2001 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 37th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 2001

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 2, Number 17

CONTENTS

Routine

Proceedings

Time

Introductions by Members

Skills Development and Labour

Statutes Amendment Act, 2001 (Bill 18).

Hon. G. Bruce

Introduction and first reading

Oral Questions

Government action on U.S. decision on

Canadian softwood lumber exports

J. MacPhail

Skilled labour shortage

K. Manhas

Community enterprise grant for Horsefly

J. MacPhail

Home care services

J. Bray

Programs and services for victims of

domestic violence

V. Anderson

Transition house funding

V. Anderson

Proceedings in

Section B

Committee of Supply

Ministry of Provincial Revenue estimates.

Hon. B. Barisoff

Vote 39: Ministry operations

MacPhail

Hon. G.

Collins

Ministry of Health Planning estimates.

Hon. S. Hawkins

Vote 32: Ministry operations

Hon. S.

Hawkins

MacPhail

Introductions by Members

Committee of Supply

Ministry of Health Planning estimates

continued.

Vote 32: Ministry operations

MacPhail

Hon. S.

Hawkins

Proceedings in

Section A

Committe of Supply

Ministries of Sustainable Resource

Management; Water, Land and Air Protection;

Forests estimates.

Vote 53: Environmental

boards and Forest Appeals

Commission

Ministry of Energy and Mines estimates.

Hon. R. Neufeld

Vote 25: Ministry operations

Hon. R.

Neufeld

D. MacKay

B. Penner

Vote 26: British Columbia

Utilities Comission

Vote 27: Resource

revenue-sharing agreement

[ Page 507 ]

TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 2001

The House

met at 2:03 p.m.

Introductions by Members

Weisbeck: I'd like to welcome Sheila Marshall along with her two daughters,

a couple of future politicians, Dorothy and Belle, visiting from Kelowna. Would

the House please make them welcome.

Penner: It's a pleasure today for me to introduce a number of constituents

visiting here in Victoria. John and Fay Kovacs of Chilliwack are here along with

their friends Mr. and Mrs. Haywood. I know they had lunch today courtesy of the

member for Chilliwack-Sumas while I was a guest of yours, Mr. Speaker, in the

dining room. Would the House please make these people welcome.

Trumper: It's my pleasure today to introduce three people from Red Deer,

Alberta, who are my greatest fans: my daughter Carolyn Trumper, who is a

registered nurse in Red Deer and who was very interested in the contract that

has just been settled, and her two daughters and my two granddaughters, Alysha

and Melissa Zimmer. Please welcome them.

Anderson: I'd ask the House to welcome Clayton Shultz from Vancouver.

Clayton is a very important

part in my being able to be here. He was the

auditor in both the '96 election and the last election — a very important

person.

Introduction of Bills

[1405]

SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AND LABOUR

STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2001

Hon.

G. Bruce presented a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill

intituled Skills Development and Labour Statutes Amendment Act, 2001.

Hon. G.

Bruce: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. G.

Bruce: This bill, Bill 18, delivers on four of our new-era 90-day

commitments: to restore education as an essential service, to restore the secret

ballot for union certification, to end mandatory sectorwide bargaining and to

restore retirees' pension rights.

Mr.

Speaker, this bill puts children first. It will restore education as an

essential service under the Labour Code to ensure that no child's right to an

education is denied during school strikes and lockouts.

It will

also restore British Columbians' democratic right to a secret ballot vote on

certification under the Labour Code and ensure that the same rules apply for

certification as for decertification.

It will end

mandatory sectoral bargaining in the unionized construction sector.

Part 4.1 of

the Labour Code, which establishes sectoral bargaining provisions for the

construction sector, will be repealed.

We will

also, with this bill, restore individuals' right to their pensions by repealing

the law that allows some pension plans to suspend pension benefits for early

retirees who choose to continue working in their previous field of employment.

This bill

fulfils a number of commitments we made to British Columbians. It does so in a

way that is fair and is balanced. It will help protect the interests of children

and pensioners in British Columbia and help to restore democracy in our

workplaces. It will provide a much-needed signal that British Columbia's economy

is once again on the move.

I move that

the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next

sitting of the House after today.

