H0306am 08

H0306am 08

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Thursday, March 6, 2003 Morning Sitting Volume 12, Number 8 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 4TH SESSION, 37TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Claude Richmond EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council................................................................................. .........................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations.............................................................................. ..................... Hon.

Greg Halsey-Brandt Deputy Premier and Minister of Education ....................................................................................... ..................................Hon. Christy Clark Minister of Advanced Education................................................................................................. ...........................................Hon. Shirley Bond Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations.............................................................. .................... Hon.

Geoff Plant Minister of Children and Family Development.................................................................................... ..............................Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of State for Early Childhood Development.............................................................................. .................................Hon. Linda Reid Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services......................................................................... .................. Hon.

George Abbott Minister of State for Community Charter........................................................................................ .................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Minister of State for Women's Equality ......................................................................................... .................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ................................................................................ ..................................Hon.

Rick Thorpe Minister of State for Deregulation ............................................................................................. ............................................ Hon. Kevin Falcon Minister of Energy and Mines................................................................................................... ....................................... Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of Finance ............................................................................................................ ....................................................... Hon.

Gary Collins Minister of Forests ............................................................................................................ .................................................. Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Health Planning .................................................................................................... ............................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Minister of Health Services.................................................................................................... ................................................ Hon.

Colin Hansen Minister of State for Mental Health ............................................................................................ ...................................Hon. Gulzar S. Cheema Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care ............................................................................. Hon. Katherine Whittred Minister of Human Resources.................................................................................................... ............................................Hon.

Murray Coell Minister of Management Services................................................................................................ .........................................Hon. Sandy Santori Minister of Provincial Revenue................................................................................................. ................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ................................................................................ ..................................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Skills Development and Labour...................................................................................... .............................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Minister of Sustainable Resource Management and Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries ..................................Hon. Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..................................................................................................... .................................................... Hon.

Judith Reid Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection..................................................................................... ....................................Hon. Joyce Murray LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................. ..............................................................

John Weisbeck Leader of the Opposition ....................................................................................................... ...........................................................Joy MacPhail Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ........................................................................................... .............................................. Harold Long Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .............................................................................................. .........................................E.

George MacMinn Clerk Assistant ................................................................................................................ ................................................................... Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .................................................................................................. ........................................................ Ian D. Izard Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees........................................................................................ ............................................Craig H.

James Clerk Assistant/Committee Clerk................................................................................................ ............................................ Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms ............................................................................................................... .........................................................A.A. Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................... ........................................

Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian.......................................................................................................... ............................................................. Joan A. Barton Legislative Comptroller ........................................................................................................ .................................................................Peter Bray Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker by the Queen's Printer, Victoria.

Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636. Fax: 386-0221. www.leg.bc.ca/hansard In addition to printed transcripts, Hansard Services publishes transcripts on the Internet and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.

Party Standings: Liberal 75; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 2. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ....................................................................... Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L) .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)............................................. Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L).........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L).................................................................................

North Coast Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................... East Kootenay Bhullar, Tony (Ind. L) ................................................................. Surrey-Newton Bloy, Harry (L).................................................................................. Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).........................................Prince George–Mount Robson Bray, Jeff (L)......................................................................Victoria–Beacon H ill Brenzinger, Elayne (L) ...............................................................

Surrey-Whalley Brice, Susan (L) ............................................................................Saanich South Bruce, Hon. Graham P. (L)................................................ Cowichan-Ladysmith Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Cheema, Hon. Gulzar S. (L) ..........................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Chong, Ida (L)................................................................ Oak Bay–Gordon Head Christensen, Tom (L) .............................................................

Okanagan-Vernon Chutter, Dave (L) ........................................................................... Yale-L illooet Clark, Hon. Christy (L) ..................................................Port Moody–Westwood Cobb, Walt (L) ............................................................................. Cariboo South Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ........................................ Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L) .............................................. Fort Langley–Aldergrove Collins, Hon.

Gary (L).........................................................Vancouver-Fairview de Jong, Hon. Michael (L)....................................... Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................... Surrey-Cloverdale Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................... Comox Valley Halsey-Brandt, Hon. Greg (L) ..................................................Richmond Centre Hamilton, Arnie (L)............................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) .....................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Harris, Roger (L)......................................................................................Skeena Hawes, Randy (L) ............................................................ Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Hon. Sindi (L).......................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ................................................................... Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Hon. Gordon (L) ........................................................

Surrey–White Rock Hunter, Mike (L) ...................................................................................Nanaimo Jarvis, Daniel (L)...................................................... North Vancouver–Seymour Johnston, Ken (L)............................................................ Vancouver-Fraserview Kerr, Brian J. (L).............................................................. Malahat–Juan de Fuca Krueger, Kevin (L).................................................

Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ...............................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lee, Richard T. (L).......................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L) .......................................................................... Ch illiwack-Sumas Locke, Brenda (L) ...........................................................

Surrey–Green Timbers Long, Harold (L) ...................................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................... Bulkley Valley–Stikine McMahon, Wendy (L).............................................Columbia River–Revelstoke MacPhail, Joy (NDP) ..........................................................

Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) .............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ...................................................................................Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L) ........................................................... New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) .......................................... West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (Ind. L)..................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon.

Richard (L)...................................................... Peace River North Nijjar, Rob (L)...................................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Nuraney, John (L) ...............................................................Burnaby-W illingdon Orr, Sheila (L) ...........................................................................Victoria-Hillside Penner, Barry (L)....................................................................... Ch illiwack-Kent Plant, Hon. Geoff (L) ......................................................... Richmond-Steveston Reid, Hon.

Judith (L)............................................................Nanaimo-Parksv ille Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L) ................................................................ Kamloops Roddick, Valerie (L)..........................................................................Delta South Sahota, Patty (L).....................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Santori, Hon. Sandy (L)..............................................West Kootenay–Boundary Stephens, Hon.

Lynn (L) ........................................................................ Langley Stewart, Ken (L)...................................................... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Stewart, Richard (L) ...................................................... Coquitlam-Maillardville Suffredine, Blair F. (L) ................................................................Nelson-Creston Sultan, Ralph (L)....................................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Thorpe, Hon.

Rick (L) ..........................................................Okanagan-Westside Trumper, Gillian (L)................................................................Alberni-Qualicum van Dongen, John (L).........................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Visser, Rod (L).................................................................................North Island Weisbeck, John (L).........................................................Kelowna–Lake Country Whittred, Hon.

Katherine (L) ...................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wilson, John (L)........................................................................... Cariboo North Wong, Patrick (L)............................................................Vancouver-Kensington LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn................................................................John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman ..............................................Hon.

Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum.......................................................................G illian Trumper Bulkley Valley–Stikine ..............................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North..............................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds............................................................................Patty Sahota Burnaby-Willingdon......................................................................

John Nuraney Burquitlam ........................................................................................ Harry Bloy Cariboo North ..................................................................................John Wilson Cariboo South .................................................................................... Walt Cobb Chilliwack-Kent ............................................................................. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas .................................................................................

John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke....................................................Wendy McMahon Comox Valley .......................................................................... Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville .............................................................Richard Stewart Cowichan-Ladysmith .......................................................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Delta North.......................................................................................... Reni Masi Delta South................................................................................

Valerie Roddick East Kootenay .................................................................................. Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin...................................................................Arnie Hamilton Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops ....................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ........................................................Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country...............................................................

John Weisbeck Kelowna-Mission ................................................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Langley ............................................................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Malahat–Juan de Fuca .....................................................................Brian J. Kerr Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................... Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows .............................................................Ken Stewart Nanaimo..........................................................................................

Mike Hunter Nanaimo-Parksville ...................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Nelson-Creston.......................................................................Blair F. Suffredine New Westminster ..................................................................Hon. Joyce Murray North Coast ........................................................................................Bill Belsey North Island........................................................................................Rod Visser North Vancouver–Lonsdale.......................................... Hon.

Katherine Wh ittred North Vancouver–Seymour .............................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head .......................................................................Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon .................................................................... Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside.................................................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North .............................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South .......................................................................

Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley ....................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................... Karn Manhas Port Moody–Westwood......................................................... Hon. Christy Clark Powell River–Sunshine Coast.......................................................... Harold Long Prince George North................................................................................Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................Hon.

Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................Paul Nettleton Richmond Centre......................................................... Hon. Greg Halsey-Brandt Richmond East .......................................................................... Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ................................................................ Hon. Geoff Plant Saanich North and the Islands ............................................... Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South...................................................................................

Susan Brice Shuswap .............................................................................. Hon. George Abbott Skeena.............................................................................................Roger Harris Surrey-Cloverdale ................................................................. Hon. Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Brenda Locke Surrey-Newton ............................................................................... Tony Bhullar Surrey–Panorama Ridge................................................. Hon.

Gulzar S. Cheema Surrey-Tynehead .......................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley ...................................................................... Elayne Brenzinger Surrey–White Rock ...............................................................Hon. Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard................................................................. Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview............................................................... Hon.

Gary Co llins Vancouver-Fraserview ...................................................................Ken Johnston Vancouver-Hastings .......................................................................Joy MacPhail Vancouver-Kensington...................................................................Patrick Wong Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Rob Nijjar Vancouver-Langara....................................................................Val J.

Anderson Vancouver–Mount Pleasant............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................... Hon. Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena............................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill.............................................................................Jeff Bray Victoria-Hillside.................................................................................. Sheila Orr West Kootenay–Boundary.................................................... Hon.

Sandy Santori West Vancouver–Capilano ..............................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ................................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Yale-Lillooet .................................................................................. Dave Chutter

CONTENTS Thursday, March 6, 2003 Morning Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 5325 Employee Investment Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 8) Hon. R. Thorpe J.

Kwan Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 5326 Employee Investment Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 8) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 5326 Employee Investment Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 8) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 5326 Small Business Venture Capital Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 3) Hon.

R. Thorpe J.

Kwan Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 5334 Small Business Venture Capital Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 3) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 5334 Small Business Venture Capital Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 3) Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 5335 Police Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 12) D.

