly involved in the arms

trade?

HON. J. JANSEN : No, Mr. Speaker, I cannot.

MILITARY RESEARCH IN UNIVERSITIES

MR. PERRY :

A new question for the Minister of Advanced Education. Last year my

colleague the senior member for Vancouver-Point Grey (Ms. Marzari)

asked the minister about the extent of U.S. military involvement in

funding research at our major universities — that's in the Hansard

of June 21, 1988. At that time, the minister did not provide any

information. I would like to know, now that he has had a year to

reflect on this, if he could provide the House with a complete list of

contract research being done at British Columbia universities for

military research?

HON. S. HAGEN : I'll take the question on notice.

WESTWOOD LAND FOR SOCIAL HOUSING

MR. WILLIAMS :

To the Minister of Housing. In the past couple of weeks, the minister

has announced the intention of using Crown land and leasing it for

social housing. In view of the 1,400 acres still available at Westwood,

are you urging your colleague to reconsider his decision to sell that

land?

HON. MR. RICHMOND : For some reason, the

opposition seem to have run out of concrete questions and have to ask

hypothetical ones. As the Minister of Crown Lands (Hon. Mr. Dirks) has

said, all the details of that particular transaction will be made known

to the House in due course.

MR. WILLIAMS : Further to

the Minister of Housing. Is there anything comparable in size in the

lower mainland available to the Crown right now for social housing

purposes? If so, where is it?

HON. MR. RICHMOND : Again the member is making assumptions about a deal of which he has absolutely no knowledge.

SUSTAINABLE LOG HARVEST

MR. MILLER :

I have a question to the Minister of Forests. Last week I raised the

issue of Wedeene River timber and the export of over 60,000 cubic

metres of logs exceeding a diameter of 28 inches at the butt. The

minister got quite exercised. Would the minister make a commitment that

the mill will expand and be capable of handling logs of the dimension

that he has authorized now to be exported?

[ Page 7036 ]

HON. MR. PARKER : That is the intent of the licensee.

MR. MILLER :

That wasn't my question. I asked if the minister or the ministry were

going to require that to be a commitment of the licensee to cut Crown

timber. Are you going to make it a requirement, and if so, when will

that mill have to be constructed?

HON. MR. PARKER : It's not our intent to make it a condition of any permit.

Hon.

Mr. Couvelier tabled the 1988 annual report of the Credit Union Deposit

Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, in accordance with

section

169(3) of the Credit Union Act.

Orders of the Day

HON. MR. RICHMOND : I call Committee of Supply.

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Pelton in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

SOLICITOR-GENERAL

On vote 67: minister's office, $248,681 (continued).

MR. GUNO : We want to continue — if we may, Mr. Chairman — on

the question of the provincial emergency program as it relates to

earthquakes. But I want to finish off the question about the hotline

which has been installed through this program. I must admit that the

figure I gave last Friday was 11,000; I understand it was only 2,000

calls. But that is still a significant increase over the number of

calls received when that particular hotline was under the aegis of the

Ministry of Environment.

One of the things that I have

learned is that this particular hotline is getting an increasing number

of reports, including anonymous ones, of illegal dumping, spilling and

generally environmentally bad practices being carried out around the

province, which are routinely passed on to the waste management branch.

My question to the minister is: what form of follow-up is being put in

place? In other words, once you refer these particular calls, what kind

of follow-up occurs?

HON. MR. REE : Mr. Chairman, I

apologize; I didn't quite catch the time-span for those 2,000 calls.

Are you suggesting 2,000 calls a year or 2,000 a month? Maybe the

member could explain that.

Regarding calls on illegal dumping, I'll have to get some information on that and get back to the member at a later time.

MR. GUNO : We take it that this was during a full operational year, but I was hoping, you would be able to answer that.

notice that none of your staff is present, and I wonder how we can

conduct a fairly detailed discussion on your budget line items without

the presence of your staff. Are you planning to have them here or...?

HON. MR. REE : They'll be here momentarily.

MR. GUNO :

With regard to the system, I'm just wondering if you can provide us

with any assurance that the hotline results, the information that is

being collated under this particular program, are accessible to the

public.

HON. MR. REE : The hotline is available to

the public, certainly. As I indicated, it's inside the flyleaf of every

telephone book in the province.

MR. GUNO : The

minister misunderstood my question. Is the information garnered from

these calls, and the statistics we gather from them, available to the

public?

HON. MR. REE : I will make them available in this House.

MR. GUNO :

I'm talking about just on a routine basis. Can someone, John Doe, walk

into your ministry's office wherever this is being administered and

look at the statistics and information you get from these calls?

HON. MR. REE :

I really don't see any reason why John Doe would want to go in there

and find out how many calls are coming in as such. That would be made

available from time to time, but I don't think it would be available on

a walk-in basis. If someone wishes to write to the ministry, we'll be

happy to answer them.

[2:30]

MR. GUNO : So much for access to information in this province.

the last two days we've been talking about the provincial emergency

program on a fairly general basis, but also in the context of the

recent oil spill on the west coast.

The minister has

continually refused to provide details as to what steps he is taking to

correct the inadequacies of this program in responding to these kinds

of emergencies. In his own words, "To do so" — that is, to reply specifically to points raised — "would

be a knee-jerk reaction." Perhaps the minister should be reminded that

the estimates debate is precisely to do that, to elicit from the

minister detailed answers to questions about various aspects of his

ministry's budget. I refer to his rather brusque answer to the member

for Alberni (Mr. G. Janssen), which reinforces our view that the

minister is being cavalier about this program. I think the member

raised a fairly important point about coordination and consultation,

about having municipalities tuned in with whatever kind of emergency

programs you

[ Page 7037 ]

have in place to deal with the kind of oil spill that occurred recently at that particular area.

I'd

like to refer the minister to a document; it's actually the minutes of

the Interministry Emergency Preparedness Committee. Apparently they met

on February 9, 1989, and concerns were raised relating to the total

lack of preparedness by the province, and they wanted to send their

concerns, by letter, to the Solicitor-General. In this regard the memo

points out that it was the collective opinion of the IEPC members that

it was unfortunate that the Solicitor-General was unable to remain for

the general discussion, which identified the province's lack of

preparedness for earthquakes or other disasters.

At that

same meeting there was a report of the seismic safety subcommittee

tabled by the chairman of that particular subcommittee, Mr. Terry

Vaughan Thomas. In that report the sub chairman recommended that the

IEPC consider recommending the allocation of $1 per person in the

province to enable the development of a comprehensive earthquake

preparedness plan for B.C. My first question: if the minister was not

present when this very important issue was discussed, then how can he

justify the fact that he totally ignored the recommendation for $1 per

person; and what factors did he use to come up with a far lower figure

in terms of meeting this very important program?

HON. MR. REE :

I attended that meeting and gave opening remarks, at which time I

stated that funds would be available and an earthquake plan report done

by the end of this year. I was welcomed as the first minister ever to

attend such a meeting on the subject, and I was thanked profusely for

being there. My staff of the provincial emergency program coordinated

and held that meeting. They submitted a report to me. Without cardboard

types of myself, I can't be at everything. I did receive the report. It

is certainly being considered by the government, as is the report on

the oil spill which was prepared by the provincial emergency program.

Pursuant

to that report, there were joint meetings between the federal

government and our government as of May 11. Further meetings are going

to be held towards preparing a submission for cabinet's consideration.

These reports are continuously being actively reviewed, considered,

studied, and submissions come from them to improve the responsibility

of the provincial emergency program and the possibilities of minimizing

events from happening. They are being actively reviewed.

MR. GUNO :

I can see why the committee would be relieved to see the minister,

being the first minister to attend such an important meeting. It really

speaks volumes about the priority that the government has placed on

this particular program up until now. I applaud the minister for

attending that meeting.

A number of concerns were raised at

that meeting, one regarding research. Their conclusion was that

research is essential for the understanding of earthquake hazards and

effects and for determining the means by which those hazards may be

mitigated. They pointed out a number of areas that need a fair amount

of research, including the causes and nature of earthquakes, the

location of faults and subduction zones, and seismic potential. Another

one is monitoring methods, modelling and forecasting. They also talked

about delineation of geological and structural hazards, social and

economic effect and the cost of hazard reduction. They identified $1

million as being almost the bottom line in terms of responding. Can the

minister inform the House what amount of money has been spent on the

kind of research that this particular subcommittee identified as vital

in terms of preparedness?

HON. MR. REE : The dollar

figure has not been allocated at this time. Since that meeting we've

hired a planning officer to do the work the committee recommended.

MR. GUNO :

I thought the minister was going to say more. My question really

focused on the research. Does the minister have any idea how much has

been allocated in terms of getting some knowledge about what is an

earthquake and what does it mean, and how to prepare for earthquakes?

That's really the thrust of the question.

HON. MR. REE : We have consulted many earthquake authorities. We've talked to people — particularly in California — who

run seismic monitoring stations or who control that federally in

Canada. We've talked to others in the United States. All this

information is available by delineating where seismic faults are or the

potentiality of earthquakes. That is not directly within the mandate of

the provincial emergency program. The provincial emergency program is

preparedness to respond in the event of earthquakes. We've hired the

planning officer to review this research, consider it and come in with

recommendations as to what we should be doing in light of all the

research and knowledge they have as to potential earthquakes.

MR. GUNO :

If there is such research and a report being prepared, I wonder if the

minister can inform the House as to the time-line of that particular

report. When can we expect it to be tabled? I think the member for

Esquimalt-Port Renfrew (Mr. Sihota) said that we can't just dither away

and not be ready. If anything, what have we learned in the recent past

from the oil spill? I think he pointed out 14 points which you refused

to answer. Those 14 points are really an indictment against this

government in terms of treating this with such low priority. Can the

minister tell us just what the time-line is on this particular report?

HON. MR. REE :

For the third or the fourth time, it will be the end of this year, Mr.