Bill 18

introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for

second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON U.S. DECISION

ON CANADIAN SOFTWOOD LUMBER EXPORTS

MacPhail: It's becoming clear that the Minister of Forests does not yet have

a plan to protect jobs in light of the countervail decision. He is quoted as

saying: "The process is rigged, and there's nothing we can do about

it." Well, I wonder: if it's rigged, how is it then that the maritime

provinces managed to get an exemption from the duty? Perhaps it has less to do

with process than with approach. To the Minister of Finance: is he prepared

today to consider the option of issuing a provincial bond to cover companies

that cannot secure a bond to keep their operations open?

Hon. G.

Collins: Just for the information of the member opposite, who served in this

capacity previously, the Maritimes have always had an exemption through all of

this process because they are private lands. I'm unsure why she's asking the

question if she already knows the answer. We are obviously looking at whatever

it takes to make sure that our forest sector continues to operate in as

undisrupted a way as possible. Government is open to considering many options,

and perhaps the federal government may play a role in some of those options as

well. We're certainly encouraging them to do that also.

[1410]

Certainly,

we will look at every opportunity, and consider it seriously, to help the forest

sector do well in British Columbia, to help fight this unjust ruling by the

commerce department in the United States. And

[ Page 508 ]

believe you me, government will spare no expense, no energy, no effort to try

and make sure that we win this dispute once and for all.

Mr.

Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition with a supplementary question.

MacPhail: The Minister of Finance recognizes that the Maritimes have special

circumstances and got an exemption. What we're saying is that this government

should be arguing the special circumstances existing here in British Columbia,

and to date they have not. I also note he didn't commit to a provincial bond.

The process is not rigged; it's political. British Columbia needs to provide

political action that will catch the attention of the Americans.

Today the

Silvertree Mill in Vancouver is shut down, laying off 124 workers. The future of

other operations is in jeopardy. All the minister can say is…. The Minister of

Forests has said that he's worried that some companies will be unable to secure

bonds to cover the duty, and the Minister of Finance is now saying: "Let

the federal government show leadership."

It's time

for the government of British Columbia to show leadership. A provincial bond can

provide that leadership. It can neutralize the effects of the duty. Why is the

Minister of Finance not prepared to assist companies in securing bonds?

An Hon.

Member: Because you bankrupted us.

MacPhail: Did you hear what he said?

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order, please.

Hon. G.

Collins: I'm glad the member opposite is paying as much attention to what

members behind her say. I wish she'd pay more attention to what I've just said.

This

government will take into consideration every opportunity to assist and to help

the forest sector of British Columbia weather this storm, to make sure that

communities that are affected by it have government help in order to get through

that. And we will spare, as I said, no energy, no expense, no effort to make

sure that British Columbia wins this dispute once and for all.

Mr.

Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition with a further supplementary question.

MacPhail: British Columbians don't need to listen to non-answers of the kind

that the Minister of Finance just gave. This issue is not a surprise. This issue

has been brewing for months and over a year now, when we knew the softwood

lumber agreement….

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order, please.

MacPhail: When we knew that the expiry of the softwood lumber agreement

would not lead to its renewal….

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order, please, hon. members. Let's hear the

question.

MacPhail: Instead, the Minister of Finance says he's considering all

options. Well, what has he been doing? The Minister of Forests says he's

developing a formal response. The leadership needs to come now, and it needs to

come from the Minister of Finance. He should be working with everybody in his

government to make sure that there's a B.C. position that can lead on the

national position. Why is it that it is not part of the British Columbia

strategy to apply for exemptions with the special circumstances here, like the

Maritimes did, and why is it that they won't post a provincial bond to assist

the companies in jeopardy?

Hon. G.

Collins: In fact, the government is exploring all of those opportunities.

The Minister of Forests met with Pierre Pettigrew today to make, in very strong

terms, British Columbia's position. That's why he's not with us here today. He's

out there meeting with the federal government and demanding a great deal of

action from them as well.

There is a

role for both levels of government to play in this. Both levels of government

will play an active role in this. We will be available, as I said. There will be

no expense, no energy and no effort spared to make sure that our forest sector

and our forest communities weather this storm and win this dispute once and for

all. We will look at all opportunities that are available to us to be of

assistance to the industry in British Columbia.