MacKay Hon. R. Coleman Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply ............................................................................................................ ................................................... 5338 Estimates: Ministry of Finance (continued) J. MacPhail Hon. G. Collins

5325 THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 The House met at 10:03 a.m. Prayers. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: In Committee A, I call Committee of Supply. For the information of members, we will be debating the estimates of the Ministry of Finance fol- lowed by the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General. In this chamber I call committee stage debate of Bill 8, the Employee Investment Amendment Act, 2003. [1005-1010] Committee of the Whole House EMPLOYEE INVESTMENT AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 8; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 10:13 a.m. Hon. R. Thorpe: I'm pleased to be here today to entertain questions on this bill. Most of these questions are housekeeping. I just wanted to take a second to introduce the staff that are with me today, the staff that have worked hard on bringing this forward. Beside me is Ian Harper. Be- hind me are Dale Sketchley and my deputy minister, Don Leitch. I'd be pleased to answer any questions that members may have. On

section 1. J. Kwan: I first have a general question. I think per- haps these questions would best fit under the defini- tions component. During second reading stage, the minister said that the bill amends the act to reduce red tape. Could the minister please advise: how does this bill reduce red tape? How many regulations or re- quirements will be eliminated by this amendment? Which ones? Why? Hon. R. Thorpe: I'm not sure I did say that about this bill. It may be Bill 8, which is next. But let me just let the member know, though, that these amendments in this bill….

There was one additional regulatory re- quirement added. On the other side, there are three regulatory requirements to be eliminated for a net re- duction of two regulations, therefore staying in line with our commitment to reduce red tape by one-third in British Columbia. [1015] J. Kwan: Just to refresh the minister's memory, ac- cording to Hansard on March 4, the minister stated: "First, Bill 3 amends the existing legislation for venture capital corporations.

These amendments will reduce red tape and address the concerns raised by investors and small business about the existing legislative framework." It was in that context that I asked these questions, so, minister…. The Chair: Member. Excuse me a second. You re- ferred to Bill 3? J. Kwan: Yes. The Chair: We're dealing with Bill 8, Employee Investment Amendment Act, 2003. J. Kwan: I'm sorry. We were advised that we were dealing with Bill 3. The Chair: That will be next, member. J. Kwan: Okay. The Chair: Do you need a couple of moments? J. Kwan: I need to…. The Chair: All right.

We'll give you a couple of moments to gather your thoughts and your papers. J. Kwan: Thank you. Sorry. I was advised that we were dealing with Bill 3. Hon. R. Thorpe: Perhaps if the member needs some papers from her office, maybe staff or someone else could help her. We all know the condition the member is in. I can particularly relate to that, given what has happened in our family this past week with my daugh- ter. I do want to say that this bill, though, Bill 8, does cut red tape. Two regulatory net changes will be elimi- nated, so we are cutting red tape in Bill 8 also.

The Chair: Members, we'll have a brief recess. Is five minutes adequate? The committee recessed from 10:17 a.m. to 10:23 a.m. [J. Weisbeck in the chair.] J. Kwan: I apologize for the disruption this morn- ing. Our office was advised that the order of the bills was 3, 8 and 13, but my understanding is that some of the advisers for Bill 3 for the government have not yet arrived and are on the Helijet. Therefore, we had to switch at the last minute, so my apologies. On Bill 8, actually, the opposition doesn't have questions regard- ing this bill.

Therefore, I reserve the questions that we have for the other bills at a later time. Sections 1 to 8 inclusive approved.

5326 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 On

section 9. Hon. R. Thorpe: I move that

section 9 of Bill 8 be amended by deleting "Section 7" and substituting "Sec- tion 8." Amendment approved.

Section 9 as amended approved. Title approved. Hon. R. Thorpe: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 10:25 a.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 8, Employee Investment Amendment Act, 2003, reported complete with amendment. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: When shall the bill be considered as read? Hon. R. Thorpe: With leave, now. Leave granted. Bill 8, Employee Investment Amendment Act, 2003, read a third time and passed. Hon. R. Coleman: I now call committee stage on Bill 3.

Committee of the Whole House SMALL BUSINESS VENTURE CAPITAL AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 3; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 10:30 a.m. Hon. R. Thorpe: I j u s t w a n t e d t o a g a i n t a k e a moment to introduce staff that have worked on this. The staff member that has worked the longest and hardest, Todd Tessier, is in transit. He's worked very diligently on this, and he will join us in a few min- utes, hopefully. Also with me are Dale Sketchley and my deputy minister, Don Leitch. I look forward to answering any questions that members of this House may have. On

section 1. J. Kwan: My first question to the minister…. These are generally more broad types of questions, so I'm going to try and ask them under

section 1. As I said earlier, the minister said that the bill amends the act to reduce red tape. Could the minister please advise: how does this bill reduce red tape? How many regulations or requirements will be eliminated by this amendment? Which ones are they, and what's the purpose of that change? Hon. R. Thorpe: One of the things that, under the leadership of the Premier, our government is commit- ted to doing is cutting red tape. We've set a very high threshold for ourselves of reducing red tape in British Columbia by one-third over a three-year period.

Cutting red tape means getting barriers out of the way for folks. It means saving them time. As all mem- bers of this House know, especially those who have worked in small businesses, time is money. Time is taken away filling out forms and being tied up in ad- ministrative duties. In a small business it's time unnec- essarily taken away from training employees, selling products, developing new products, developing new markets. This bill gets rid of barriers to business and to in- vestors, which have been put in place by government.

One example is that investors will now be able to in- vest directly through their RSP accounts. Investors will also receive tax credits for the prior year purchases in a V C C i f i t ' s m a d e d u r i n g t h e R S P s e a s o n . T h a t p u t s more money in their pockets through their tax return, and they don't have to wait until the next year. It gives them money to invest, money to grow British Colum- bia, money to hire new employees, money to develop new markets. That cuts red tape.

It also gives the investors in businesses the oppor- tunity to increase the investment from $3 million to $5 million, again recognizing the need for business devel- opment through the heartlands of British Columbia and through the rest of British Columbia, and the need for additional dollars. We are removing unnecessary red tape. There has been some degree of red tape layered on this sector. There hasn't been fairness between the small business venture group tax program and the labour-sponsored. Now the funds will be on a level playing field.

All of these changes individually, some would ar- gue, are very small, but when you start adding all of these changes up, that's how this bill is helping cut red tape in British Columbia. [1035] J. Kwan: I'm not sure if I get the minister's sugges- tion that this bill actually reduces red tape then, be- cause what the minister has listed out are ways in which a person can invest, but it doesn't actually re- duce regulations or requirements. This bill does not reduce regulations or requirements. If they are re-

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5327 duced, I would ask the minister to be specific about what regulations or requirements are being eliminated. The one example the minister gave that says RRSPs could now be used to directly invest — for people to directly invest with RRSP…. That was always the case. People could actually do that before as well. So I'm not quite sure where the reducing-red-tape element fits into this bill. If the minister could be very specific about what regulation is being eliminated or what re- quirements are being eliminated by this bill…. Hon. R.

Thorpe: Thank you very much, Chair, and thanks to the member for her question. Let me add another example here. Previously, a small business had to set up a holding company in order to provide tax credits for investors. We're elimi- nating that requirement. We're eliminating the filing costs for investors and businesses. We've eliminated those incorporation costs as well. Our government knows that this money is more effective in the hands of entrepreneurs and investors than in the hands of gov- ernment, and that accelerated access means less red tape.

We're also introducing in this program the streamlining through the introduction of the direct investment model. That cuts red tape. J. Kwan: So from this bill, how many regulations or requirements are being eliminated? Hon. R. Thorpe: That's an excellent question. I am advised by staff that we don't have that number here, but we'd be pleased to get that to the member as quickly as we possibly can. Hopefully, we'll have that before noon for the member. J. Kwan: What new regulations will accompany these changes? Hon. R. Thorpe: There will be some minor regula- tions required as we go to the streamline.

But, as I said earlier, regulations will be eliminated as we remove the requirement for small business to set up a holding company. Again, as I said to the member just a second ago, we will get that detailed count for the member before lunch today. J. Kwan: I'll also be interested in how many new regulations will be added, as well, so that you can ac- tually juxtapose the claim on reduction of red tape. If you're eliminating some — and we don't know how many from this bill — then on the flip side of it is: how many new ones are being added, and what is their na- ture, and what is the purpose of these changes?

I'd then like to ask the minister this question. The minister touched on it briefly in his answer a little bit earlier, and in second reading stage the minister also suggested that the new model proposed by these amendments will provide for more investment to coastal and interior communities and businesses. Aside from the notion that there's an additional amount to which people can invest, from $3 million to $5 million, could the minister please advise this House how spe- cifically this new model proposed by these amend- ments would provide more investment to coastal and interior communities and businesses?

At what price…? What type of new investments will be attached to, say, Bella Bella or Fort Nelson or 100 Mile House? [1040] Hon. R. Thorpe: To the member's opening com- ments on the regulatory count, we will provide the reduction, we will provide any increase in the regula- tions, and we'll provide the net gain for the member. Also, if the member requires a detailed briefing on that, I am pleased to offer that when we supply the informa- tion. But what the question here now is: what addi- tional support for the heartlands of British Columbia happens here?

The direct investment model will in- crease access to capital for small businesses in the heartlands. Let me go through a few examples here. The direct investment model not only cuts red tape, it builds on the success of the programs operating un- der the act. The venture capital programs under the act have invested $105 million in 135 small businesses in the heartlands. That's not just in high tech. For exam- ple, the labour-sponsored fund has raised $140 million in capital from residents in the heartland but has rein- vested only $12 million in small businesses operating outside the lower mainland.

Currently, 98 percent of venture capital is managed and invested in the lower mainland. Introducing these amendments can only help reverse this trend and ac- celerate the opportunity in the heartlands. Further evidence that this model holds promise for the heartlands is based on our consultation with inves- tors, small business and economic development agen- cies throughout the province.

Since the introduction of the proposed amendments to the act in January of 2002, 87 written responses have been received in support of the changes to the act — especially with respect to the introduction of the direct investment model, which receives support from more than 34 respondents based in the heartlands, including Community Futures of north Cariboo, Mid-Island Science and Technology Association in Nanaimo, B.C. Wood Specialties Group, the University of Northern British Columbia and the economic development commission of the central Okanagan.

Finally, I would like to point out that this govern- ment has committed additional tax credits reserved for investment in rural communities. British Columbia is t h e o n l y p r o v i n c e i n C a n a d a t h a t r e s e r v e s t a x c r e d i t s for small business investment outside major urban c e n t r e s . A s t h e m e m b e r m a y b e a w a r e , t h a t i s d o n e through regulation. In crafting these amendments to this act, our government has listened to the needs of the heartlands, not just to the capital fund managers based in the lower mainland.