Member. Mr. Chairman, I get very concerned when the member keeps

bringing up the 14 points from the oil spill. That is follow-up material — information garnered

[ Page 7038 ]

by this government through the provincial emergency program.

have a continuing review and debriefing of any and all emergency events

that take place in the province. We do that; we take that information,

analyze it and respond to it. We will not respond in a knee-jerk manner

as these members expect us to. The opposition.... Well, I think they

should go see a medical doctor about their legs, because they're having

difficulty.

We will do it in a responsible manner, and

that's what we've proposed to do. As I said, on May 11 we had a meeting

with our federal people on the oil spill report. That's ongoing. As a

result of it, we have further amendments to the 1972 agreement with the

state of Washington. We have consulted with the states of Oregon,

California and Alaska on oil spills. These are all follow-up to it; we

learned lessons from it.

Mr. Chairman, that February

14-point memorandum is owned by the government; it's not the

opposition's. It's continuing work by the government.

MR. GUNO :

That's a rather curious way of assigning ownership. I think that the

owners are the people of British Columbia, whose taxes help pay for the

preparation of that report. I think that it's incumbent on the minister

to be able to answer very specific questions about those 14 points.

They

raise some very valid concerns about the fact that we don't have an

action plan in place. It says: "Lessons Learned." I would think that

the most logical step after learning your lessons is to start

correcting your mistakes. Our question in terms of trying to get

detailed answers on those 14 points is to see whether any concrete

steps have been taken to put these 14 recommendations in place.

The

second part of this meeting which you walked out of, Mr. Minister, is

preparedness, and the assessment and reduction of hazards — the first

point being education and public information. These programs should be

directed to the schools, general public, business organizations and the

government. This kind of information package should include earthquake

information, earthquake preparedness, procedures, survival skills and

family and individual emergency preparedness planning. It also talks

about programs developed to exercise emergency plans at all levels of

government. These programs should include intergovernmental programs.

I'm just wondering if these particular recommendations have been acted

on, and whether the budget reflects that particular item.

[2:45]

HON. MR. REE :

Yes, some of them have been acted upon. The members of PEP go around to

schools. The Ministry of Education is preparing information pamphlets

at this time in consultation with PEP. Some of the other

recommendations certainly fall within the responsibilities of the

planning officer whom we've hired to look at and prepare material. We

encourage municipalities to provide their own earthquake response

program of education to the public. There have been a number of

educational programs provided to community TV, dealing with

earthquakes. A great deal of that is being done on an ongoing basis,

and it will accelerate as we receive more reports from our planning

officer.

MR. GUNO : Another item identified by the

subcommittee is the very important area of training. It recommended

that a specific training program be developed for emergency response

personnel, which should include heavy urban rescue, emergency social

services and other programs related to emergency response. I'm just

wondering what has been done since the report was tabled in PEP.

HON. MR. REE :

Mr. Chairman, one item is that the Provincial Emergency Program Academy

has now been established at the Justice Institute for training

volunteers, coordinators and staff for PEP. Heavy response teams are

being identified. I was quite pleased yesterday to visit Port Day at

the Pacific Marine Training Institute in North Vancouver and watch our

North Shore Rescue Team participate with the Coast Guard, St. John

Ambulance and a number of volunteer groups, all within the PEP

organization and framework, rescuing people in simulated marine

accidents. This is all ongoing; these people are there. They hauled

simulated injured people out of the water by dropping from a

helicopter. These things could take place at the time of any disaster.

This is ongoing, and it is excellent.

You've got to

understand the broad range and nature of volunteers within the

provincial emergency program. As I've told you before — and I'll tell you again, Mr. Member — they

cover an extreme range of abilities, skills, training and equipment, in

the event of emergencies. It includes people fighting forest fires,

people trained in mine disasters, marine rescue, mountain rescue and

many others.

MR. GUNO : I understand that you have in

place area coordinators whom you depend on to act as a first-line

response in any given geographic location. I'm just wondering what sort

of training they are getting now and whether they're.... I understand

that there was some concern by the subcommittee about the level of

training. It's another report; it's actually a report by Boydell. It

points out that there is a severe lack of training for these area

coordinators. I'm just wondering if anything has improved since this

report was tabled.

HON. MR. REE : These coordinators

get training in all aspects of rescue, whether it be toxic spill,

earthquake, marine disaster to a certain extent or mountain rescue. I

was very pleased to talk to the PEP coordinator who coordinated the

event at Britannia the other day. It was an excellent job of

anticipation and coordination up there. He has the background in

chemicals. He's now going to the Pacific Marine Training Institute.

[ Page 7039 ]

They

have a great number of skills and knowledge of their local areas. There

is ongoing training. As I mentioned the other day, we've had people in

Arnprior, Ontario, taking earthquake training at the school there. This

is ongoing, Mr. Chairman.

MR. GUNO : It's rather

interesting to hear that from the minister, because as I mentioned,

there were recommendations in the Boydell report — which dealt more or

less with transportation of dangerous goods, but I think it applies to

just about any emergency areas. It says that many of the area

coordinators have no prior knowledge of or expertise in emergency

planning. It goes on to say that the overall state of emergency

planning in B.C. is so fragmented that such a provincial plan simply

does not exist.

I find it hard to accept the minister's

easy assurances. Mr. Terry Vaughan-Thomas stressed at that meeting that

it was the consensus of the subcommittee that a solid indication of the

government's commitment was required prior to continuing with the

development of the general strategy and detailed roles necessary for

adequate municipal, provincial and federal preparedness. The minister's

response, whether by design or not, seems to ignore the fact that these

reports — Boydell's report and also the subcommittee's — say

differently. There seems to be a real consensus by people who are

experts in this field that right now we have inadequate funding and a

lack of coordination. Is the minister saying that these people are

totally wrong?

HON. MR. REE : I guess it's a fact of

life: many times people disagree with other people. I disagree with the

comment in the report. I think the training and capabilities of the

area coordinators in this province are commendable. I can see a

continuing and an upgrading of training; that is always necessary for

all of us. I think they're very competent, and we have nothing to be

concerned about as far as that is concerned. In fact, one of our

coordinators was commended for his participation and advice in the

Valdez spill. So I disagree with that part of the report.

MR. G. JANSSEN :

First of all, having been back in my constituency over the weekend, I

would like to pass on to the minister some information on the storage

of goods that doesn't appear in the book that the member for

Maillardville-Coquitlam (Mr. Cashore) brought forward. Tofino presently

has 2,000 garbage bags, 200 shovels and 100 coveralls left over from

the oil spill. So if another spill happens, you don't have to scramble

around, as you did in the last case; you can simply phone up the fire

hall. If you so desire, you can phone up Dave LeBlanc and make use of

the articles that are there.

In debate on Friday I

questioned the minister as to his comments about consulting with local

agencies. I asked him if he had consulted with such groups as the

Alberni-Clayoquot regional district or the villages of Tofino or

Ucluelet, or virtually any other group involved in that oil spill, and

he said he had not. Seeing that he has, as he calls it, a sizeable

increase in his budget, I wonder whether he plans to initiate some

meetings through PEP on the west coast to gather some information that

may be helpful if, as some people say, another spill is only a matter

of time.

MR. R. FRASER : I've been listening with

some interest to the debate on the minister's estimates and in

particular have been identifying the thrust of the opposition party

when it comes to things like oil spills. Their main agenda seems to be

the scrubbing of rocks or the accumulation of garbage bags and gloves

and rakes as a sort of reactionary response to oil spills. If we look

passing through hourly — there are hundreds a year going through — and

where there have been some major oil spills and disasters, they would

find there are more proactive ways of getting involved in oil spill

cleanups, with the possibility that oil spills will go on for a long

time.

One of the methods used in Europe for cleanup is not

the accumulation of garbage bags, which, like gloves, degrade and

become useless over a period of time in storage, whether it's light or

dark, but vessels called hopper dredges. Normally they're used to scoop

up sand from river bottoms or whatever; when they fill up, the ship is

moved away and the cargo discharged in some manner, whether onshore or

off. During an oil spill these vessels are converted into "slick

lickers" — that's not the right word, Mr. Chairman — with great

pontoon-like extensions on each side that can sweep up the oil lying on

the surface. All that pickup is put into the cargo of the ship and

taken off, and the oil is discharged before it gets to the shore.

I've

been surprised that none of the members of the opposition who have said

anything on this particular minister's estimates has said one word

about this kind of technology. Instead, they've concentrated on the

reactionary things: the use of garbage bags — which are produced by the million and which are easily available — along

with gloves and rakes and all those other things. So one presumes they

really wanted to delay as opposed to enrich the House with some

information.

What they didn't know, and what they should have known, and what the government will know soon if it doesn't know already — and some of the ministers do know, because I've made a point of telling them — is

that not too long ago a B.C. company purchased a hopper dredge. That

vessel recently came through the Panama Canal and is presently in

British Columbia. The company is putting this vessel into use as a

hopper dredge working for them on the contract work they do, but

they've told me that they're more than prepared to have the vessel

converted into an oil-scooping rig on a standby basis. The interesting

part about this proposal is that they will be using the dredge in its

ordinary capacity unless there is a problem, so there will be no standby

[ Page 7040 ]

time required or standby expenses that the taxpayer will have to endure.

They

to participate in this program, they wish the federal government to

provide them with some money to refit the vessel so that it can be

converted into a vessel that can pick oil up off the surface of the

ocean. Thus far, I understand, they have had no success with respect to

their request, but it appears they have a vessel that is worth between

$25 million and $30 million. It also appears that the conversion money

they would require is about $2 million to $3 million. It's not

definite as far as I know; it may be definite as far as they know.

[3:00]

That's not a large amount of money for the federal government to

commit to such a program to protect the British Columbia coast.