[1415]

SKILLED LABOUR SHORTAGE

Manhas: Labour force surveys estimate that 60 percent of job openings in the

next ten years will require workers with technology or intermediate skills

training. Many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding and around the

province are experiencing shortages of skilled labour. Many businesses are

concerned about being able to fill their labour needs in the future. If we

increase skilled labour in this province, we can work with the technology

industry to capitalize on the tremendous potential for growth and job creation

in new sectors like biotechnology, forestry, software development, multimedia,

electronics and telecommunications. By doing this, we can attract more

investment, high-paying jobs and new, clean businesses to my constituency and

around the province.

Could the

minister tell us what is being done to address the skilled labour shortage, so

we can make B.C. a leader in the knowledge-based economy?

[ Page 509 ]

Hon. S.

Bond: Obviously the looming shortage in skilled workers is an issue for

government, particularly now that businesses around this province have a more

competitive tax environment and there is renewed consumer confidence. It is

essential that we at least make an attempt to provide them with the skilled

workers that they need. So we're currently working with industry, with private

and public post-secondary trainers and, in particular, with the Industry

Training and Apprenticeship Commission to develop a thoughtful and strategic

plan so that we will be able to address those needs, unlike the kind of

situation we're finding in health care at the current moment.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain with a supplementary

question.

Manhas: The Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association recently

identified the shortage of skilled workers as the number one concern amongst its

members. Rapid growth in technology and high-tech industries is creating a large

demand for skilled workers, and at the same time young people in British

Columbia are looking for opportunities so they can plan their future right here

in this province.

Could the

Minister of Advanced Education tell us what she is doing now to ensure that

students in British Columbia have access to the training and resources they need

to succeed in the high-tech sector and in an increasingly knowledge-based

economy?

Interjections.

Hon. S.

Bond: I am sure that the member was able to write that question all by

himself, unlike others.

MacPhail: Are you sure?

Hon. S.

Bond: Actually, Mr. Speaker, I am positive about that.

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order. Order, please.

Hon. S.

Bond: We are concerned about the increasing opportunities for students in

terms of access to the high-tech area. We have an aggressive agenda. We intend

to double the number of graduates in electrical and computer engineering over

the next five years. I am very excited about the model we are developing around

the leading-edge endowment fund which is going to create 20 leadership chairs in

this province, some of which will focus on technological research. In addition,

we want to increase the opportunities for students through on-line learning.

COMMUNITY ENTERPRISE GRANT

FOR HORSEFLY

MacPhail: Yesterday I asked the Minister of Finance to promise not to cut

community transition programs that will help communities ride out the storm

effected by the expiry of the softwood lumber agreement. He provided no answer.

To the Minister of Finance: the community of Horsefly was told that it would

receive from the government a small grant to help it promote tourism. Can the

minister explain to the people of Horsefly, who needed a community enterprise

grant, why he reneged on that commitment?

Hon. G.

Collins: I'll take that question on notice, Mr. Speaker.

HOME CARE SERVICES

J. Bray:

My question will be for the Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and

Home Care. It's about a very important issue that affects every single community

in the province. A report recently released by the Canadian Association of

Retired Persons points to a lack of leadership across the country in developing

a clear vision and a clear strategy for the provision of home care services.

According to the CARP report, not a single province could receive a passing

grade on providing a clear vision of how they plan to deliver home care services

to patients in the comfort, security and safety of their own homes. My question

is: how does the Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care

intend to address the issue of home care in British Columbia?

[1420]

Hon. K.

Whittred: Today in this province there are 20,000 fewer people receiving

home care than there were in 1994. That is because of deliberate policies on the

part of the former government to reduce the availability of home care and who

could access it. We in British Columbia have decided that British Columbia is

going to be a leader in providing this service, and to that end, the Premier has

appointed a minister of state specifically to address this issue.

J. Bray:

Those losses in home care spaces…. I'm sure many fellow members have heard

from their constituents. It's been the number one issue for my constituency

office. The effect has been devastating.

One

particular problem that the authors of the CARP report pointed to was a lack of

funding for home care services. While the report acknowledged some modest

increases over the last three years in the province, they were quick to point

out — and I quote from the report — that "levels are not sufficient to

address the higher-acuity clients and the general increase in utilization."