I want to discuss for a moment the member for Vancouver-Hastings' comments on sophisticated inves- tors. During second reading, the member said that the only people who will benefit from these changes are

5328 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 the people working on Howe Street. I want to tell her that that's not correct. I want to say that the residents in my riding of Okanagan-Westside and residents throughout the heartlands of British Columbia are go- ing to benefit. They are sophisticated investors also throughout British Columbia.

These significant inves- tors throughout the heartlands have used this program to create the Vance Creek Hotel in the community of Silver Star Mountain Resort in Vernon, Pacific Insight Electronics located in Nelson in the Kootenays and the Wells Hotel in the heartlands community of the Cari- boo. Let me say what some of the other people in the heartlands — not Howe Street; the heartlands — are saying about these changes.

Let me just say what Marilyn Hutchinson from the Mid-Island Science, Technology and Innovation Council in Nanaimo is saying: "These changes will no doubt see increased growth of technology and knowledge-based businesses throughout British Columbia's regional communities, and today's announcements demonstrate positive sup- port of regional economic development." Mr.

Robert Fine of the economic development commission in the central Okanagan congratulated the government '"that steps have been taken to look at easing the accessibility and availability of venture capital in the province." [1045] Talk about what's going to benefit the heartlands — how about the employees of the more than 200 high- technology firms in the Okanagan Valley, generating in excess of $300 million in revenue a year? With respect t o t h e d i r e c t i n v e s t m e n t m o d e l , R o b e r t F i n e s a i d t h a t the economic commission in the Okanagan is strongly supportive of this move.

It will streamline the process. It will reduce red tape. Mr.

Fine "looks forward to reap- ing the benefits as a community from the proposed changes." Michael Kerr of the National Research Council at UNBC, in the heartlands community of Prince George, had this to say about the changes: "The proposed tax incentive program is a positive suggestion to help small firms, especially remote and rural small firms, attract investment capital." Greg Lawrence, a general manager of the Community Futures Development Corp. of the North Cariboo, said that these changes will clearly assist in the availability of venture capital for small businesses.

John Bowman, from the College of New Caledonia in the heartlands community of Quesnel, said: "The proposed changes to the act will respond to the acute demand for seed capital outside of the lower mainland and, in particular, to the needs of the north Cariboo region of the province." These are just a few of the quotes and comments we've received as we've gone through a very, very thorough dialogue with British Columbians in the lower mainland, on the Island and through the heart- lands of British Columbia. J. Kwan: The minister highlighted a list of quotes that really centres around generalities.

However, the question I'd like to canvass with the minister is: more specifically, what type of new investments does the minister anticipate would, as a result directly related to this bill, actually result in the rural community, in the smaller communities? How many new investments does the minister anticipate would result from this? The direct investment loan is applied across the prov- ince, and the tax credit the minister talked about was in existence already, as it were. Therefore, the situation has not substantively changed. What we do know, though, is that investment has actually gone down.

It's projected to go down by about 3 percent for British Columbia. From that perspective, what type of new investment does the minister expect this bill would bring? How many new investments would be brought to the rural small communities? Hon. R. Thorpe: You know, I'm proud of the ac- complishments of our government. I'm proud that 78,000 more British Columbians are working this year than last year. I'm proud that for the first time in the history of British Columbia, two million British Co- lumbians are working. I'm proud of those achieve- ments. I'm proud that we're cutting red tape by one- third.

I'm proud that we've left $900 million in the pockets of hard-working British Columbians through 27 tax cuts. I'm proud that we've left $350 million to $400 million in the coffers of businesses, small and large, in the province so that they can be the masters of their destiny. I am disappointed in what I believe is the direction of the question of the member. What disappoints me is that now we want to know who we anticipate is going to access these funds, how that is going to be facili- tated, who's going to facilitate that.

What I tried to do in my previous answer was say that this has broad acceptance from those that live in the heartlands of British Columbia, whether it be Nanaimo, Quesnel, the Kootenays or the Okanagan. Our government, unlike the former government, is not about to pick winners and losers. That is what the business community does; that's what the investment community does; that's what entrepreneurs do.

We are putting in place a framework that will provide the op- portunity for them to access capital, to grow their busi- nesses, to chase their dreams, to build on their dreams and to create employment in British Columbia. [1050] J. Kwan: Y o u k n o w , w h a t I ' v e g o t t e n s o f a r f r o m the minister is a bunch of rhetoric and no answers to the question. I asked a simple question.

Given that the minister can stand in this House and claim that all this investment is going to come to British Columbia, given that the minister has just finished saying that the heart- lands are going to get all these new investments and everything's going to be fine, then in determining and creating this bill, I'd like to know specifically from the minister — arising from this bill — how many new investments projected, approximately, would actually result in the smaller communities and the rural com- m u n i t i e s t o b a c k u p h i s c l a i m . W h a t k i n d o f n e w i n -

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5329 vestments are we looking at to back up his claim? But not high-level rhetoric like what the Premier and all the other government members have already done to date with the tax cuts that don't pay for themselves. Approximately a billion dollars has been given to the corporations in terms of tax cuts, yet investments are down. They're projected to continue to decrease for British Columbia. The minister can get up on his high horse and throw out all the rhetoric he wants, but the reality has to match what he's saying.

If he's saying this bill is going to somehow yield investments in the small rural communities, I'd like to know what kind of in- vestments he thinks will actually materialize. How many new investments would actually materialize? The minister talks about job creation, but you know what? Unemployment rates have gone up under this government's administration. They have gone up; they have not gone down. That is the reality as well. I wish the minister would actually take off his rosy red glasses and take a look and see what really is happening.

I'm asking the minister a very simple question to back up his claim that this bill will bring investments, new investments, to the small communities, to the rural communities. What kind of new investments and how many new investments does he anticipate? Hon. R. Thorpe: We expect that, annually, up to $67 million in seed capital will be invested in up to 85 small businesses throughout British Columbia.

With respect to the heartlands — which the member from Vancouver, since she's been in opposition, seems to have taken a liking to, unlike when she was in government — over the coming three years we would expect that 66 small businesses will receive capital and create just under 2,000 new jobs in the heartlands of British Columbia. J. Kwan: The minister says $67 million to $85 mil- lion throughout British Columbia. He expects there would be new investments, and that's throughout B.C.

First, can he break down that $67 million to $85 million into how much of that or what percentage of that would fit into the heartlands' new investments? Hon. R. Thorpe: Of course what the member is trying to do is get a number on the record right now so that next week or next month or next year or when- ever, they can come back and say: "Well, you didn't invest $67 million; you only got $63 million." Let us be very, very careful here, and let us try to tone down the rhetoric in this House, especially from the negative Nellies.

I've always been troubled by what the member from Vancouver and her colleague from Vancouver have against the heartlands of British Columbia. Let me restate again what the goal is. I know this next

part is a concept that's very difficult for the members over there to comprehend. We actually aren't going to try to pick winners and losers. The market is actually going to do that. I mean, you picked a real winner in fast ferries. You picked a real winner in Skeena Cellulose. We actu- ally believe that the market and the entrepreneurs and the small businesses of British Columbia should pick the winners and losers. [1055] Let me tell you again, and please listen carefully.

Over the next three years we expect that up to 66 small businesses in the heartlands will receive financing through this investment program and will create just under 2,000 jobs. Let me also, if this will help, give you some examples, because this is not a cookie-cutter ap- p r o a c h . T h i s i s n o t , a s t h e p r e v i o u s g o v e r n m e n t wanted, a one size fits all.

Again, we've got the exam- ples here. the Vance Creek Hotel in Vernon is an ex- ample, the Blue Mountain Vineyard in Oliver is an example, the Pacific Insight Electronics Corp. in Nelson is an example, the Wells Hotel in the Cariboo is an ex- ample, and the Wickaninnish Inn on Vancouver Island is another example. What the member should be able to see here is that by allowing and following the changes our govern- ment is putting in place — cutting red tape, making it easier to do business here, giving employees the oppor- tunity to build their own businesses…. It can be in a variety of areas.

It can be in the grape and vineyard business. It can be in environmental technologies. It can be in the tourism industry. It can be in the high- tech. It can be in the biotech. There is actually no limit to the possibilities when our best and brightest not only stay in British Columbia but come back to British Co- lumbia. They're going to have the opportunity, through programs like this, to invest and build and create jobs in their communities. J. Kwan: The minister would be wise to take advice from himself to cut down on the rhetoric, because the only person who's actually thrown rhetoric around is the minister.

The issue here is this. What I'm looking for is the minister to back up his claim, his rhetoric around crea- tion of jobs, how this new investment is going to boom in British Columbia, particularly for the heartlands, and so on and so forth. What I'm looking for is evi- dence, for the minister to back up his claim in this House.

You can't get up in this House and say that here's the introduction of a bill and here's how wonderful it is and here are all these things that it's going to do with- o u t a n y t h i n g t o b a c k i t u p o r e v e n s o m e p r o j e c t i o n s which the ministry might have looked into. I'm looking for actual experiences elsewhere on the basis of this model that the minister claims is really successful. Where is it? What we have learned so far is this: some $67 mil- lion to $85 million, the minister says, over the next three years….

There will be new investments in British Columbia, a very broad-scale kind of thing. What per- centage of that will actually be taking place in small communities? No answer from the minister. The minister says there will be some 66 small busi- nesses that will receive funding from the government on this issue, and therefore that would create jobs over three years — 66 small businesses. I'd like to ask the

5330 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 minister this question: of those 66 small businesses, how many does the minister anticipate to be existing businesses? Or does he anticipate that these are all new investments? The reason I ask this question is this. In order to substantiate the minister's own words, he's got to be able to put up information and evidence or even pro- jections that the minister might well have in mind in order to back up his claims.

You can't just make all these claims without that backup, because then on what basis is the minister measuring his own perform- ance to see whether or not this bill is actually success- ful? Surely the minister must have some measurements that he's set aside in order to determine whether or not this bill will be effective. Hon. R. Thorpe: L e t m e j u s t s a y , f i r s t o f a l l , h o w much will be existing and how much will be new. One of the things this does is allow the investment to be raised from $3 million to $5 million.