Therefore I am hoping that when the minister has some information in

his hands, which I don't believe he has at the moment, and when he

reads the information that I am sure will be provided to him — because this minister hasn't had the chance to see it yet — he

will reflect very thoughtfully on what this British Columbia company

wants to do. I hope he will be of a mind to encourage the federal

government to participate in the conversion of this vessel so that the

states of Alaska, Washington and Oregon and the province of British

Columbia would have at their disposal a vessel that would be an advance

pickup instead of waiting for the oil to hit the beach.

could go up there and do a lot of scooping work and protect the shores

and wildlife from the damages of an oil spill. We shall, of course, be

waiting anxiously for a federal government decision to come down. In

the meantime, I just wanted to advise the opposition members that there

are other ways to protect the shores of British Columbia, Washington,

Oregon, California and Alaska, and that we should all be concentrating

on providing ourselves — all of us together — with this new chance.

suppose there are some who would think that the Jones Act would prevent

a Canadian vessel from working in the United States waters. However, I

am persuaded that the unrealistic amount of damage that oil spills do

to shorelines, environments and wildlife will more than overcome any

resistance they might have to inflict the Jones Act upon their own

shores, if you want to put it in that light.

I hope the

minister will read this information very carefully and consult with his

other colleagues, some of whom have it, and as time goes by will

provide the opposition with the technology, or at least the information

package, and that as a unit this House could prevail upon the federal

government to assist this government with finding ways to prevent any

further damage from oil spills to the extent possible, and that we can

proceed in a more realistic way.

HON. MR. REE : To

the member for Alberni, our interministerial committee on the follow-up

from the oil spill will be consulting many British Columbians during

the course of their studies and learning exercise.

They will, I would imagine — I would ask them to, and certainly would hope that they will — attend

to the Tofino area. I know when I was up there I spoke to the mayors of

Tofino and Ucluelet and learned from them at the time. I would hope the

committee would consult with them the same way.

To the

member for Vancouver South, at the meeting on May 11 with the

provincial and federal government representatives, a great deal of

consideration went to the method of preventing the spread and the

method of cleanup of oil or contaminants when they are in the water. A

type of skimming vessel is certainly something we would be looking at.

You

use a phrase of looking at other ways of protecting our coastline. We

did have a proposal some years ago that I think would have gone a long

way to protecting our coastline from potential oil tanker spills. That

would have been the Mackenzie pipeline, but unfortunately certain

groups were adverse to that, feeling it was an environmental hazard. It

might be a bit of a hazard, Mr. Chairman, but not nearly as much of a

hazard, I think, as some of these large tankers we have coming down the

coast.

MR. G. JANSSEN : I appreciate the fact that

after three and a half months he will be consulting with the people who

were affected and who were involved in that oil spill on the west coast

of Vancouver Island. They are waiting to give advice on how to clean up

the next oil spill when and if it happens.

The member for

Atlin was canvassing the minister briefly on the preparedness for

earthquakes. As the minister is undoubtedly aware, in 1964, when an

earthquake struck Alaska and sent a tsunami down the coast — I think the earthquake occurred on Amchitka Island — it

sent a tidal wave that flooded Alberni Inlet. It had a staging effect

as it came up the canal. It flooded the mills on the waterfront. It

flooded the entire lower Somass River basin, knocking homes off their

foundations. Luckily there was no loss of life. Since then, diking has

been done in that area to stop any further damage should another

tsunami hit or should we have another earthquake.

However,

there are still a number of questions in that area because of the

design of the canal. If another tsunami were to hit and have that

billowing effect up the canal.... The lower Somass River area has only

one exit road. There has always been talk about building a second exit,

an evacuation road. There has been talk in Alberni about the dangerous

goods and chemicals stored in the mills on the waterfront in oil

storage facilities. I wonder if the minister has any information on how

the provincial emergency program is prepared to deal with another

tsunami coming up the canal.

HON. MR. REE : Obviously

we are very concerned with the potential damage to the Alberni Canal.

I've been down it on the Lady Rose. It's a beautiful, scenic

environmental place, and I would hate to see any damage to it. I will

certainly see that the earthquake

[ Page 7041 ]

planning

officer we have appointed is cognizant of your comments. I also suggest

that the member himself could initiate some action within his community

and write the planning officer directly with the concerns and potential

solutions you might have. I would think that it is an area open to

earthquakes from far offshore of our own borders. There is potential

for damage there, which other parts of the province would not have, and

I think it should be brought to his attention for planning

recommendations that he might have.

MR. G. JANSSEN : In fact, Mr. Chairman, the Port Alberni rescue squad, which in 1964 had a facility right on the Somass River — and still has it — had

its building knocked off its moorings and swept away, and was therefore

unable to be of much help in the 1964 disaster. They have acquired some

more equipment over the years and have been looking at relocating. They

have been looking to garner more funding — and they do raise the majority of funds themselves — for

moving the facility and gathering more equipment to make themselves

more prepared to help out a provincial emergency program. Would the

minister be agreeable to re-establishing the Port Alberni rescue squad

and giving it any additional equipment or training that they may

require in order to be more effective in case another tsunami hits?

HON. MR. REE :

I don't know whether an application has been submitted to PEP for

consideration of what the member is requesting. I would ask him to do

so, and certainly such an application would be looked at. There might

also be funding somewhere.

Since you're talking about

volunteers, I recall twice in the Nanaimo constituency assisting

volunteer fire departments to get lottery grants to assist in

rebuilding their stations. The then member would tell the fire people

that there were no such funds available. I went to bat for the

volunteer firefighters and, as I say, was able to get assistance and

funding for them. It might be available, too, for your emergency people

as a means of obtaining some funding. Maybe the member should seek that

course at the same time.

MR. G. JANSSEN : Further to

the question of the dangerous goods stored particularly on mill sites

in the industrial area along the Alberni Canal in the oil storage

facilities.... As the minister is undoubtedly aware, the firefighters'

association of British Columbia recently hosted a reception and made a

presentation to the members on both sides of the House on the storage

and identification of dangerous goods. Under the provincial emergency

program, is the minister initiating a report that will identify the

various types of chemicals and the various types of dangerous goods

that are stored at facilities such as the mills and the storage

facilities lining the waterfront, not only at Alberni Canal but

throughout the province, so that there is a record and that a proper

response can be given if a disaster does strike?

HON. MR. REE :

It was just recently that the member said that the firefighters came

down and made an excellent presentation to both sides of the House in

their offices. I had local people from my constituency come in and talk

to me.

Not only the labelling of dangerous goods in

stationary buildings but proper labelling as far as transit of

dangerous goods is concerned is a very important issue. As far as the

buildings are concerned, it falls within the Ministry of Environment.

I'm very conscious of what the firemen said. It's an issue that I'm

confident the Ministry of Environment will be following up on.

MR. G. JANSSEN :

I thank the minister for his comments and his explanations. In the

Alberni Canal, there was a false alarm a year ago when there was

another earthquake. As a matter of fact, everybody stood down on the

canal. We evacuated all the mills. We evacuated all the hotels.

Everybody moved up to higher ground and waited for the tidal wave to

hit. In fact, there was a small ripple that came up the canal.

Jokingly, there was a local friend who had posted a sign on his

property on the hill that said: "Waterfront property for sale."

However, it did bring the realization that should a disaster hit,

should another tidal wave come up that canal.... Admittedly, the one

that came up in 1964 was some ten feet or three metres in height and

washed away some homes. Luckily there was no loss of life, although

there was some injury.

[3:15]

At that time, when that happened, the militia was brought out. I

believe it happened on the Easter weekend. They patrolled the streets.

There were some emergency shelters brought in by the army. I know it

was discounted during the oil spill, but does the provincial emergency

program consider bringing in the Armed Forces during the time of such a

disaster?

HON. MR. REE : That threat of a possible

tsunami coming up and then not materializing was an excellent exercise

that we should learn lessons from about evacuation, preparedness and

the rest of it. Probably that's something that the area should have

once a year, with an alarmist sense, so that people would understand

and know what they could do.

With regard to calling in the

Armed Forces, they are often called in in the event of emergencies,

particularly in a lot of our marine or mountain emergencies where we've

lost people or ships. We call in the air force helicopter and what not.

We certainly, as the member said, considered it for the Tofino oil

spill and judged that it wasn't warranted at that time. But that is

always an option. I cannot personally call in the armed services. I

must get in touch with the Armed Forces counterpart in Ottawa, who

would call them in, I would anticipate, generally upon our

recommendations.

MR. G. JANSSEN : Just to move to a

different topic here, as a member of the B.C. Coalition of

Motorcyclists, I am alarmed to hear that at the end of this

[ Page 7042 ]

month

there will be a reclassification of motorcycle licensing through his

office. The class 6 motorcyclist in British Columbia.... Now, when you

rent scooters or vehicles that are under the 49 cc range, what has been

the practice in British Columbia — and I'm sure you've seen them out in the streets of Victoria around the parliament buildings — is

that if you come from another jurisdiction where licensing is not

required to ride those vehicles, you don't require the licensing in

British Columbia. I gather it's a reciprocal agreement.

However,

the ministry in its wisdom has decided, because of the confusion

involved there, that B.C. drivers will also not need class 6 licences

to ride those vehicles. Many of those scooters are rented out to

teenagers, to groups of schoolchildren, who in fact come in here and

drive around having no experience on those vehicles. They are capable

of 50 kilometres per hour. Many of those students have accidents. The

minister is undoubtedly aware that British Columbia has the highest

mortality rate in motorcycle accidents, two per thousand. It is the

highest vehicle accident rate with motorcyclists in Canada.

just wondered: has the minister consulted with anybody before making

this recommendation? Has his ministry done a report or a study that led

them to the conclusion to allow people to ride these scooters without a

class 6 licence?

HON. MR. REE : Traffic safety is a

very great concern of mine, and making the roadways safer for users,

whether it be cyclists, motorcyclists, auto drivers, passengers or

pedestrians is, as I say, a great priority of mine.

At the

moment I'm looking at the high numbers of bicyclists and motorcyclists

who are injured and killed on the highway each year. With regard to

your specific question, I'll bring an answer to you here later today — if not, first thing tomorrow morning.

MR. G. JANSSEN :

I hope you do, Mr. Minister, because it is of great concern to the

coalition of motorcyclists, as it is to the Insurance Corporation of

British Columbia, which has been continually raising premiums to

motorcyclists in the province to offset the damage that's done. Even

though 85 percent of the accidents are caused by four-wheel vehicles

rather than the motorcyclists themselves, it seems that in ICBC’s

wisdom the motorcyclist must pay for somebody else's mistakes.