In other words, there are more people requiring services, and the services they

require are more in-depth.

My question

is: how does the minister intend to address the need for increased funding for

home care services in British Columbia?

Hon. K.

Whittred: Of those 20,000 people that I talked about in my previous answer,

many are today in acute care settings. This is placing an incredible strain on

the health care system, and it's one of many stresses that we hear about daily

in the acute care system.

[ Page 510 ]

In our

provincial budget update we have allowed $39 million for additional home support

in the next few months. We will deliver on that commitment, which was part of

our new-era commitment.

PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR

VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Anderson: My question is to the Minister of State for Women's Equality. Each

week and each month, many women and children in B.C. are victims of domestic

violence. While there are programs in place, there aren't enough for the people

of this province, and many are kept on waiting lists.

Can the

minister tell us what she is doing to ensure that victims of domestic violence

receive the help when they need it — now and not later?

Hon. L.

Stephens: The ministry is well aware of the significant problem of

wait-lists around the province. The former administration — the previous

government — really said one thing and did another as far as programs and

services to women and children were concerned. Our new-era commitment is to

provide domestic violence legislation.

At the

moment, the ministry is undergoing a review to address the issues of wait-lists.

This government is committed to providing and improving services for abused

women and children around the province.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Vancouver-Langara with a supplementary question.

TRANSITION HOUSE FUNDING

Anderson: Again to the minister. Transition houses do provide a safe

environment for the women and children of the province when they have the need.

But in order to provide the proper services, these transition houses need

long-term funding. Can the minister tell us what she is doing to provide this

kind of stability for these houses?

Hon. L.

Stephens: Again, the ministry is well aware of the funding inequities around

the province. As a matter of fact, the government, which was the opposition in

the previous sessions, repeatedly asked the ministry to look into these funding

inequities. I've since found out that very little has been done, but we are well

down the road now to looking at these funding inequities for the transition

houses around the province.

We are

committed to this review. We are developing a program to look at the inequities

and resolve them. This government understands and appreciates the really

valuable work that transition house workers do around the province —

certainly, the counselling service for abused women and programs for children

who witness abuse — and we are committed to improving these services.

[End

of question period.]

[1425]

Orders of the Day

Hon. G.

Collins: In Committee A, I call Committee of Supply. For the information of

members, we'll be beginning with the Ministry of Energy and Mines for their

estimates. In Committee B, I call Committee of Supply. For the information of

members, we'll be discussing the estimates for the Ministry of Provincial

Revenue.

The House

in Committee of Supply B; J. Weisbeck in the chair.

The

committee met at 2:26 p.m.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

PROVINCIAL REVENUE

(continued)

Hon. G.

Collins: I would just move that the House recess for about five minutes or

so. I understand that the member for Vancouver-Hastings is in the corridor doing

some business and will be in shortly.

The

committee recessed from 2:27 p.m. to 2:47 p.m.

[J.

Weisbeck in the chair.]

On vote 39:

ministry operations, $49,724,000 (continued) .

MacPhail: We were exploring the deflation factor, the price deflator, and I

was asking the minister whether he anticipates that having any effect on the

collection of the social service tax. That's where we left the last time.

There has

actually been a price deflator in the province about three times over the course

of the last 50 years. I'm wondering if the minister could indicate whether, in

the past — and we will get to the background of why this price deflator is in

place — a price deflator has led to a reduction in revenues.

Hon. B.

Barisoff: I will have to take that on notice.

[1450]

MacPhail: Again in relation to tax collection, because I know that the

minister is responsible for tax collection, the records, the backgrounders, the

documents buried in the deep, dark dungeons of these documents which lots of us

read…. That's not a negative comment. I actually, in a very sick way, enjoy

reading the entire document. The price deflator is based on a reduction in

commodity prices. I am going to ask the minister about tax collection, revenue

collection, on a per-commodity basis. My initial question is this: what is the

range of reduction of commodity prices forecast by commodity, please?

[ Page 511 ]

Hon. B.