Perhaps some ex- isting businesses will, through investors, have the op- portunity. Our new streamlining approach is obviously going to create an opportunity for new businesses. There could be a combination of different multiples here that that's going to work on. [1100] The member asks: which businesses is government going to invest in? I want the member to understand that our government is changing. British Columbians do not want the status quo. Our government will not be investing. This is what investors do. This is what the private sector does.

This is not what this bill is about; it's not about government investing in businesses. It's about investors and entrepreneurs and employees, etc., investing in the businesses. In fact, it was the previous government that reduced the budget from $12 million to $6 million in this area and kept it at that level for three years. Then, only after some pressure, they in- creased it back to its original intent. But let me just say that our direct investment model is innovative.

This is a first for British Columbia and has been designed taking into account the positive ex- periences drawn from other provincial jurisdictions that have direct investment programs. Those jurisdic- tions are Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Newfound- land and Nova Scotia. British Columbia's model has been designed to improve upon the shared experiences of these jurisdictions, especially with respect to invest- ment in the heartlands necessary to ensure the maxi- mum benefit for all taxpayers and all businesses in British Columbia.

If the member would like to see a copy of one of the reviews we used in our consultations, I would be very, very pleased to supply the member with a review from Nova Scotia. I'm surprised that the member and the former Finance minister haven't read it, because it was dated March 2001. But I am very pleased to provide this to the member. J. Kwan: So far I haven't gotten an answer from the minister. But I want to put this on the record, because I know there's a sense that the minister and the government members like to insinuate that these questions being asked by the opposition are irrelevant.

I think he called me earlier a negative Nelly or something to that effect. But you know what? It's not me who's making up this information. There's an

article in B.C. Business, March 2003, writ- ten by Paul Wilcox. In it, in different sections, he inter- views various people about the economic situation. The

article is entitled "Diminished Returns." Let me just quote a paragraph from this article. The paragraph begins with the lead-up to investments from the busi- ness community. I quote: "The government's tax revenue from business will have dropped by more than $1 billion this fiscal year, mainly due to the tax cuts. And yet business investment fell in 2002. Granted, there are a lot of reasons companies are reluctant to invest at such a globally risky time. But" — and it uses the name of the Minister of Finance — "…concedes some disappointment.

Without being overtly critical, he hints at a certain amount of frustration at the business community's willingness or unwillingness to accept the challenges and opportunities." Then the

article goes on to say that the projection for investment is actually going to go down approxi- mately 3 percent for British Columbia. There are lots of other places in the

article that talk about the economic climate and some of the issues with which we are faced today. So while the minister can get up and claim that somehow this bill will reduce red tape or somehow it will create investments — particularly in the heartlands — there is nothing that the minister is providing to back up that claim. That's where it becomes problem- atic. That's where it becomes questionable in terms of how the minister himself would measure his own per- formance on that basis and given that projections from economists and others seem to indicate that the econ- omy is actually going down.

Yesterday at the Confer- ence Board, the report came out saying that British Columbia, in terms of growth rate and GDP, is going to be number ten under this administration and is going down. So investment is going down, and the economic growth rate is also going down. [1105] I would love it — don't get me wrong — if there were new investments in British Columbia. I would love to see that. The opposition would love to see that.

But it is just hard to understand the wild claims that the minister and many of the backbench MLAs come up with — to say that all of a sudden we're going to get all of these new investments because of Bill 3 or be- cause the government says that's what it wishes to see…. The reality so far does not match up. I won't belabour this question, because obviously the minister doesn't have the answer. He obviously doesn't even, perhaps, have projections, which then, of course, makes one wonder how he measures his own performance on that basis.

I'm going to leave it at that instead of asking the minister further questions on it, because he will just get up and enter into yet another

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5331 high level of rhetoric, which I don't think serves any- body in this House. Let me go to another general ques- tion. What models in other jurisdictions were reviewed or examined before the minister decided to introduce this particular one? S. Brice: I ask leave to make an introduction, Mr. Chair. Leave granted. Introductions by Members S. Brice: I'm delighted to introduce in the Legisla- ture this morning the students from St Margaret's school in my riding of Saanich South. They are here to watch the proceedings — 19 students along with five teachers.

I ask the House to make them welcome. Debate Continued Hon. R. Thorpe: I'm glad to see that the member of the opposition joins our government in working and wanting investment and new job creation in British Columbia. Let me just start this answer by repeating an an- swer I gave a second ago. I did ask the folks to take over a copy of one of the reports that we used from one of the jurisdictions, and hopefully the member received that. We consulted extensively. We consulted and learned from Prince Edward Island, Quebec, New- foundland and Nova Scotia.

The new model has been designed to ensure that the tax policies issued to investors work for all taxpay- ers of British Columbia. With this in mind, the legisla- tion has been crafted to ensure that the program capital is only invested in small businesses that are engaged in activities that further diversification and growth and prosperity in British Columbia. That will be done by regulation. Program capital is to only be spent on ac- tivities that create or expand the growth of small busi- nesses.

The legislation has the ability to recover tax credits from small investors or businesses in situations where there's been abuse. We're putting in controls here for the taxpayers of British Columbia. We've also, looking at this program, noted that in Nova Scotia in the year 2001 the department of finance in that province conducted a review of 277 small busi- nesses that received capital directly from investors un- der their equity tax program since 1994. The results were that the program capital of $30.8 million was in- vested in business at a cost of $9.1 million in tax credits.

Fifty-two percent of the program capital was invested in rural regions outside Halifax area, similar to one of the objectives we're trying to achieve here. The five- year survival rate for small businesses was 72 percent versus a national rate of 29 percent, and as the member over there knows, British Columbia has the highest rate of small businesses of any jurisdiction in Canada.

Pay- roll expenditures and employment levels doubled within one year of receiving program capital invest- ment, and by 2001 the province had earned back $9.6 million in incremental tax revenues. [1110] Clearly, the results from Nova Scotia show the po- tential of this model in assisting small businesses throughout British Columbia and in the heartlands with access to venture capital, while demonstrating sound taxation policy. We have provided the members the examples, but the member uses one selected

article which, quite frankly, did not reference this program. Let's see what some people that actually are in the business, actually understand the business, have to say. As a matter of fact, in a column called "Money Business" in Business in Vancouver , a Mr. Harry Jaako says: "The changes of the rules of the Small Business Venture Capital Act to make VCC shares more attrac- tive to investors.

Possible changes include — to look more like mutual funds — a l l o w i n g V C C s t o p a r t n e r with institutional investors allowing redemption of VCC shares to resolve liquidity problems." He's saying it's a good idea. The technology industry and a writer by the name of David Raffa of Business in Vancouver : "Putting the proposed changes to the Small Business Venture Capi- tal on the front burner of the legislative agenda. These c h a n g e s a r e d e s i g n e d t o m a k e i t e a s i e r t o r e c e i v e t a x credits for investment in small business.

Easing these rules would spur on investments in early stage compa- nies which have been particularly hit hard by the mar- ket conditions." These are the folks that actually do this stuff all of the time. Haig Farris, a well-known angel investor, a leading British Columbian, said in a recent article: "Investors are also anticipating amendments to the province's Small Business Capital Act in the spring that could help encourage more early stage investment in British Columbia companies." It goes on and on and on. You know, Mr.

Chair — and apparently the mem- ber wasn't listening earlier — I can go through a list of endless people. I said we received 87 written responses — 87. The consultation that went on in this process is unprecedented in the province of British Columbia. We have not received one negative written comment. What we've received is overwhelming support from small businesses, from entrepreneurs, from economic devel- opment, from high-tech associations to seed capital organizations throughout the entire province: "Get on with it.

Give us the tools so that through the heartlands and through the rest of British Columbia, entrepre- neurs and investors have an opportunity to access capi- tal so their businesses can grow, so that they can create jobs — all of this done by the private sector." That's what we're doing, Mr. Chair. J. Kwan: The minister can rant on with his own rhetoric, and he obviously seems to believe in it even though there's no evidence to back it up.

Then he goes on to say that I don't know what I'm talking about — or insinuate that — a n d t h e n s a y : " B u t h e r e ' s a l l t h e e x - perts who say that." Let me just put this on the record,

5332 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 Mr. Chair. People who actually would know the eco- nomic situation in the business community very well — here's what they have to say further in this article. Jimmy Pattison, when asked a question about eco- nomic investment around this…. Here's what he had to say… The Chair: Member, just a reminder that we should stick to the contents of this bill and to committee stage. J. Kwan: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Chair: We're dealing with Small Business Ven- ture Capital Amendment Act, 2003. J.

Kwan: This is how the information that I'm just about to give to the House relates to this bill. The min- ister just went on to make a long list of people, to hear what they have to say around this in terms of the eco- nomic recovery that is needed for British Columbia. I'm putting on the record other people in terms of what they have to say…. The Chair: Member, take your seat for a moment. I just want to remind the member that the minister re- ferred to people making comments on this particular piece of legislation. I was hoping that you would do the same thing.

Any comments that you have would be related directly to this bill. [1115] J. Kwan: T h a n k y o u , h o n . C h a i r . Y e s , i t d o e s a l l relate to that what this bill does; it deals with our econ- omy. Our economy has very different components re- lated to it, and investment is a key piece around it.

The minister claims that the changes to this bill will some- how bring millions of dollars of investment into par- ticularly the smaller communities and the rural com- munities, but yet in the global picture, as we look and see what is going on with our economic situation and i n v e s t m e n t s , w h a t w e d o k n o w i s t h a t i n v e s t m e n t i s down. It was down last year. What we do know is that investment projections are going to go further lower this year. It's not just me who is saying that. It's people from the business community who are saying that, and that's the point I wish to make here.

I'm again going back to the whole notion of how you back up the claim that somehow this bill is going to create all these new in- vestments in the community. I fail to see that connec- tion. The minister has so far not provided any informa- tion to actually make that link. Judging on the basis of what other business people, p e o p l e w h o a r e e x p e r t s i n t h a t f i e l d , h a v e t o s a y … . I would like to share this information with the House and then ask the minister questions following from it. Jimmy Pattison.