I won't canvass the helmet law at this time, as it would probably take up most of the minister's time remaining in estimates.

However, I do want to reiterate that I think it's a mistake — and I'm sure ICBC and the B.C. Coalition of Motorcyclists considers it a mistake — to relax the requirements to ride scooters. I'd like to know exactly — and, as the minister said, he will be getting me that information — where this report came from and why no consultation was done with the groups involved.

Again on motorcycles, also a concern to me is the fact that right now in British Columbia — and I'd like to see a resolution to this problem — a

young person who is 16 years of age can go down to a motorcycle shop,

purchase a motorcycle that has in excess of 160 h.p. or 170 h.p., go to

an insurance broker and purchase insurance and registration on that

vehicle, go back to the shop he's purchased the motorcycle from and get

on it and drive away, never once having to produce a class 6 motorcycle

licence or prove that he in fact owns one. My son just recently

acquired his licence and his motorcycle licence at the same time.

Many

accidents occur with these first-time riders who are unfamiliar with

the power of these machines. There is a nickname for them that I won't

repeat in this House. But most of the accidents that people suffer — and certainly I was one of them — happen

in the first two years of operation of these vehicles. Now that these

more powerful, technologically advanced machines are available to young

people....

In Japan they've limited the size of motorcycles

sold there to 750 cc. Many European countries are moving to a

power-to-cc ratio to cut down on these technological wonders that

produce these massive amounts of horsepower and maneuverability.

Has

the minister considered increasing the restrictions on obtaining

licences and making sure that young people who obtain these motorcycles

have the proper licensing and training before they get on them? It

seems rather amazing to me that you have to be 19 years old in order to

drive a vehicle with air brakes and yet you can go out and purchase one

of these machines, which I consider more dangerous to the rider and to

the public, with virtually no licensing requirements.

HON. MR. REE :

I'm quite confident that the member is aware of the restriction on his

son getting his licence at the age of 16 for operating a motorcycle and

that the member acted responsibly in ensuring his son was adequately

and responsibly trained and competent to operate the vehicle before he

gave that consent; that he just didn't give that consent because his

son requested it. Up to, I think, the age of 18, anybody getting a

motorcycle licence must have the consent of their parent.

Certainly

we are continuing to look at the feasibility of categorizing the

licence by size. At the moment class 6 is for motorcycles. I believe

other jurisdictions have a certain limit, as you're suggesting. In

Japan you're licensed up to 750 cc, or some sort of thing, and then

another licence after that. That is continually being looked at. It has

been looked at and turned down, but it's certainly something that the

chairman of the traffic safety directorate will be evaluating again.

actually commend the laws in Japan, although I don't think it's

feasible here. I don't think any government could be re-elected if they

implemented them. In some ways I would like to see the training

required here that is required before you get a licence in Japan, not

only for motorcycles but also for motor vehicles, but unfortunately the

costs sometimes run to $500, $600 or $700 for an individual just

[ Page 7043 ]

to get the licence. Your annual licences are very expensive to renew, too, in Japan.

With

regard to the mopeds and mopeds in and around Victoria, or licensing

within the province, there has been no change in the requirement. A

class 5 licence entitled you to drive a moped in the past, and I guess

the only change now is that we've extended it to the loped at the same

time.

MR. G. JANSSEN : I'd like to ask the minister

how he came to that conclusion. Was a study done? Was a report done?

Why was that decision made? The B.C. Coalition of Motorcyclists has

been asking the ministry and ICBC to consult with them. If the minister

is not aware of it, they will be here tomorrow taking various members

from both caucuses and the media on a motorcycle ride, and presenting

some information to both caucuses that hopefully will be taken into

consideration. I just wonder why the decision was made through the

minister's office to reduce the classification.

HON. MR. REE :

Mr. Chairman, I'm informed that the decision with respect to the single

licence, regardless of the weight of the motorcycle, is basically

common across Canada. It is a common decision in most of the

jurisdictions in Canada. Four years ago we embarked upon requiring more

thorough training for the motorcycle licence — the class 6 licence — and

that is the reason they went into the single licence at that time. But

the motorcyclist requires more training now to get his licence than he

did four years ago.

MR. G. JANSSEN : I'm aware of

that, but I consider, as do other people in British Columbia, that

motor scooters.... Certainly in the report on the radio, the police

officer In charge of traffic in the city of Victoria thought that was a

wrong decision. He cited a number of accidents that have involved

rented scooters in Victoria, and one serious one.

To simply

say that this seems to be the case in the rest of Canada, and therefore

we're going along with that decision.... I think the minister or the

ministry he represents should have relied on a study or some reports or

some input, if not from the British Columbia motorcycle association

coalition, from ICBC; or perhaps by getting the law enforcement

officers involved in giving some direction to the ministry. I think

it's the wrong decision; there are other people who think it's the

wrong decision. I wonder if the minister would consider looking into

the matter and basing his ministry's decision on some solid facts, not

just on the fact that everybody else is doing it, so why don't we.

The

question, Mr. Minister, is: would you consider initiating a study so

that you could have some facts to back up your decision, not simply the

fact that, well, everybody else in Canada is doing it, so why don't we.

HON. MR. REE :

I've already answered the question, Mr. Chairman. I told the member

that it would be referred to the chairman of the traffic safety

directorate for consideration. I told him earlier that we would look at

it. If the member would listen, he wouldn't take up the time of this

House by repeating questions he's already got the answers to.

MR. ROSE :

I don't like to see the Solicitor-General, normally a very tranquil

person, get himself all excited like this. It's not good for his

health. I know he smokes cigarettes; as a personal remark, he shouldn't

do that. It's not good for his blood pressure. After dealing with a few

questions from the member for Alberni on this highly technical subject,

he may want a short adjournment while he goes out for some warm milk

and cookies. I'd be willing to sit down for five minutes and give him

that opportunity.

[3:30]

However, I don't have the technical background of my hon. friend in these matters, since I've never been a biker — which I think applies to most of us here — but

I was a little bit surprised to hear the minister say that he couldn't

bring in certain kinds of regulations because no government could be

re-elected if it did that. I don't think that's a basis, really.... I

know we all respond to the popular will, and that's called democracy.

But if something needs to be done, I think we have to be courageous

about it. I think the minister has been courageous in other areas. I

recommend that he give this suggestion serious study, because most of

us simply don't have the background.

I'm basing my

information on I don't know how many minutes' study, but not very many.

I'm reading here a letter to the minister of September 9, 1988, having

to do with ATVs, off-road vehicles — sometimes three-wheeled or four-wheeled — dirt

bikes and snowmobiles. They cause a lot of injury as well, and a lot of

accidents. Usually there's no insurance on them, they're not registered

and they're driven by juveniles of varying ages. So I wonder if the

minister.... I could ask some specific questions. This letter that I

have here in my hand comes from the spinal cord injury prevention

program. It's a pretty desolate feeling, I imagine, if you wake up some

day and find out that you're going to be in a wheelchair for the rest

of your life. I haven't had to face that, but some people in this House

have, and we all know Rick Hansen. Neither of these cases I mentioned

were injured by off-road or ATVs, but certainly they were injured as a

result of spinal cord injuries, and there's tremendous cost to

themselves and to society because of it.

Rather than my

asking specific questions, I wonder if the minister would care to

indicate how he has responded to their representation. They've called

for a number of things. If he would like me to refresh his mind on what

they've called for, I'll do it. They've called for legislation to make

mandatory the following: use of approved helmets by all vehicle

operators; proof of third-party liability and personal no-fault

insurance — that's pretty important, where snowmobiles are operating in

areas occupied by cross-country skiers. There's the vehicle

registration of the ATVs, both three-wheeled and four-wheeled — as a

[ Page 7044 ]

matter

of fact, I think they've banned the three-wheeled kinds in certain

American states, because of the numbers of injuries there. And there's

operator licensing so that you're sure you have some control over the

age limit and the maturity of the person using them. I recently saw a

horrible film done by an amateur-photographer father of his son getting

run over by one of these ATVs; he just bounced off it.

addition to this, the spinal cord injury people, and obviously they're

dealing with it.... They're a stellar group, incidentally; I'll give

you some names in a moment, but it interrupts my flow here. Use of

off-road vehicles by children under 14 years of age Use of off-road

vehicles carrying passengers, except where a vehicle has been designed

for that use — most of these are single-rider vehicles. And the operation of vehicles while impaired — which is obvious, whether you're talking about boats, snowmobiles, ATVs or automobiles.

Some

of the people who are involved in this representation come from G.F.

Strong, the School of Nursing, Western Rehab, MADD, the paraplegic

association, the Coalition of the Disabled, the Royal Life Saving

Society, University Hospital, the Head Injury Association, Ski West,

the acute spinal cord injury unit of University Hospital, and a number

of others, mainly doctors.

I wonder if the minister would

care to respond and let me know what consideration and progress he has

made since September '88 in addressing their representation.

HON. MR. REE :

It was an excellent representation that was made by these people,

dealing with a problem which is very serious and which a great number

of people have sincere thoughts on. At the moment, it is under very

active consideration. Primarily it's under the Ministry of Environment,

but there's a joint committee between Environment, ICBC and my

ministry, under the superintendent of motor vehicles.

By the way, I should introduce to the House — I think you've probably all met him at one time or another — Keith Jackman, the superintendent of motor vehicles in the province, who is here to assist today.

[Mr. Rabbitt in the chair.]

the member is well aware, it's a difficult problem to address, because

off-road vehicles or ATVs run the gamut from the actual bicycle to

powered vehicles, in essence. I have some concerns, in that a

constituent of mine recently had her children run down by some people

with bicycles. Just how far and how extensively do we go into

licensing, insuring and training of people who operate them. You know,

you learn to ride a bicycle at six years or five years of age, or four

years of age in certain cases. Do we license these people? Do we

license the bicycle itself? So to what extent would one go on this? But

I certainly think, when it comes down to the powered vehicles, those

that are operating by motor or other than by human energy, that

something should be done, because they can create a great deal of

injury.