Barisoff: Actually, the material is in with the Minister of Finance's

portfolio. I know that the Minister of Finance indicated during his estimates

that if anybody wanted to ask any particular questions of him after his

estimates were done, he would welcome the opportunity to answer any of those

questions.

MacPhail: I thank him for that offer, but I want to have the discussion so

it's on the record. If the Minister of Finance is suggesting some way we could

do that so it's on the record, perhaps he could offer that, and I'd be happy to

do that. So are we not going to be able to get the information, then?

Interjection.

MacPhail: This is indicating that somehow these questions are inappropriate,

because it's his portfolio and not the Minister of Provincial Revenue. However,

the reason why I asked for this was so I could relate it to tax collection,

which is the minister's responsibility.

Hon. G.

Collins: We're very prepared to answer whatever questions we can, given the

rules of the House. If there is particular detail about price deflators in the

resource sector over the last 100 years in British Columbia, it's pretty obvious

that none of us would have that at our fingertips. We would be willing to see if

we could find it, but that would certainly take some time. If the member has

questions in that line or in that vein, notice would have been beneficial so

that members could have done that. If she had wanted a briefing specifically on

the issue, we'd certainly be prepared to provide it for her.

I know the

minister won't have those at his fingertips now, because (1) it's not in his

portfolio, (2) there would be data that would have been accumulated over the

last however many decades, and (3) this isn't the place for it. So if the member

wants a briefing on that, I'd be prepared to try and set that up with staff from

my ministry. I'd be glad to do that in the next little while. If she has

specific questions around that, I am prepared — if she wants to write me a

letter with those questions — to respond to them.

I'm very

happy to do that, and I'll give her my commitment that unlike some previous

ministers in this House, I will actually respond to them. If she has any

specific questions for the Minister of Revenue that deal with the collection of

revenue, then this is the place to ask them, but questions about revenue policy

or those tax policies lie within the Ministry of Finance. As I said, I'm

perfectly happy to accept those questions and get back to the member.

MacPhail: I appreciate that from the Minister of Finance. My question was

actually a current one. I'd moved on from the history of price deflation over

the last couple of decades. My question was on the basket of commodities that

make up the price deflator and what that basket of commodities is, so I could

then examine the tax collection of each, based on the commodities listed. So

that was a current question.

Hon. G.

Collins: I would say that falls within my purview as Minister of Finance,

and I'd be prepared to answer those questions. If she wants to write those

questions, I'd be glad to provide answers for them.

MacPhail: It does seem to be interesting to note that the division of

responsibilities now leads to obfuscation in answers, which is very unfortunate.

This is the Minister of Provincial Revenue. I think the minister is a full

minister, not a minister of state. May I ask if that's correct?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: That is correct.

[1500]

MacPhail: So I assume that this responsibility is his full purview, and all

I'm trying to link is tax collection on a commodity-by-commodity basis. That's

all. That's what I'm trying to do. I think the questions are in order.

Hon. G.

Collins: In fact, they're not in order, because forecasting revenues falls

within the purview of the Ministry of Finance. Collecting the revenues falls

within the purview of the Minister of Provincial Revenue. I know there have been

big changes to government over the last little while, and I know that not

everyone is clear how that is all moved around. But I want to be very clear with

the member that revenue policy, revenue forecasting, all of those things fall

within the Ministry of Finance, not within the Ministry of Provincial Revenue.

The Minister of Provincial Revenue's job is to go out there and try to collect

the taxes that are due the people of British Columbia in the most efficient and

effective way possible. That is his role.

As far as

policies or forecasting or any of those things that lie within the Ministry of

Finance, as I said, I am not trying to obfuscate or avoid answering questions.

I'll be very prepared to answer any questions that the member wants to give me,

and as well, I'll be prepared to provide any briefings we can to answer some of

the more detailed questions that she's looking for. But here is not the place,

and these questions are out of order to the Minister of Revenue.

MacPhail: Well, it is an interesting day in British Columbia. So far the

Minister of Finance has answered for the Minister of Management Services, and

now he's answering for the full Minister of Provincial Revenue. It does seem

unbelievable that British Columbians have all these executive council members,

and there's kind of like one guy running government — very interesting.