Everybody knows that Jimmy Pat- tison is a person who is very much involved in a vari- ety of economic development and businesses in British Columbia — elsewhere as well, but let me just stick with British Columbia. When asked about this issue around our global economic uncertainty…. That is also the issue that one must take into consideration on the question around investment, whether small or large investments or otherwise. Here's what Jimmy Pattison has to say. "Judging by the long silence that greets a question on the relatively weak economic performance under the Liberals…." Here's what he has to say.

"'There's a little item out there called the softwood lumber problem,' he says finally, his tone implying that anyone who hasn't noticed the impact of the dispute must be living on another planet. 'We have a lot of struggles in a lot of small towns in B.C.' Pattison, who runs a multibillion-dollar business empire, says B.C.'s main problem is uncertainty about how or when the softwood dispute will be resolved. 'Investment revolves around confidence.'" That's just one example. Then you go on to another statement, from Mark Milke. Here's what he has to say. Milke says it's not just about past reputation.

The Lib- erals themselves are sending some mixed signals about their commitment to a truly open economy. These are individuals who are from the business community, who have something to say — that the piece that ties into all of this is the global economy. You can't just ignore the global economy and say: "Hey, we'll go merrily on our way in our own little silo here, and everything will be fine." It doesn't work that way. Each and every one of these pieces ties together and is interrelated. That's where I think the minister actually fails to make that connection as well. Notwithstanding, notwithstanding….

The minis- ter's going to say: "Hey, you know what? That's an- other thing. That's big business. It's not about small businesses." But within the picture of our economic development, you do have to link all the pieces to- gether in order to see what the picture is. The minister said earlier that he would expect that some 66 small businesses would receive tax credits. I just want to reconfirm that from the minister. Is that new businesses? Is that 66 new businesses that would receive tax credits? Hon. R. Thorpe: Well, I'm going to try to remember all of the points that the member raised over there.

I'm actually going to comment on some of them. I did not say, Mr. Chair, that the member did not know what she was saying or did not know what she was talking about. Actually, only the member knows whether she knows what she's talking about. I can't pass judgment on that, nor would I. Let me just say that when the previous government was here, foreign investment in British Columbia rep- resented about 8 percent. It's now up to 20 percent. I believe that's a positive sign.

Let me also say that with respect to the businesses through the heartlands, 66 or 67 businesses that we would anticipate would have a funding through this…. As I said — t h i s m u s t b e t h e third or fourth time I've said this — because we are raising the limits from $3 million to $5 million, some of those businesses may need…. Some of that funding may go to businesses that are growing because of the

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5333 renewed business climate here in British Columbia, which are actually adding private sector jobs here. It will be a combination of existing and new. [1120] I am actually quite pleased that the member made reference to Mr. Pattison, a well-known British Colum- bia entrepreneur, an entrepreneur who actually knows where you should be doing business today. I just wanted to point out — perhaps the member isn't aware — that Mr.

Pattison is in the process of relocating a business from Manitoba, which I believe has an NDP government, to British Columbia, in the city of Pentic- ton. I want the member to listen carefully. Who is run- ning that business for Mr. Pattison, who is investing in British Columbia, is a former Premier, Glen Clark. He has confidence in British Columbia today. [Applause.] J. Kwan: This is the first time I've heard people cheer for the previous Premier in this House. Actually, part of the job the previous Premier is doing very well for Mr. Pattison is that he expanded his business once he got involved with Mr.

Pattison. You know what? Good on him. He's actually applying his skills in the private sector and increasing the reve- nue for his boss. That's the job he is doing, and he's been doing it ever since he got involved. Let me just be clear. It's not because of this bill. It has nothing to do with this bill and has everything to do with the capa- bilities the previous Premier has engaged with his new boss. That is not the issue here. The issue here is this: the minister likes to claim…. I want to go back to the issue here. You know, all of a sudden Glen Clark is working hard and making money for his boss.

Therefore: "Let's claim that and say it's our credit. It's to the Liberal gov- ernment's credit that Glen Clark is helping Jimmy Pat- tison make money." Help me here. How do you make that link? Setting that aside, the minister said that of the 66 small businesses that would receive tax credits, some would be new and some would be old. What is his percentage breakdown on that? How many does he expect? The crux of the issue here is this: the minister keeps on saying that this new model, this new bill, will bring new investment to the heartlands.

Well, how many jobs, how many new investments, will yield from this bill? Not old investments or existing invest- ments, but how many new ones will it yield? Can he give a simple answer to that, a simple percentage — 50 percent, 60 percent, 80 percent, 20 percent or whatever? A simple answer from the minister would be appreci- ated. Hon. R. Thorpe: Well, I'll try to answer that ques- tion once again, and I'll try to answer it in such a way that the member can understand it. J. Kwan: A simple percentage. Hon. R. Thorpe: Well, I'm actually going to try to give a simple answer.

Our experience is that through these programs, 70 percent have historically been new businesses. If we had 70 new businesses and our his- torical trends stayed in place, that would be 49 new businesses. That's the trend. It comes out once again that the biggest issue with this member is how they believe they should engineer what businesses are going to be brought into British Columbia. They want to engineer how many people are going to work there, and they want to engineer what they're going to make. Our government doesn't operate that way. Our government believes in British Columbians.

Our government believes in the entrepre- neurs and the spirit of creativity and the dreams of those in the heartlands. You know, whether they're existing businesses, 30 percent, or new businesses, 70 percent, what does the member over there have against 2,000 new jobs in the heartlands of British Columbia? [1125] J. Kwan: You know what? For the minister to rise in this House and make claims like he is making that this new bill, Bill 3, will somehow bring millions of dollars in new investments into our communities — into the small communities and rural communities — with nothing with which he can back it up….

There is a problem here. There is a problem with credibility here, w i t h t h i s g o v e r n m e n t . H e ' s u n a b l e t o b a c k u p h i s claims with anything substantive. He's not even able to back up his claim with anything that he can measure his own performance on. That is the issue here. Just yesterday the Premier's office ordered B.C. Stats to do a performance survey on his own caucus.

You would think, on the basis of the need to make sure that there's a performance survey, that the government, this minister, would put some sort of performance measure here on the successes that he claims would be part of the result of this bill. So far we have heard nothing from this minister on that basis, because either (

a) he doesn't know, or (

b) he has no confidence with his bill. Therefore, he doesn't know what the projections would be in terms of the investment climate, in terms of how many new invest- ments would actually be yielded as a result of this bill. He's unable to answer any of those questions. Perhaps lastly is: (

c) all of the above. The minister simply does- n't know, and he's just throwing it out there and wish- ing that somehow these things will materialize. The minister's obviously not going to answer ques- tions, or he doesn't have the answers, because he has no projections whatsoever from his own ministry. Yet he can go out and make these wild claims, as though somehow they're true when, in fact, he has nothing to back it up — zero credibility whatsoever, Mr. Chair. Hon. R. Thorpe: Let me once again try to answer the question.

When I say 66 or 67 businesses in the heartlands will access additional funds, I believe that's a real, quantifiable number — that the target…. J. Kwan: Give us a percentage. What — 50 percent, 40 percent?

5334 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 Hon. R. Thorpe: As I said earlier, and I realize that…. Well, never mind. I did say in my last answer that 70 percent of the businesses are new. That's the historical trend, if the member would care to ac- knowledge that. We did say that. Therefore, that leaves 30 percent which will be existing. Let me just tell you what happened last year. Twelve new VCCs registered in the province of British Columbia. That raised just slightly more than $8 mil- lion in seven small businesses located in the heartlands of British Columbia, creating 140 jobs.

Now, you can't get much more real numbers than that. Our govern- ment has confidence in British Columbians, and appar- ently the member over there doesn't. This bill is not about picking winners and losers; this bill is about cre- ating opportunities for all British Columbians so that they can have access to funds, they can have access to capital, they can finance their ideas, and they can fi- nance their dreams and create jobs in their community. J. Kwan: Well, we'll measure that. We will measure that. The Chair: I'd like to remind the member that I'm calling on

section 1 of Bill 3. J. Kwan: Yes, we'll measure the minister's answer on the basis that he says, out of those 66 businesses that will receive credits, that some 70 percent would be new investments. We'll measure the government's response and see whether or not that materializes. We will look to see whether or not this bill actually adds — as a re- sult of this bill directly — to new investments in British Columbia and particularly, as the minister claims, in the heartlands. I hope that it does. I want to be very clear that I hope it does and that there will be new eco- nomic activities to all British Columbia.

I can tell you t h a t i n P r i n c e R u p e r t , a s o n e c o m m u n i t y a l o n e , t h e i r unemployment rate is at 60 percent — six-zero, hon. Chair. That is significant in terms of the impact for the communities here. I hope that somehow the govern- ment will do something about that to turn that around. The lumber industry, what's happening with soft- wood lumber, is directly related to some of the many, many troubles our communities are dealing with.

We d o n e e d t o l o o k f o r d i f f e r e n t w a y s o f t r a n s i t i o n a n d different ways of economic activities. [1130] It's not the opposition who says the economic trend is going down. It is people in the area, economic ex- perts, who are saying that, who are projecting that eco- nomic activities are going to go down. The GDP growth, as I mentioned earlier, in yesterday's report from the Conference Board shows that we're number ten behind P.E.I. under the Liberal government's ad- ministration.

Economists say that investment is ex- pected to go down by 3 percent under the Liberal gov- ernment's administration and that it went down last year. Investments went down last year under the Lib- eral administration. The opposition will look to see how that turns around. Interjection. J. Kwan: No, it's not CCPA — for people who actu- ally like to claim that somehow CCPA is discounted. Ask any credible economists out there, and they will tell you these answers. Pick up a magazine. B.C. Business Magazine tells you that information, not exactly CCPA.

We will look and measure the government's claim and particularly this minister's claim that somehow the investments will actually go up and skyrocket because of this bill. We will look to see whether or not that will actually materialize.

Section 1,

section 1 to

section 19,

section 25 inclu- sive approved. On

section 20,

section 26. Hon. R. Thorpe: I move the amendment to

section 20(

b) standing in my name on the orders of the day. [SECTION 20 (b), by deleting the proposed

section 20 (

b) and substituting the following: (

b) in subsection (2) by striking out "or a grant has been authorized" and by striking out "or grant, as the case may be".] Amendment approved.

Section 20,

section 26 as amended approved.