You mentioned helmets. Certainly I'm a supporter of

helmets for any open-vehicle operation. I think bicycle riders should

wear helmets. I had the unfortunate incident of seeing my son, who had

been riding a bicycle, have a car turn right in front of him, and he

went head over heels over the hood and down face forward onto the

pavement. I think he should have been wearing a helmet; it would not

have been nearly as serious had he been. Fortunately he had no internal

injuries. He had cosmetic damages; he was not as good-looking when he

was finished.

Third-party liability, yes. No-fault

insurance: I have a personal feeling on that. On these items you're

going down, I have been personally averse to moving towards no-fault

through ICBC. I believe in the third-party liability basis. I found

that that no-fault type of coverage was going to indicate that if you

were riding a bicycle and you ran into a moving car or a stationary car — as long as you ran into a motor vehicle — the

no-fault would have covered you. But if you were riding a bicycle in

the same manner and you ran into a telephone pole, you wouldn't get any

coverage. You only got coverage because you ran into a car. To me, if

you're going to extend no-fault, it should be in all walks of life, not

just restricted to motor vehicles or ATVs.

Vehicle

registration, yes. You indicated that certain jurisdictions have

outlawed the three-wheeled type of vehicle. I'm told that these are not

prevalent — they're not being manufactured anymore — because of the representation by licensing authorities and insurance companies in North America, which B.C. was part of.

Driver's

licences and driver training are good things that certainly should be

looked at towards any legislation that's brought in. Age of operators:

I know that a lot of people object to 16 as being too young for a motor

vehicle driver's licence. I don't object to that; I got my licence at

15 and thought I was quite competent. As for what age you should be on

a snowmobile, I haven't got the slightest Idea at this point.

I trust that has some answers for the member.

MR. ROSE :

I won't pursue this much longer. I would just like to clarify that I

wasn't speaking about pedalled vehicles or scooters or roller-skates or

anything like that. There might be some suggestion that skateboards

might well fall under the helmeted class as well. Again, as that other

side of the House is prone to say, you can't regulate everything, and I

think that's true.

The three-wheeled vehicles have been

withdrawn because they were just unacceptable. The industry didn't

withdraw them voluntarily, and there are no safety standards — or

traditionally there haven't been. The industry wanted to police itself,

but it wasn't until jurisdictions of government got involved in it that

there was some action.

Just before I leave this topic, I would like to find out from the minister what progress is being made,

[ Page 7045 ]

what

he is considering. Certainly we would look forward to some kind of

time-frame. Then I want to move briefly to another topic to do with

motor vehicles, and then I'll yield the floor to somebody else.

HON. MR REE : I regret I can't give a time-frame, except to assure the member, since we're talking legislation — it may be a little bit out of order here in the estimates — that no legislation is coming forth this session.

[Mr. Rogers in the chair.]

MR. ROSE :

Since we have the superintendent of motor vehicles here, I would like

to ask a question that perhaps he might be able to assist us on. I've

been here now for six years, and I find myself making the same old

speeches; this is another of my favourites. I sometimes ask the

Minister of Highways — who was the appropriate minister at one time and may not be now — about

this business of the kids lying on their bellies in campers on the cab,

looking out the window, waiting for that camper to hit something, when

they become projectiles. To me, this is a scandalously dangerous

operation.

If you can require a baby to have a car seat for

its own safety because the parents don't realize the power of mass and

energy and movement, then certainly this is also true about campers. I

know that people can't have a lot of vehicles, and if they have a large

family there's not a lot of room and the kids like to look out the

window when they're traveling. But this is scandalously dangerous and

something's got to be done about it. I know there have already been

many injuries and deaths as a result of this. I'd like to see something

forbidding children — or adults, for that matter; persons — from lying down and looking out the window of a cab-over camper while the vehicle is moving.

HON. MR. REE : This is certainly a subject that will be considered for legislation next year, not this session.

MR. CHAIRMAN : I might remind the minister that he's out of order. We may not discuss matters of legislation.

MR ROSE : I'm really pleased, Mr. Chairman, that you've admonished the minister.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Oh, I wouldn't miss a chance.

MR. ROSE : I'm quite sure he will accept your discipline in the spirit in which it was given.

Another of my favourite speeches is the policing of Belcarra. Belcarra — and/or White Pine Beach, its contiguous neighbour — is

a small municipality with tremendous traffic and a lot of visitors.

Some 300,000 cars visit Belcarra Park and White Pine Beach every year,

and it's growing. But each and every year the policing is being

diminished. It's needed essentially on weekends.

I have a

letter here that you sent to me: "Thank you for your letter dated

January 24, 1989, regarding the delivery of police services to the

Belcarra area. As you are by now aware.... I have written (copy to you

and to Mayor Drew) in response to his letter dated January 13, 1989,

regarding this matter...." A copy of the letter is attached.

[3:45]

Essentially, what it says here is that the extra policing, the

supernumerary special constable program, has been withdrawn; by whom, I

don't know, but it's been withdrawn. There's some chance that there

might be an alternative. I would like the minister to comment on that

and whether, since he wrote me this letter on March 8, there has been

anything firm dealing with that area and what the minister intends to

do about that in terms of providing this another way, rather than the

way that has been done through supernumeraries. Just the extra

allocation of police to direct traffic would be greatly appreciated.

HON. MR. REE :

I have been very sympathetic to the requests, because Belcarra is an

enjoyable area which draws people from the whole lower mainland.

Unfortunately, in the early evening hours and sometimes in the late

hours there are a number of people who abuse the privilege of the

facility out there. We had two additional constables last year — a

regular member and a supernumerary. I am not too sure whether it will

be auxiliaries or regular constables this year, but there will be three

additional people — which includes that, too, in a sense — available for the summer period for Belcarra. That would be an increase in manpower for the area.

MR. ROSE :

I appreciate that. It's not just Belcarra itself; the contiguous

municipalities, such as Port Moody, are also interested in this.

have a final question on another subject. The other day in the House I

asked the minister when the next annual report of the Racing Commission

was going to be tabled, because the last evidence I have — the tabling of an annual report of an $11 million industry — was

something like '83. I wonder when the next one is going to be tabled. I

am not saying it hasn't been tabled. I don't know of it, and people who

have been looking into the matter in the library can't find it. I would

like the minister to say why this commission has not been reporting

regularly, since it's a public commission. It deals with megabucks and

public funds. Why isn't it reporting to the people?

HON. MR. REE :

We hope that the first annual report of the Solicitor-General's office

will be completed this fall. The Racing Commission report would be part

of that annual report and should be available for the member. I believe

the legislation says it may be tabled, but it is not obligatory to

table the Racing Commission report.

[ Page 7046 ]

MR. SIHOTA :

I want to revisit a topic that we dealt with on Friday; namely, the oil

spill on the west coast of Vancouver Island. I want to ask the minister

some further questions.

On Friday I pointed out to the minister 14 recommendations that had been made — or 14 lessons that had been learned by his people — on

which, of course, the minister has now indicated there has been no

action. This is a debate that took place on Friday, and I don't want to

repeat my frustration with that. One of the things that was missing

from there was the development of a manual to deal with oil spills. It

seems like a good idea. Could the minister advise whether that is being

actively considered by his department?

HON. MR. REE :

I am not too sure whether the member is talking about a pocketbook-type

of manual that people can carry around in their coat pocket or not; but

I doubt if a manual on oil spills would, if it were comprehensive, fit

in any coat pocket. I would think it would have to be a fairly

extensive one. As far as planning for oil spills is concerned, what you

do will depend on the area in which the spill occurs, the size of the

spill, the equipment available, what manpower is available, what people

should or should not be doing, the depth of the water, the nature of

the oil and all of these sorts of things. A pocket-sized manual — the law of torts in a nutshell, which the member probably had in school — would not be available when it comes to oil spills.

MR. SIHOTA : I wasn't thinking of something that every volunteer could carry on a beach — some sort of handy-dandy manual — just

a book to delineate areas of responsibility, to talk about who is in

charge to deal with jurisdictional matters, to have a catalogue of

where material is available and that kind of thing.

HON. MR. REE : This is what we are trying to get from part of our studies — if I were in the army, I'd call it the war plan — on

what we'd do in the event of disasters. Certainly the telephone

operators at the emergency response area have a manual telling them who

to contact at the time of a phone call, depending on the nature of the

phone call and so on. I can see there is certainly merit to what the

member is talking about.

MR. SIHOTA : I want to let the minister know that there was a manual

in place to deal with this last oil spill. It was developed in 1984. It was

developed by the former coordinator of toxic spills, which is a position that

had been created within government. It's a position that was cut back; it's

been eliminated The individual has never been replaced. The entire manual is

who knows where in terms of dealing with oil spill concerns. It was there when

PEP was under the Ministry of Environment. First of all, I want to know from

the minister why that manual — which would have avoided many of the delays and

problems that we saw during the oil spill — just sat on the shelf during the

course of the oil spill.

HON. MR. REE :

There are, in essence, manuals available. Planning has been done and

program responsibility has been set out, depending on the nature of the

spills. With regard to toxic spills, oil spills and movement of

dangerous goods, there is far more intensive planning now than there

was in 1984 by this government, which continues to look at these things — being

environmentally concerned. With the motor vehicle department,

Environment and Transportation, this is going on all the time, Mr.

Member. We are upgrading our response planning and programming for any

emergency event. I mentioned that earlier. It's still going on.

MR. SIHOTA : The question to the minister is: why was this manual — which

had been developed for this very disaster, which delineated

responsibilities among various ministries and which provided

information on how to best tackle this oil spill — not utilized?

HON. MR. REE :

We have programs and planning that did go on at the oil spill. The

responsibility was clear; it was the Coast Guard's responsibility as

far as the oil spill was concerned.

We put in the

provincial coordinator for PEP. He knew his responsibilities and what

part he played in the cleanup there. This was in place, Mr. Member.

That's why it worked as well as it did. We had people on the ground

within hours of that spill coming ashore. As far as the provincial side

was concerned, it was an excellent exercise. I don't know why the

opposition continues to knock the job that was done by many people in

British Columbia in cleaning up that spill.

MR. SIHOTA :

The minister says that an excellent job was done by his people with

respect to the oil spill. The minister would have us believe that

everything went off just perfectly, that there were no problems

whatsoever and that they did a first-class job in handling the oil

spill.

I have before me the minutes of the Interministry

Emergency Preparedness Committee of February 9, 1989. They deal with

the west coast oil spill, which the minister says that from his and the

province's point of view they did perfectly on.

Let me read

the minutes for the minister, and let's juxtapose that with the

minister suggesting that everything was done well. They say:

"Following general discussion, agreement was reached on

the following major recommendations: (1) a requirement exists to determine what

the coordinated provincial response will be for any disaster or large-scale

emergency; (2) as a result of the general feeling that at cabinet level there

was a lack of realization of the critical provincial response and coordination

problem, it was agreed that a cabinet committee was required to determine government

policy and direction for coordinated provincial re-

[ Page 7047 ]

sponse to any given emergency" — dealing with oil spills.

The

minister tells us in this House that the response was excellent. His

officials, in the minutes, tell us that a requirement exists to

determine what the provincial response will be for a disaster of this

type. The minutes tell us there was a general feeling of a lack of any

coordination at the provincial level.

All along, your

people had a 1984 manual that told you how to deal with the situation.

You had a 1972 agreement with Washington State in place....

Interjection.

MR. SIHOTA : Well, you are holding me up.

You

had a 1972 agreement in place with Washington State to deal with it. I

won't belabour the point, as I raised it on Friday, but I want to

know.... From this minister's budget this year, it seems to me that one

of the things that's missing is an individual to coordinate the matter

of spills and toxic dangers. You used to have a coordinator who

arranged courses across the province on oil spills and other toxic

matters. I want to know from the minister whether in this year's

budget, after having cut this position in 1984, the government is

reinstating that position.

HON. MR. REE : No, Mr.

Chairman, we're not reinstating the position, but we have nine

specialists, regional coordinators, in the province to coordinate

disasters that take place within their region. We can also bring in

ones from other regions to assist and back up a regional coordinator.

Nine is better than one, Mr. Member.

[4:00]

MR. SIHOTA :

Well, I haven't looked to see what you had in '84, from which you cut

back, but I think you had one person quarterbacking those nine. What

you've got now is a team out there without a quarterback. The absence

of the quarterback certainly became evident during the course of the

west coast oil spill. My suggestion to the minister is that perhaps he

should take a look at the redeployment of someone in that job.

One

of the things that used to happen in that job, of course, is oil spill

courses. Could the minister tell us what provision is made in his

budget this year in terms of courses to train people to deal with oil

spills?

HON. MR. REE : We have developed a PEP

academy at the Justice Institute for training regional coordinators and

volunteers, and for continually up training all people, whether it be

for oil spills, earthquakes, mountain rescue or marine rescue. PEP is

continuing that, as I've advised before.

MR. SIHOTA :

In light of this year's experience with the oil spill, could the

minister tell me how many courses the province will be offering in

terms of oil spill management?

HON. MR. REE : I

regret, Mr. Chairman, that I'm not in a position to set out the

complete agenda of each and every course we will be making available to

people who come down for emergency response. Sometimes in training for

one thing in emergency response, they are learning another, and that

has to be considered at the time of the courses. I don't have at my

fingertips the hours of training for each and every course at the

Justice Institute in a 12-month period.

MR. SIHOTA :

It's very interesting, Mr. Chairman, because my information is that

very little is happening in terms of oil spill training. On the heels

of a major oil spill; with all the chatter from the government about

its concern for the environment; after the Premier's celebrated trip to

Alaska; after all of the debates with Washington State; after all of

the accolades — until we got into this debate — for all of the

volunteers that worked down there, you would think that the government

would have some expertise, you would think that the government would

recognize that it lacked expertise during the course of the oil spill,

and you would think that it would now begin to provide courses for

individuals with respect to oil spills.

This year, in a

draft submission to cabinet, this matter was raised. Let me quote from

one of the points in that draft submission, which has now been provided

to me:

"The Emergency Program Act designates

considerable authority to the director of the provincial emergency

program upon declaration of an emergency, and the civil emergency

planning regulations stipulate the emergency planning and preparation

required of all ministries and Crown corporations." This is what I want

to emphasize: "However, no adequate means exist to accomplish the

extensive provincial planning, exercising, training, testing and public

awareness programs vital for preparation for the range of natural and

commercial hazards for which the government must be prepared."

When

you think about it, that's a fairly devastating comment by the

government's own officials. I don't know if this submission has ever

made its way to cabinet. As I say, I've got the draft of it, and maybe

through some fear, the officials decided to take that quote out, but at

one point they felt strongly enough to put it in. Could the minister

tell us what specific steps his ministry is taking this year to deal

with training, testing and public awareness programs for oil spills, as

identified by his officials, or is it true what they're saying, that

the program is inadequate?

MR. CHAIRMAN : The member

for Esquimalt seems to be exercised, but the Chair has no choice but to

respond to whichever member is standing. The only member standing was

the member for Burnaby Edmonds (Mr. Mercier). I recognized him, he

failed to respond, and now the second member for Langley (Mr. Peterson)

wishes to speak.

MR. PETERSON : I'd like to canvass the minister about the horse-racing industry in British Columbia,

[ Page 7048 ]

and

on behalf of my constituents, some of the concerns they have expressed,

the needs of the industry and what kind of commitment the minister may

be able to give us.

I realize the minister has some urgent

business he must attend to, so while he's attending to it, I'll talk a

bit about the horse-racing industry. But I wish he would attend to it

very quickly, because I wasn't intending to stand here all day.

However,

let me carry on. First of all, let me talk a bit about Langley and the

large and small acreages of standardbred and thoroughbred horse

breeders in the area, who are very concerned about the direction the

horse-racing industry in British Columbia is headed. Their concerns are — particularly with the thoroughbred industry — the

lack of an adequate facility in the lower mainland, and because of that

lack, the inability to attract top-notch horses. This results in the

good horses going south of the border and the calibre of racing here

perhaps deteriorating, making it very difficult for the business to be

a viable, economic driver in terms of each individual breeder. The

horse-racing industry is not only a form of leisure and entertainment;

it's a way of life for many people, and it employs a lot of people. I

don't have the figures in front of me, because I didn't intend to stand

up here and talk for a long period of time, but the minister probably

has them readily available.

In the Langley area there are

many small acreages locked in the agricultural land reserve that are

not really viable for any farming other than the raising of horses and

things like that, and these small operations can utilize that land.

It's a good lifestyle and the people really enjoy doing it, but there's

no economic return. It seems that the bottom line is that in order to

supply that economic return, we need a first-class facility in the

province.

Interjection.

MR. PETERSON :

The member opposite says Colony Farm. I don't really care where the

facility goes as long as it meets the needs of the industry, so that

the industry can develop, flourish and reach its fullest potential in

this province.

My understanding is that we are now awaiting

Vancouver city council's reply relative to the PNE site. If that site

can adequately house what is required by the industry, fair enough; but

if they're not prepared to provide the property needed to put up a

first-class facility, then it shouldn't go there. I'm not an expert on

that; I don't really know. All I know is that we need the facility.

I'm

certainly glad to see that the minister has returned from attending to

that urgent business. Perhaps now that he's relaxed, he could answer a

few questions. First of all, can you tell me exactly when you expect to

be able to announce something concrete, so that the horse-racing

industry in this province can have some guidelines that they can make

some plans on? Right now everything seems to be in the air. I just

wonder if you could give us sort of a time-frame — I realize you can't put it into exact dates — of what you intend to do.

The

second and most important question probably is this: will you guarantee

that we will attempt to provide a first-class facility that will meet

all the needs of the racing industry in the province of British

Columbia?

HON. MR. REE : Mr. Chairman, the questions

are fairly extensive. As to providing all of the needs of the racing

industry, I don't know whether all needs can be provided. It is

certainly the intent of this government to facilitate a first-class

track within the province and in the lower mainland by the time the

present lease to the existing Jockey Club in Hastings Park expires in

1994, and that there should not be any lost days of racing within the

province.

I appreciate the member's concerns, coming from

Langley, because that is an area of the province which is very active

in the breeding, training, raising, running and owning of horses. It

contributes to the horse-racing industry — not just the racing but the

whole industry, agriculturally. It contributes many dollars to the

economic benefit of the province and is a very important part of the

agricultural economy of this province. The government is very conscious

and cognizant of that, Mr. Chairman, and we'll do whatever we can to

protect that.

There is definitely the need for not a

world-class but a first-class track. I classify the definition of a

first-class track as a track of a mile length with a standard

configuration of approximately two and a half to one. It also should

have the facility or the capability of a turf track at the same time.

It should have a minimum of 1,400 to 1,500 stalls and, I would think, a

grandstand of approximately 8,000 to 10,000 people.

We have

asked the city of Vancouver to consider whether they would accept a

first-class track in the Hastings Park area. I honestly believe that

such a track can be constructed and operated at that location. The city

of Vancouver has been having some community hearings recently to get

feedback from residents. To date it has not been supportive of the

idea, from what I understand. I understand that they still have a

further hearing.

I think part of the reason is that in the

proposal for a first-class racetrack at Hastings Park, a large number

of people do not appreciate the extensive area within the track itself,

what we might call the inner track, which could accommodate a large

community park facility and area, amenities for the people, playgrounds

for children, picnic areas, and what not in a racetrack of that size.

It would provide the people in Vancouver East and the western part of

North Burnaby with a tremendous facility, and I think they should

encourage it. The racetrack itself can help substantially in the cost

of providing such a park for the people, if they would look at it from

that point of view.

[4:15]

I would envisage, if the track was built there, that there would be tunnels under the track with free

[ Page 7049 ]

admission

to the centre, the inner field of the racetrack. There should be

concessions, possibly, available to the people in there. Some people

would say that that would block your view, but I don't think

concessions would block your view any more than the present tote board

at a racetrack that you see.