Section 21,

section 27 to

section 28 inclusive ap- proved. Title approved. Hon. R. Thorpe: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 11:32 a.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 3, Small Business Venture Capital Amendment Act, 2003, reported complete with amendment. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time? Hon. R. Thorpe: With leave, now. Leave granted. Bill 3, Small Business Venture Capital Amendment Act, 2003, read a third time and passed. [1135] Hon. K. Falcon: I call second reading on Bill 12.

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5335 Second Reading of Bills POLICE AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 Hon. R. Coleman: I move that the bill be now read a second time. The Police Amendment Act, 2003, is about PRIME, the Police Records Information Man- agement Environment. I'll have more to say about the bill shortly, but I would like to yield the floor to a member who has travel arrangements to fulfil and does want to speak to the bill. So I will yield the floor now and take my spot with leave later. D.

MacKay: I would like to rise at this time and speak in support of Bill 12, entitled the Police Amend- ment Act. But before I get to the reasons why I'm sup- porting the bill, I think it's important that the province look back at the history of where we are going with policing in this province. I want to take you back to 1962, when I arrived in this province. I arrived in British Columbia as a 19- year-old police officer for my first posting in Nanaimo. I'm going to jump to today's computers that we have on our desks; we have this cut-and-paste program that allows us to move stuff around, thanks to technology.

Well, back in 1962 we also had cut-and-paste, literally cut-and-paste, because information was received through the mail. In those days we received sheets of photographs, and they were all on one sheet of paper. We received another sheet of paper that had the information relat- ing to the photographs we had received. Because I was the junior man at the detachment in Nanaimo, it was my duty on night shift to cut and paste.

With a pair of scissors I would cut the photographs out, and then I would cut and paste the information that was con- tained on a separate sheet and put them together, and then the data was filed away for retrieval. So that was cut-and-paste. The information we received was probably weeks or months old by the time it actually got into the filing system for retrieval, to be used for what it was intended — to assist in police work and for the apprehension of criminals. But I've got to go back again to 1962. When I ar- rived in Nanaimo, we did not have radios in the police cars.

We would drive around Nanaimo, and we would look for lights — blue lights — on top of certain build- ings. When the blue light was on, we then had to go find a phone to phone the detachment to find out why they wanted us. It was terrible. If you happened to miss the blue light or if the blue light was burned out, you could spend your whole shift never responding to a call, even though you were wanted. But there was no…. An Hon. Member: There was no Tim Horton's? D. MacKay: Tim Horton's did not exist either. There was no way for the office to get a hold of us in those days, so it was a bit of a challenge.

The blue light was a critical part of police work in those days because we didn't have radios or telephones. And tele- phones were difficult to find in the middle of the night; they weren't all over the place like they are today. So it was a bit of a problem trying to do police work back in the 1960s. Eventually the police cars did receive radios, and we were able to talk to the office and we were dispatched. But we were still in the dark ages, because we were still relying on information that was distributed throughout the province through a

section called the crime index

section in Vancouver. That in- formation was all gathered. The police departments all reported major crimes and crimes of interest to the crime index section. They would gather that informa- tion and distribute it throughout the province by mail. So the information we received was quite old, and of- ten it was useless by the time it was received. That's the way it worked years ago.

Finally, when the police cars became equipped with radios, we started looking at radios for members on foot patrol so that the members did have some contact with the office and some contact with the members in police vehicles when they were needed. [1140] Then, in the late sixties, we had this technology marvel called CPIC come on stream. It was a computer system that allowed for the input of data with serial numbers for names of wanted people, and it was avail- able across Canada. But it was only available in the office.

If you had a name that you wanted to check, you would call in the name and as many descriptive fea- tures that you had on the individual, and a radio op- erator at the CPIC terminal would then check the name. It was never foolproof, because there was no pho- tograph to make sure that the person on the street that you were talking to and querying was in fact the per- son that was identified through what we called a CPIC hit. There was a suggestion that a person with that name was in fact wanted. There was no way of tying those two together.

Stolen property was also put on the Canadian Po- lice Information Centre, but it had to have serial num- bers attached to it. That moved a lot of stolen property from the criminal element back to the rightful owners, because if people took the time to put the serial num- bers down and retain them and they were later the victim of a crime, we were able to put that data into the CPIC bank. If a person in Vancouver had property sto- len from them, and they decided to drive to Prince Rupert to get rid of it….

If the Vancouver police en- tered that stolen property on CPIC, and a member in Williams Lake checked the piece of equipment driving through Williams Lake a couple days later and they ran the serial number, quite often the property was recovered. We were moving ahead. Technology was moving ahead, making police work a lot easier in this province. Stolen vehicles. When I got to Prince George in 1965, we had a chalk board there, and that's how we kept track of stolen licence plates. We had two columns that we had to match up. We'd have 20 or 30 cars stolen

5336 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 in an evening, and it was a bit of chore keeping track on the boards where the cars were stolen from. We d i d n ' t k n o w i f t h e y w e r e s t o l e n f r o m V a n c o u v e r . W e just kept track of the ones in Prince George. I can remember sitting down at a computer termi- nal the first time. I'd come in from night shift, and I had s o m e l i c e n c e p l a t e s w r i t t e n d o w n i n m y b o o k , a n d I wanted to check to see if they were stolen.

I couldn't believe the excitement when I sat down and typed in that licence plate number and got a hit. It meant the vehicle had been stolen. My goodness, the technology was moving ahead in leaps and bounds, and it was great. It allowed us to do police work faster and better for the people of this province. At the same time, we were able to track crime sta- tistics by community, by province, by region. We could look to see what the trends were — whether there was an increase in auto thefts or an increase in break and enters — and it helped us track what was happening throughout the province.

Moving ahead, I think everybody knows today that the cost of crime is costing the taxpayer huge sums of money. Just as an example, the average cost to hire one police officer in this province — one man per year — is roughly $100,000. That's a ballpark figure. It is an ex- pensive operation but a necessary one. I expect the municipal police departments are probably looking at similar costs. With this new program that the Solicitor General has introduced today, the capital cost of this program is going to be covered by the province.

We are going to look after the capital cost for this new pro- gram that the Solicitor General talks about and that is mentioned in Bill 12. I wanted to give you a little bit of history of what it was like working in this province 40 years ago as a police officer and where we're going today and the technology and what it's doing to make police work a lot easier in this province. In this province today we have very many dedicated, professional, well-educated people on the front line doing police work to make our streets safer for us. Can we do more to help them with those jobs?

We certainly can, and one of the things we're doing today is the introduction of Bill 12 to put PRIME in the police vehicles and in every police office across British Columbia. Every police officer, regardless of where they are, regardless of which police department they're with, is going to be connected with one another all the time. They're going to be able to exchange information back and forth.

That's what police work is all about: gather- ing information, deciphering what that information means and acting on it. [1145] I have been fortunate, having lived in British Co- l u m b i a n o w f o r 4 0 y e a r s , t o h a v e s e e n s o m e o f t h e changes and the technology and what it's doing to make our streets much safer for the people of this prov- ince. We in British Columbia are a leader in crime fight- ing. We are a leader in technology in Canada, and I suspect we are going to see other provinces looking at what we are doing in this province to combat crime.

As the member for Peace River North always says: "More good news." Bill 12 is, in fact, good news. It's good news for the taxpayers. It's good news for the police officers. It is bad news for the criminals. For the criminal element in this province, you should know that this piece of tech- nology is going to do wonders. It's going to allow po- lice officers sitting in a car anywhere in this province, because they're all going to be connected, to pull up a photograph of an individual if, in fact, their name comes up on a hit to suggest they might be wanted. There's no more second-guessing.

Photographs are going to be available. This thing is going to do so much for police work. People who are in the criminal element should maybe have a second look and maybe look for a second career, because this is going to do wonderful things. I applaud the Solicitor General. I look forward to the results of this bill and the results of the PRIME pro- gram that will be introduced into this province and what it will do to combat crime. Hon. R. Coleman: I thank the House for agreeing to allow the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine to have the opportunity to speak, since he has to be at another responsibility.

This is an exciting moment in the history of British Columbia in policing. The legislation we are consider- ing here today creates a framework for the manage- ment and use of a new police records information m a n a g e m e n t s y s t e m t h a t w e c a l l P R I M E . P R I M E i s a multi-jurisdictional, integrated information-sharing system designed to provide timely, accurate, accessible and comprehensive information to police and other justice partners. It is in real time. Input into this system when it is up and running….

Within five minutes any- where in the province, information by a suspicious roadside check will be on the computer terminal of every police officer in the province. They will start to break down barriers for investigations of serious crime and minor crime in British Columbia. Under the legislation, police agencies will be re- quired to use one platform to serve as a common in- formation management system. PRIME will integrate police information from the lower mainland, the lower Island and the heartlands of British Columbia, and will be the first integrated system of its kind in British Co- lumbia.

Not only is PRIME itself a system that we've t e s t e d a n d w e k n o w w o r k s , t h e b i g s t e p h e r e i s w h a t we're doing today with the future of policing. The big step is this: you cannot find a jurisdiction in this coun- try or that I can find in the United States where all law enforcement police agencies are on one system, one system where there are no barriers and where informa- tion in real time will be passed through to each other. That's the big breakthrough. It's not the technology.

We can find technology platforms that work in other juris- dictions, and we can apply it to policing in British Co- lumbia. What's important is that the Vancouver city police, the Delta city police, the Richmond RCMP, the

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5337 Prince George RCMP, the Penticton RCMP, and so on, are all on the same system. The member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine talked a moment ago about some of the changes in policing — when they first got their radios and then moving on to when they got portable radios and so on.

One of the challenges in policing in his era of policing, which was some time ago and over a 28-year period as I under- stand it, was that even when we got radio communica- tion in policing, the biggest problem was that they couldn't talk to each other. [1150] I can remember a hostage-taking in the city of Cal- gary where a person was taken hostage. The Calgary city police were following the car. There had been shots fired at a gas station. The RCMP were picking up the file to support it as it came out of the city and went right across the southern portion of Alberta into Saskatche- wan.

You know how the police officers communicated even though they both had radios? They weren't on the same frequency, so the radio rooms in the two police departments were talking by phone and relaying the information from the police officer in the field back and forth so they knew what the other cars were doing. What that creates is silos, barriers, inefficiencies and the ability for criminals to have an advantage over po- lice. That's not acceptable.