MR. ROSE : Where is this racetrack?

HON. MR. REE : This could be in Hastings Park. I think it would be an excellent location for a racetrack — and satisfy your constituents, Mr. Member, through the Chairman — and

it could be constructed within the time-frame so that we would not lose

any racing days when the present lease to the Jockey Club expires in

We would put it out for proposals, expressions of

interest from somebody to build and operate the track. We would

certainly look into their background, their financial responsibility,

and the plans that they would have with respect to the timetable of

construction. All of these would be looked at in a businesslike manner.

I would hope that that might alleviate some of your fears.

Unfortunately,

if the city of Vancouver comes back and says no, they do not want a

racetrack in Hastings Park, then we have to look at alternative

locations. But certainly there should be a location in the lower

mainland. I know that a number of members of this House, Mr. Chairman,

would be averse to one area versus another because of some interests in

their constituencies, but we would certainly try and locate an area

which would be amenable and possibly successful as a racetrack.

in the government do not wish to own a racetrack. We don't wish a

racetrack built that would obviously fail and not provide the

facilities needed by the people in the industry. So it's going to take

some time. I cannot state a definite date. If the city of Vancouver

comes back and says, "Yes, we would like one at Hastings Park, " our

decision-making might take less time than if we have to locate it

elsewhere.

MR. PETERSON : I have a couple more questions to the minister. Thank you for your reply. As I said in my opening remarks — perhaps you didn't hear because you were busy doing other things — my

concern is not where it's located. My concern is that we have an

adequate facility that meets the demands of the horse-racing industry

and will give it the opportunity to meet its fullest potential in this

province.

You mentioned the one-mile track, Mr. Minister,

but you didn't talk about a turf track or a training track. It's my

understanding that the industry feels that's one of the necessities.

Perhaps I'm incorrect, but I would like your views on that. Then I have

one more question following that.

HON. MR. REE : I

did mention that it would be in the proposal requirements that it not

only be a one-mile track of the standard configuration, but it would

also be able to facilitate a turf track. If I didn't,

I apologize, but I thought I did. I know I mentioned that in the House as late as last Friday.

With

regard to the training track, the track itself could be used to a

certain extent for training. But training can also be in a location

other than where the racetrack is. Regretfully, I don't think a

separate training track would be feasible at the Hastings Park site. It

might be at other locations, or other locations might have the main

track with a training track elsewhere, as we have at present.

MR. PETERSON :

I'd like to thank the minister. I have one more question. What is the

ministry doing in terms of looking at the concept of teletheatre

betting, and what is its opinion of that? I am told, through relatively

reliable sources, that it has been very successful south of the border.

It certainly would contribute significantly to increasing the handle in

British Columbia, thereby returning a bigger share both to the

breeders, the racing industry and, of course, government. We mustn't

forget that we do take our little piece of that action, and any time we

can increase it, fair enough. I wonder if the minister could give me an

overview of his ministry's ideas on the possibilities of teletheatre

betting in the province.

HON. MR. REE : Mr. Chairman,

teletheatre betting certainly is becoming the in thing for the

horse-racing industry in the United States and in due course in Canada.

The federal government has recently passed Bill C-7 — I don't think it has been proclaimed yet, but it has passed the federal Parliament — which

provides for teletheatre betting under the auspices of the Criminal

Code. One of the restrictions of that bill is that it does not provide

for third-party participation in the teletheatre betting as such, and

it is restrictive from that point of view.

But I honestly

believe that teletheatre betting may be the survival of the

horse-racing industry. Teletheatre betting, if it is implemented

responsibly in the province, could add at least an extra 15 percent to

the handle, and that could make or break a new facility if we did not

have it. It could make the facility if we did have it. I would foresee

teletheatre betting being blacked out within the immediate vicinity of

a racetrack, so that the live audience will attend at the racetrack

rather than participate in their gaming through teletheatre betting.

But if the racing is at Hastings Park, I would see teletheatre betting

facilities being made available in Victoria, Prince George, Fort St.

John, Kelowna or Penticton. I would like to see these facilities be of

high quality with maybe a good-class restaurant, where the patrons can

come in to enjoy their dinner and attend the races at the restaurant at

the same time. That would be my vision of the participation in

teletheatre betting.

Interjection.

HON. MR. REE :

The member for Coquitlam Moody (Mr. Rose) said "off-track betting."

Maybe it is off-track betting, but certainly not in the view or

perception we might have had of off-track betting

[ Page 7050 ]

parlours under.... What was the actor who recently...? I'm trying to think.

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Order, please. It's falling apart now. Let's try to address the Chair.

HON. MR. REE :

Mr. Chairman, I gather the members across the way don't include movie

theatres as part of their entertainment. I'm trying to think of a type

of betting establishment seen in New York. We don't look at off-track

betting in that aspect; we feel that there should be other amenities

with the betting location.

MR. PETERSON : I know the

member for Esquimalt-Port Renfrew is very anxious to carry on with his

deliberations. He must have a very important appointment in his law

office or something that he wants to get to. I'll be as quick as I can

so he can get up.

I just want to thank the minister for his

forthright answers. I will close by saying that while I don't believe

in making decisions in haste, the clock is running, and there is some

urgency to come up with some decisive action so that we can save and

indeed enhance the horse-racing industry in British Columbia. I really

would encourage him to do so as quickly as possible.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Perhaps the member would like to review standing order 42.

MR. SIHOTA : Let me say this to the member for Langley. At least I've got another job to go to, unlike the member for Langley.

I want to ask the minister this question.

Interjections.

MR SIHOTA : If my own members would stop heckling me, I could probably get to the point.

quoted the draft submission to cabinet on the oil spill, and I brought

to the minister's attention the following. I'll quote it again to

refresh his memory: "However, no adequate means exist to accomplish the

extensive provincial planning, exercising, training, testing and public

awareness programs vital for preparation for the range of natural and

commercial hazards for which the government must be prepared."

That's

what your own officials tell you, Mr. Minister. I want to know what

provision exists in your budget this year to deal with those issues — training, testing and public awareness — in

relation to an oil spill. What provisions have you made to deal with

those gaps that your officials see as existing within your ministry?

HON. MR. REE :

I think the member is a little bit incorrect in his nomenclature with

respect to the document, Mr. Chairman. It's not a draft submission to

cabinet; it's an in-house document as a result of the oil spill.

The largest percentage of dollars within the allotment for PEP is for training.

MR. SIHOTA :

Again, in light of the oil spill this year, and in light of everything

that transpired on the west coast, it seems to me that the government

would be taking special initiatives to make sure that if we were to

have another unfortunate incident, there would be funding in place to

train people to deal with such an eventuality.

One thing we

all learned on the west coast as a consequence of the last oil spill

was how vulnerable we are. We all took for granted — I know I did — the

splendid beauty we have here along our coastline. You kind of think

about the day you keep putting off when you take your own kids down

there to show them some of these beaches. It turns out, of course, that

you had always taken it for granted, you're hit with an oil spill and

you recognize how vulnerable you are. That shakes you. I want some

comfort from the minister that steps are being taken to adequately

prepare and train people to deal with oil spills. I don't think that's

asking for much in light of what's happened, unless, of course, the

government is betting that we don't see an oil spill for some time and

has chosen....

With respect to an oil spill, Mr. Minister,

my question to you is: what provisions have you made in your budget for

these gaps which your officials identified, particularly in terms of

training, public awareness and testing? Are you telling me that there

is little, if anything, in this year's budget for training of

volunteers in those areas?

Mr. Chairman, I'll go back to the minister....

MR. CHAIRMAN : I thought you had finished your remarks, but if you're still standing, continue.

MR. SIHOTA : I had, but I didn't see the minister get up.

I'll

ask the minister again, if he didn't hear me. Are you telling me that

there is little or no money allocated this year for training, public

awareness and testing for oil spills? If there is money allocated in

those areas, could you please tell us how much?

[4:30]

HON. MR. REE :

There's a considerable amount of training being conducted and planned.

I believe the member was here last Thursday and Friday; we discussed it

at that time. I think we're getting into a lot of repetition of

questioning here.

With earthquakes, there's a plan for the end of the year. We've indicated that as a result of the document of February 9 — I think that's what you're talking about: the debriefing report from PEP, the interministerial thing — meetings

are being held in Ottawa as of May 11. We will be consulting with

people. Training is going to be conducted at the Justice Institute.

This is an ongoing thing. I will continue to sit on continuing

questions.

[ Page 7051 ]

[Mr. Pelton in the chair.]

MR. SIHOTA :

It's getting painful. The minister has one, two, three officials from

his department sitting there. I just want to know how much money. I

don't have the breakdown of your budget here. In relation to an oil

spill, I want to know how much money the province is allocating to

train people on these pivotal areas of oil-spill management. I don't

think it's a skill-testing question. I don't think it's a difficult

question. How many courses on oil-spill training are you going to be

offering to those people this year — one a month, one a week? Is it in Vancouver? Is it on the coast?

want to be assured by the minister, as do a lot of people on Vancouver

Island, that this government, in light of its experience with the oil

spill on the west coast, has allocated funds to make sure that if it

happens again, people are going to be trained and educated to deal with

the eventuality. I didn't expect to get into any great tirade; I

thought it was a simple matter of asking the minister. Is it that your

ministry doesn't develop its budgets that way? If that's it, let's hear

it. That will invite, I guess, a different set of questions. Is it just

lost in one global budget such that you can't tell us? If you can't,

then will you agree to break it down and get back to us later on during

the course of these estimates?

I take it that the purpose

of having these debates is to get some grip on what type of financial

resources are being allocated to see if there's any meaning, any

substance, to the words and all of the good things that the government

keeps saying it's going to do about oil spills. I just want to know how

much money is being allocated to courses, and how many courses. I don't

think it's that difficult.