The step we're taking that is bold with regard to this legislation is that we're standing up and saying: "Sorry, folks, you don't get to go get your own mouse- trap; you don't get to make your own choice. We have PRIME in B.C. — period." No other police department can go and have a different information management environment. It has to be PRIME, it has to be inte- grated, it has to work in real time, and it has to be built on a platform that can build for the future of technology in the province. We think we've got all of that. In addition to that, we are actually changing how people will look at policing.

We know PRIME works. We tested it in Vancouver, Richmond and Port Moody. We also know that it was the system that did the 2002 Olympics in Utah. It's the system that's being used in Tampa Bay, Florida, for their police department. We know where this system works. It's just that nobody has ever taken the step to say it is the one system for policing so that you can't have those barriers that exist. In Alberta the information management between the Calgary city police and the RCMP doesn't exist. In our province it will exist between all our departments.

As we move forward and they see the success of the system, I wouldn't be surprised if other jurisdictions take this bold step. There are two portions of the step they have to make. First, they have to identify the sys- tem and they have to legislate it as being the system, which is what we're doing today. Second, in order to m a k e i t w o r k , y o u h a v e t o h a v e p e o p l e i n y o u r g o v - ernment that have the temerity to actually decide to spend the money to make it happen.

When I identified PRIME as the system, as the So- licitor General, through working with my ministry, the first challenge I knew I would face was that somebody was going to say: "We're not taking it, because we don't want to pay for it." Then we would have a hole in the middle of information management and policing in the province.

Even during times of tough economic times and cuts, I went to Treasury Board and asked them to fund the system provincewide — that the province would pay for it so that we could have the system in the field and it could be integrated completely into policing and there would be no excuse for not doing it. They saw that vision too, and as a result of seeing that vision, we are funding PRIME in B.C. The nice thing about PRIME is that the computer systems that exist in our police cars today can handle PRIME. We don't have to go buy a bunch more equip- ment to make this thing work.

This thing will work, and we'll roll it out in the entire province. We'll be fin- ished between 18 and 24 months from now. We already have the teams working on the different rollouts within the province that will go forward. Without an integrated system, there's a lack of tim- ing and accurate information, often making effective policing very difficult. In addition, there is currently no ability to conduct crime analysis to identify trends or types of problems within and amongst communities.

This kind of analysis would allow police to effectively target resources, to use the personnel they have effec- tively and to deal with crime effectively and not be hit- or-miss on how they can get their performance. Police departments do not all have the same inves- tigative and information management capabilities to- day. PRIME provides all police officers, regardless of location or department size, with the same extensive information management and investigative capabilities of any other department.

The central problem today is that systems used in B.C. agencies, both RCMP and municipal agencies, cannot provide the comprehensive information necessary to implement contemporary policing strategies such as problem solving, commu- nity policing and integrated investigations. You heard the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine talking about cut-and-paste. Well, he wasn't kidding.

Even today in many jurisdictions, if there is a rash of break-ins with a trend in one area of the lower mainland, the information doesn't necessarily flow to the other areas of the lower mainland so they can track that trend or look for suspects or have informa- tion they could use at the street level.

We're changing that. [1155] To achieve true multi-jurisdictional information sharing by police agencies and other justice partners requires police agencies to use a common records man- agement system and to publish key information con- cerning offenders, cases and incidents in a form that other agencies can query and analyze. That's what PRIME is about to do. It is something else when you see it in operation and you see what other things can be added onto its abilities. PRIME will solve many of the current prob- lems inherent within the current police information

5338 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 management environment and the investigative man- agement of crime. With PRIME, critical information can be communicated instantly, allowing police to match similarities between different crimes. It will improve the basis for their effective communication. Down the road, I envision PRIME hooking directly to the national sex offender registry and other national crime-fighting databases.

PRIME will give us the ability in the prov- ince to build our own sex offender registry if the fed- eral government doesn't meet us the halfway that we need them to meet with us to make a national sex of- fender registry work. As I said earlier, we know PRIME works. For the last two years we have run pilot projects in three B.C. locations: Vancouver, Port Moody and Richmond. There are a number of examples of how that can work. I will tell you those examples. But noting the time, I will break here, and I will move adjournment of debate. Hon. R. Coleman moved adjournment of debate. Motion approved.

Committee of Supply A, having reported resolu- tions, was granted leave to sit again. Hon. K. Falcon moved adjournment of the House. Motion approved. The House adjourned at 11:57 a.m. PROCEEDINGS IN THE DOUGLAS FIR ROOM Committee of Supply The House in Committee of Supply A; T. Christen- sen in the chair. The committee met at 10:08 a.m. ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF FINANCE (continued) On vote 23: ministry operations, $39,249,000 (con- tinued). J. MacPhail: Yesterday we wrapped up, I believe, talking about premium lifts, etc. What I'm now inter- ested in, then, is….

From what I understand, there was $181 million of revenue that flowed to the corporation as a result of premium increases. How many vehicles were insured at the end of 2001, and how many vehi- cles were insured at the end of 2002 with ICBC? Just so the minister knows the direction I'm going in here, I'm curious to know if he could break that down between optional and…. Sorry, I've lost it about…. What is it? Hon. G. Collins: Mandatory. J. MacPhail: Is it "mandatory"? Is that the word? Interjection. J. MacPhail: Okay, yeah.

The breakdown of that, 2001 versus the end of 2002, on both the optional and basic. [1010] Hon. G. Collins: I'll try to get a breakout between optional and basic, but overall Autoplan policies…. In 2001 there were 2.661 million. In 2002 it was 2.705 mil- lion. Those are numbers rounded to the thousand — so 2.661 million to 2.705 million. J. MacPhail: How does that compare? That's an increase of about 44,000 policies. How does that com- pare historically? Hon. G. Collins: I'm looking back. I have numbers going back as far as 1998. Where are we here? Number of policies.

It was 2.552 in 1998; 2.572 in 1999; in 2000 it was 2.614. You can sort of see how that goes back over five years. It gives you a bit of a trajectory. I'm just pulling the numbers for basic and optional. Basic: in 2001 there were 1.47 million. In 2002, 1.618 million. That was basic. In 2001 optional was 1.029 mil- lion. In 2002 it was 1.141 million. I just want to be clear. The numbers I gave for basic and optional are dollar figures, and they are in billions. They're not numbers of policies. I'm advised they don't break it out. J. MacPhail: T hi s m ay b e an are a i n w hi c h I c o m - mend the government.

I mean this seriously: ICBC is flourishing. But I am curious to know…. As I recall, part of the change that was announced was that the corporation would be moving toward permitting greater competition in the optional area. Perhaps that's not the right way of saying it. They would properly price the optional coverage, which would make it competitive but not an advantage. I see here that there's a change of about 120 million in optional coverage. Perhaps the minister could ex- plain the trend around optional coverage, which has either been encouraged or…. Let me just make this clear.

The trend in optional coverage with ICBC, as opposed to private coverage: how has that changed or remained the same in 2002? Hon. G. Collins: It has pretty well remained the same. There hasn't been a big upturn or downturn in that. The goal of the restructuring of ICBC and the re- s u l t o f c o r e r e v i e w i s t o c r e a t e a h e a l t h y m a r k e t i n a competitive marketplace on the optional side. This will be the regulator's role: to determine and ensure that the

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5339 costs associated with optional are reflected in the op- tional side and the costs associated with basic are re- flected in the basic side. Then the pricing should take care of itself on the competitiveness side. The goal there is to ensure that there is no cross- subsidization one way or the other between optional and basic and also to look at non-financial barriers to competition, to make sure that ICBC isn't using its vir- tual monopoly, even on the optional side — about 95 percent of the market — to behave in a way that is un- fair or uncompetitive.

That is the mandate we will be giving to the regulator, and that will be their role. J. MacPhail: Are those objectives reflected in any- thing in 2002, or are we anticipating that this year? [1015] Hon. G. Collins: That will be part of the core re- view that we rolled out toward the end of ICBC's last fiscal year, which ended December 31. That has not been implemented yet. I know that ICBC is preparing for it; at least I hope they're preparing for it. I'm sure they are. The regulator will receive legislative structure early this spring.

There will be directions given to the regulator, and then there will be a process that starts. I expect that will take some time to sort itself through. It's not going to happen overnight. I know that private insurers will want to make a representation as to what they think should happen. I know ICBC will certainly want to make a representa- tion as to what they think the market should look like — w h a t s h o u l d b e i n a n d w h a t s h o u l d b e o u t , e t c . I expect that advocates for the motoring public will also have comments on that.

As well, probably, individual British Columbians will have comments. That will be part of the process the regulator will undertake. The goal, obviously, is to have a very healthy, very com- petitive market on the optional side — where there is choice, where there is service and where there is ap- propriate pricing. That's the goal. J. MacPhail: I s M r . N i c k G e e r s t i l l t h e C E O a n d chair? Is that a permanent appointment now? Hon. G. Collins: Nick was brought in as the chair of the corporation.

When Kevin Benson left, it was de- termined, for an interim period of time anyway — there was a lot of uncertainty around ICBC as the core review was being done — that rather than go out and search for another CEO when you may have a period of fairly significant transition and volatility at the cor- poration…. It might be difficult to attract the calibre of CEO we needed, given that. Until this settled out and we knew what the corporation was going to look like, it was determined that for a transition period, Nick Geer would take on the job of CEO as well. The goal is still to find a permanent CEO.

The board, as well as government, will be part of determining when the best time is to do that. J. MacPhail: Will that be this year? Hon. G. Collins: Obviously — and government's policy around board governance has been — we don't like to have the chair and the CEO be the same person. Just as a board process, you will see that a board gov- ernance philosophy has evolved in both the private and public sectors over the last number of years. That's a goal you see even happening in the private sector: to keep the chair and CEO as separate individuals for accountability purposes.

Our goal is to do that as soon as it is practical and as soon as we can get the right person for the job. J. MacPhail: Yes, I'm well aware of it — except the two largest Crown corporations now have chairs that are CEOs: ICBC and B.C. Hydro. I'd like an update on the no-fault portion of benefits around access to no-fault benefits — the uptake in 2001 versus 2002. Secondly, what kind of community out- reach or community advisory system is in place to en- sure the allocation of these benefits? Hon. G. Collins: Two questions. First of all, there have been no changes to the no-fault benefits that exist within ICBC.

As far as the uptake, I think it's pretty much the same, as far as we can tell. [1020] With regard to the outreach, there is a president's advisory committee, which is somewhat longstanding at ICBC, I think. It has been around for a while any- way. The chair has met with them both prior to and post–core review to get their input. As the member knows, having been minister before, it is made up of a whole bunch of stakeholder groups: health care pro- viders, brokers, etc. There really have been no changes there. J.

MacPhail: Am I to understand that when the minister says there's no change, it means that there's no change on how one qualifies for no-fault benefits? Hon. G. Collins: That's correct. J. MacPhail: I assume it's controversy-free. Hon. G. Collins: You never know, but nothing has changed. We haven't changed anything. You would think if status quo were controversy-free, then the an- swer, I guess, would be yes. J. MacPhail: I'm interested in CounterAttack pro- grams and the safe roads programs of ICBC. Could I have an update, please, on the amounts spent in the year '02 versus what's planned for '03? Hon. G.

Collins: I'm just breaking out the question for the member. The CounterAttack spending in 2001 was $8.9 million. The same amount was budgeted in 2002. However, we have had somewhat protracted negotiations with the RCMP and municipal police forces as to how they were going to implement that. As a result, the actual expenditures are about $4.7 million

5340 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 for 2002. The budget for 2003, I'm assuming, is still around $9 million. We've concluded most of those agreements towards the end of last year, if not all of them, and we expect a full expenditure of the budget in 2003. J. MacPhail: The budget is going to stay at $8.99 million for '03? Hon. G. Collins: The answer is yes. The amount budgeted is expected to be the same. We are in negotia- tions with the Solicitor General and the RCMP to see if we can arrange a longer-term contract.

The intention is that that will be the same sort of an expenditure over a period of time. J. MacPhail: Yeah, well I'm assuming it will be $9 million for the year '03. Road Sense, beyond CounterAttack. What's the budget for Road Sense? Safe roads I guess it's called now, isn't it? [1025] Hon. G. Collins: The forecast for 2002 as at Decem- ber 10— so we get towards the end of the year. It's not a final number. The forecast is that we will have spent about $37 million. The budget for 2003 is $47 million. J. MacPhail: What will the increased $10 million be allocated for? Hon. G.

Collins: The number I gave for 2002, which was toward year-end, was below budget, and the number was $37 million. I'm trying to find out what the budget number was for 2002, but I think it was around $47 million as well, so there's some under- spending in 2002 — one of the examples I gave the member. The intention is that the plan for 2003 will continue with sort of a normal budget for road safety. J. MacPhail: Does the number of $47 million for '03 include the $9 million for CounterAttack? Hon. G. Collins: Yes. J.

MacPhail: S o a b o u t h a l f o f t h a t u n d e r s p e n d i n g for '02 in all-over road safety programs is because of protracted negotiations. Where did the rest of the un- derspending occur? That's kind of like: where did the money not get spent? Hon. G. Collins: The other portion of that is just that as the road safety programs went through a re- view — as all of ICBC did, as the member knows — there was some major downsizing of the corporation and reductions in staff and individuals programs.

I think when Kevin Benson was there — I can't remem- ber the number — there were a huge number of pro- jects underway. What he wanted to do, and I remem- ber him speaking to me about this, was to make sure the projects that were underway were actually getting us maximum efficiency, etc. I know there was a review that went on. There was about a 26 percent reduction in costs in the corporation over the last little while and a 20 percent reduction in staff since 2000, so some pretty big changes at ICBC. As a result, there was underspending.

The other portion of that underspending would have been caused by that, but we're not reducing the budget. The budget is going to be $47 million. It will be spent, probably, on slightly different things or different projects where we think we can get better value, but the budget remains at $47 mil- lion. [1030] J. MacPhail: I'd like an update on the motor vehicle branch portion of ICBC's services in terms of integra- tion.

I remember having a discussion — I can't remem- ber under which government, and it could have been yours or mine — about program outreach, services outreach that may return money to the motor vehicle branch, etc. What's the financial status of the motor vehicle branch portion of the ICBC services? Hon. G. Collins: The motor vehicle branch side for driver services and then commercial vehicles — so they're sort of two separate components — in 2001, was about $67 million in expenditures. That declined by about 15-ish percent in 2002 to about $56 million.

That was just reflective of the overall efficiencies and the reductions in costs at ICBC. The FTEs went down, as well, by a smaller percent- age, around 4 percent reduction in the staff for 2001- 2002. One of the key areas, certainly in the driver ser- vices, would have been the graduated licence program up and running. Now that it is running, the costs of running it on an ongoing basis are less as well. It's an example of the kinds of things that are happening. J. MacPhail: Do the increased fees for drivers' li- cences go to ICBC or into general revenue? Hon. G.

Collins: The increase in the licence fee is c o l l e ct e d b y I C BC . I t i s re m it te d t o g o v e rnm e nt . It i s t o help with some of the costs we have in Solicitor General with just managing some of those pressures that come from the motor vehicle side, enforcement, etc. That was the intent. ICBC collects the fee and it is remitted to gov- ernment, as they do now with all of those fees. J. MacPhail: Is ICBC committing any of ICBC's re- sources to road upgrades, road improvement any- where in the province? Hon. G. Collins: Yes, about $10 million.

That's been an ongoing budget, and what ICBC measures to de- termine — this is the longstanding principle — is that they have to be able to see that they're going to get a $2 savings in reduced claims for every dollar they invest. They look for, as the member knows, particular inter- sections where there may be a problem or a high-

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5341 accident area, in an effort to try and get their costs down. They participate in that. That has gone on for some time, and I do recall the chair of ICBC presenting at open cabinet a couple of times, mentioning that it is getting harder and harder to find those. They've sort of dealt with the low-hanging fruit and the intersections that were really problematic, and it's getting harder and harder to find those investments where you know you're going to get back that guaranteed flowback. J.

MacPhail: How much of the budget for the next two years of ICBC is committed to changes on the Sea to Sky Highway? Hon. G. Collins: To my knowledge, none. J. MacPhail: Was there any money spent on the Sea to Sky Highway in '02-03? Hon. G. Collins: I'm advised no, but we're going to check that out and just make sure. We'll get back to the member on that. J. MacPhail: My last question…. Hon. G. Collins: We think there might have been some. But as I said, I'll find the number and get it to the member. [1035] J. MacPhail: My questions would be for '02-03, '03- 04 and '04-05.

My last question, depending on the answer, is about systems update in terms of changes to informa- tion systems at ICBC in '02 and plans for '03. Hon. G. Collins: Last year it was about $5 million across ICBC, and in 2003 the forecast is that it will be about $16 million. There is a major upgrade of the computer hardware and software to about $11 million coming in this year, in 2003. J. MacPhail: In terms of BCPSEA, which is the B.C. Public School Employers Association, will there be…? There's membership in that association of people who are not elected. When do you anticipate changes there? Hon. G.

Collins: There are five people on the board that are, I guess, government. One is the past president — in this case, it's Ken Denike. It's not a voting posi- tion; he doesn't vote. Then there are four government board members that we appoint. There were changes done in the fall of 2002 to those four positions. J. MacPhail: Who's the president? Hon. G. Collins: The new president is Ron Chris- tensen. He's the board member from the Kootenays. J. MacPhail: What's the status of the review of bar- gaining structure in the K-to-12 system? Hon. G.

Collins: Actually, under Bill 28 last year, that was something the Minister of Labour took on — looking at public sector bargaining in the K-to-12 sys- tem. That question would be more appropriately put to him. I'm not dictating that or running that; that's some- thing he's determining. We certainly give him our opinion and our advice, but I'm sure he's getting opin- ion and advice from elsewhere. I don't know the cur- rent status of it. I expect he's working on it. [1040] J. MacPhail: Perhaps the minister could tell me what collective agreements will be expiring in the K-to- 12 sector in the next 15 months. Hon.

G. Collins: As the member is probably aware, the support staff contract is up June 30, 2003. On June 30, 2004, the teachers' contract is up. J. MacPhail: I'm interested to know. It would seem to me that the bargaining strategy of government would be related to the bargaining structure. We are 15 m o n t h s a w a y f r o m t h e e x p i r y d a t e o f a c o l l e c t i v e agreement that will be affected, I assume, by a review. Does the Minister of Skills Development and Labour then report to BCPSEA? How does that work? How does the mandate get set for bargaining of a group?

I assume that by "support staff," the minister means CUPE and operating engineers, etc. There are about 30,000 employees there, as I understand. Hon. G. Collins: First of all, the support staff in the K-to-12 system includes about 19,000 FTEs represented by CUPE, about 24,000 full- and part-time employees. There's that. The teachers are about 40,000 full- and part-time — 28,000 FTEs. The mandate for negotiation is set by me through PSEC. I'm not going to discuss that in this venue be- cause it's obviously a bargaining mandate.

The struc- ture and the rules within which all that happens is the purview of the Minister of Labour, and I'm sure he's aware of the time line. However, the support staff bar- gaining process was not part of Bill 28. It was the teachers' bargaining that was part of Bill 28, and that contract expires in June 2004. J. MacPhail: Will the bargaining structure for '03, K-to-12 support staff, be board by board? Hon. G. Collins: The same process remains in place. BCPSEA oversees it, but they delegate it to local boards. They will be monitoring it, but it's still board by board. Nothing's changed there. J.

MacPhail: In terms of mandate for negotiations across the public sector, the fiscal plan says zero-zero- and-zero in '03-04, '04-05 and '05-06. Is that across all sectors, including commercial Crowns? Hon. G. Collins: Any entity or Crown where gov- ernment appoints board members would be under that

5342 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 mandate. The answer to the member's question, I guess, is yes. J. MacPhail: The zero compensation for three years. Is that across government or across unionized employ- ees? Hon. G. Collins: It's the mandate for collective agreements. J. MacPhail: W h a t i s t h e a l l o c a t i o n f o r r a i s e s f o r non–collective agreement employees? [1045] Hon. G. Collins: It's zero as well, unless there is some area where there's a need for market adjustment. That applies on the collective agreement side as well. For example,

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0306am 08
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0306am 08
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0fd80ba60f22a4678128e88b68fc906cde554865

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).