HON. MR. REE : I'll

undertake to give you information in writing as to the moneys allocated

for courses and the number of courses. I cannot break it down as to

which ones are oil-related versus earthquake-related versus any other

emergency-related type, because some of the training is common to all;

so it's difficult to break it down that way. I think the member would

have understood that before he asked the question.

MR. SIHOTA : I want to thank the minister, first of all, for his response. I look forward to his reacting to that undertaking.

Let

me come at it from a different angle. Again, if the minister wants to

take it on notice, I'll be happy to do that and wait for a written

reply from him. In relation to oil spills, what additional measures is

the government taking this year in terms of training and public

awareness which weren't in place last year? This is an opportunity for

the minister to give us some good news, to tell us what his government

has done in light of that experience. Just tell us what you've started

to do.

HON. MR. REE : The writing will compare this year's against last year's.

MR. SIHOTA :

The letter he's going to write to me will give me the comparison

between this year and last year? Okay, that's fair enough. I'll wait

for that information.

MR. B.R. SMITH : I'm going to

make a few remarks of a general nature, so I'll be departing from the

sacred subject of oil. I'm going to speak about some of the areas that

are under this ministry, but I think I would be remiss if I didn't

repeat my concern, which I expressed publicly last year, that it has

been necessary to create a separate ministry to deal with these

functions. I believe it was a very good idea to remove gaming from the

justice portfolio. I never took comfort in having gaming under justice.

I think that was very good. But I have continuing concerns that

creating a separate ministry which must interface all the time with the

other justice ministry in areas such as victims' programs, youth gang

activities, and in all prosecutions and police investigations, was an

unnecessary thing to do. Despite the fact that it has some historic

precedent across the country, having two sets of bureaucracy does not

make it any more effective, efficient or easy in this province to catch

criminals and put them away.

Having said that, I'm going to

move on so the minister doesn't have to fulminate in response to that.

That is my opinion and I have said that before publicly.

a happier note, I have no hesitation in saying that the people that

work in the various branches of this ministry are absolutely A-1

dedicated public servants, and they do a super job.

I want

to say a word about somebody who used to work in this ministry and who

took early retirement: a very distinguished Canadian, Mr. Robin Bourne.

Mr. Bourne decided to leave government service, and I believe that was

entirely a personal, family-related decision. He had a very

distinguished career with us. He came here in 1981 and was for many

years the assistant deputy minister of police services. But that was

not just his career; his career as a federal public servant saw him do

the same job in the federal government. Robin Bourne was the Deputy

Solicitor General of Canada from 1972 to 1979. He also served in

relation to the McDonald inquiry; he was on the Morand commission for

RCMP discipline and grievance procedures.

He, perhaps more

than any, knew the difficulties in Canada that are attendant on running

a police force and a security service together. He had all those very

tumultuous and bad experiences through his life, with the barn burning

and the other things that embroiled the security service in so much

debate and ultimately led to a decision to separate the security

service from the RCMP Police — a decision which I think was not a good

decision. This government, when I was Attorney-General, went to Ottawa

and appeared before parliamentary committees — Senate committees and so on — and

pointed out that the problem was that the security force needed to be

cleaned up, not made a new and separate monster, and it could be done

within the RCMP. Robin Bourne

[ Page 7052 ]

believed that implicitly. He gave us a great deal of help and good advice.

Another

thing that Robin Bourne worked on long and hard when he was in this

government was trying to ensure that the Young Offenders Act was a

workable piece of federal legislation, one that would meet the needs of

law enforcement in this province and also be a reform measure to help

youth. I'm afraid that we were not entirely successful with that piece

of legislation. It was introduced, I think, prematurely and without

being tested. Finally, after a number of years, the new Canadian

government is now going to make some changes in it, I gather — probably changes along the lines that Robin Bourne advised and sought some years ago.

One

of the worries that he and I had was that we were going to have major

duplication of facilities and spend a lot of money on facilities; that

we were also going to have an age bracket of offender, maybe under the

age of 12, that would be not capable of being dealt with by any court;

and also that we were going to have difficulties in raising very

serious young offenders to adult courts. Well, we've had all those

difficulties, except for the raising to adult court, which the courts

have solved themselves and have solved in a satisfactory way. Also due

to very strong submissions on behalf of our prosecutors in this

province, we have made progress.

Robin Bourne, a dedicated

public servant in the justice field, a distinguished soldier and

Canadian, has decided to take early retirement, and this province and

the justice ministries — the two of them — are the poorer as a result of it.

want to reflect also, just for a moment, on police services and on the

job that the police do in this province. The various municipal forces

that I know very well — because I was chairman of one of those boards for some years — and

also the RCMP give, I think, very, very high-calibre service to the

citizens they represent. Policemen today have a much broader mandate

than they ever had before. It's not just a mandate to enforce the law

and catch people who break the law; their mandate is much broader.

You

notice that with the advent of victim services, the pressures that are

put on the police are often not recognized by citizens at large. They

don't understand how much preventive policing goes on by the RCMP

Police and by our local police forces, and they also probably have no

idea of the tremendous strain on resources that occurs with police as

witnesses in criminal cases waiting in courtrooms, as they inevitably

do, and the overtime that's paid for that kind of project, and

particularly for the extra call that's made on the police today to be

witness assisters and preparers for people to go into court and go

through their ordeal of giving evidence.

I'm very pleased

to see that the government has continued its strong commitment to

victim services. I think this is probably one of the most important

initiatives that we've undertaken in the past ten years in the field of

justice. Those programs support community organizations that already

exist, or help community organizations get going to work in the

community with volunteers to perform these functions. That is the way

to go, and that's the route the government has been following.

should observe also that on Thursday of this week, the University of

British Columbia is giving an honorary degree to Mr. Raymond Burr. One

of the criteria for that and one of the reasons that will be given in

his citation is that Raymond Burr was one of the inspirations for

victim programs in British Columbia. He came up here and did a number

of public service broadcasts and tapings without fee. He gave

generously of his time and showed us how in California a victims'

toll-free line was started. We wouldn't have had that toll-free line if

it hadn't been for Raymond Burr. He started one at the University of

the Pacific in Sacramento and paid for it out of his own pocket to get

it going. We owe him a debt. He has always retained his Canadian

citizenship; he has always been interested in British Columbia. The

victim programs that we are so proud of have a legacy from Raymond Burr.

[4:45]

I also want to commend this ministry's approach to gaming. I think it is the correct approach. It's a conservative — small c — approach,

a cautious approach, and it has allowed the Gaming Commission to try

and modify, alter and change policies and to be flexible. It has

encouraged a very good general control on gaming and its proliferation;

and also has ensured that the gaming we have for charitable purposes is

spread around more evenly and fairly, so it isn't just the first ones

in the gate who have these spots forever.

I know that this

ministry is having difficulties, on the one hand, with the desire of

the Lottery Corporation to make very substantial sums of money which

are used for extremely good projects throughout this province. The

Lottery Corporation is probably second to none in its management. It

has very bright people who are always thinking of maximizing those

revenues. But in its desire to have revenues and electronic bingo, I

see the Lottery Corporation as being directly in opposition to what has

been developed in the gaming branch for charitable bingo halls around

this province. We could easily move to one big bingo machine run

electronically and very efficiently out of Kamloops, but that could

spell the end to charity bingo.

The minister can nod all he

wants, but I have a little knowledge about this, Mr. Minister, and I am

telling you that electronic bingo is a slot-machine, and it is going to

remove all sorts of people in the ordinary charitable bingo industry in

small communities in this province, and I don't like it one bit. I do

appreciate, though, that this minister has displayed similar concerns

and has really protected the independence of the Gaming Commission. I

commend him for that.

I believe that this issue is very

important and that he is on the right track, but I hope that the

electronic bingo experiment will pass and go its way, and that we will

not depart from the homespun bingo par-

[ Page 7053 ]

lours that we enjoy around the province. I don't think that we want to move to one big bingo machine.

also would say to the minister that I hope one of the ministry's tasks

next year will be to draft a new parole bill. We need new parole

legislation. It is not adequate to simply have parole provisions

contained in the Correction Act. It is obvious that provincial parole,

while it doesn't have the importance of federal parole, because

everybody is serving two years less a day or under, nevertheless needs

its own act and an umbrella piece of legislation highlighting the

importance of provincial parole, the independence of that parole board

and the role of the chairman. That was something I had on the menu

before I departed. I am not critical of its not coming forward in this

session, because there is so much justice legislation anyway, but I

hope that next year we will have prepared and introduced an independent

parole act.

Mr. Chairman, I notice also that the minister

has spoken about the Drost report and the development of correctional

facilities. The thrust in that direction is very commendable. The

facilities built in Kamloops, those under construction in Prince George

and the new women's prison that will be built in the lower mainland in

conjunction with the federal government are long-needed facilities. The

closure of Oakalla will be welcomed, I think, by everyone in all

parties and all communities. It has not had a good correctional history.

spoke the other day on the subject of horse-racing. I am not going to

repeat those remarks, but I should probably say on the record that I

think this minister's heart has been in the right place on this issue.

He wants to do something on this subject, and it isn't an easy subject

to deal with; it's not something you can do overnight. But it cries out

for solution and activity, and I'm afraid this industry is going to be

in very difficult straits unless we have some activity. I believe the

work being done by the officials of this ministry is commendable — I see some of the ministry here today — and I appreciate their service.

HON. MR. REE :

Very briefly, I must echo the comments of the member with respect to

Robin Bourne; his contribution to this province and to the justice

system in the province is commendable. Also on the police and some of

his other comments.

I must give that member credit for the

initial efforts towards the improvement of prisons within this

province. I think he deserves recognition for that. It has allowed me

to continue the momentum and I hope to carry on with that. As I've

indicated, it's not just to improve the facilities for the convicts,

the people in the prisons; it's also to improve the working conditions

for the guards and the corrections officers, who are entitled to humane

working conditions. I thank the member for his comments.

MR. GUNO : I note that the time is six minutes to the hour, and I move the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The committee, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. Mr. Richmond moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 4:54 p.m.

[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright 1989, 2001: Hansard Services, Victoria, B.C., Canada