The

Minister of Provincial Revenue…. If there's a provincial-territorial-federal

meeting, who would he be meeting with?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: If it is with ministers of provincial revenue, then it would fall

into my category. If it's with ministers of finance, it would fall into the

purview of the Minister of Finance.

[ Page 512 ]

MacPhail: Just because this is brand-new to British Columbians, what other

jurisdictions would have a minister of provincial revenue whose sole

responsibility is that?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: The federal government has, and I understand the province of

Alberta has also.

MacPhail: It would be a pretty lonely meeting, I guess, this new category of

ministerial responsibility for not much — absolutely not much. Perhaps I could

ask a question on that basis, considering that tax collection is the

responsibility of the Minister of Provincial Revenue, but there's no policy

related to that tax collection. What is the minister's office budget for the

Ministry of Provincial Revenue?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: It's $382,000.

MacPhail: I'm trying to figure out, and I say this with interest and

respect.... The Minister of Provincial Revenue, whose office budget is $382,000 and

has no policy…. What policy initiatives is the minister responsible for? What

matters of change in the coming months does the minister propose in terms of

collecting revenue?

[1500]

Hon. B.

Barisoff: I think I want to make something abundantly clear to the member

opposite. The Minister of Provincial Revenue's job is to administer the policy

of the other ministries that we mentioned earlier. The Ministry of Provincial

Revenue has to look after the finance section, the forestry

section and

municipal affairs. We're looking at amalgamating some of the MSP programs coming

towards the Minister of Provincial Revenue. The culmination of all these things

that are coming into an area where we're trying to be more efficient and fair in

how we collect the dollars for British Columbia, to make sure we have the money

for health care and education….

Something

that I think has been lax in the past and what's happened in these first 90 days

that I've been involved in this ministry is that I've found there are a number

of areas that definitely need to be looked at. We want to create an efficient

manner of collecting revenue for this province. If we don't get the revenue in,

we won't be able to have the health care and education systems that we hope to

have in this province.

MacPhail: In fact, I couldn't agree with the minister…. That's exactly

what my line of questioning was leading to. The Minister of Finance has

predicated any increases in health care and education to economic growth. The

predication is based on an economic forecast of 3.8 percent, so it's directly

linked. I couldn't agree more with the minister that efficient collection of

taxes and proper estimation of taxes collected will help fund our health care

and education system, because the government has linked the two. The government

hasn't said: "We'll fund education and health on the basis of what's

needed." It's based on economic growth.

All I'm

trying to do — from this Minister of Provincial Revenue, whose sole

responsibility is to collect revenue — is figure out how he anticipates that

collection going, given the condition of the economy. Yet I'm being shut down by

the Maytag…. Actually, it's not the Maytag repairman; it's the Minister of

Finance. I hope that's not going to be the way for the entire executive council

— that a question is asked of their responsibilities and the Minister of

Finance leaps up, as has been the wont to date. My question is: what does the

minister anticipate happening to forestry revenues based on, I assume, a price

deflator in the price of lumber?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: I think the member opposite doesn't understand that the job of the

Provincial Revenue ministry is to administer the policies that have come

from…. Whether it's forestry, whether it comes from the Ministry of Finance,

Municipal Affairs…. It's not my job to make the policy. It's my job to

administer the policy, to make sure that the policies they have put into place,

that we collect the revenue from…. You can keep asking the same question and

go round and round, but the job of the Provincial Revenue ministry is to

administer those policies.

MacPhail: I always thought that there was a difference between

administration and elected politicians to make policy. Administration of

programs is very much the responsibility of the public service, and that

minister is surrounded by excellent public servants who can administer and have

administered extremely well. I'm trying to get at his role. It's different from

public servants. That's all.

Let me try

another tack. The softwood lumber agreement has expired, and we are in a

situation now where there are some forest companies that are worried about their

future and that there will be layoffs and closures. Does the minister…? Before

the Minister of Finance gives advice….

Interjection.

MacPhail: Okay. Great, I welcome that.

The

Minister of Provincial Revenue: what will be his administration policies —

let's try this tack — if forest companies come to the minister responsible for

the collection of provincial revenue and say: "We can't pay"?

[1505]

Hon. B.

Barisoff: I guess my comment to the member opposite is the fact that the job

of the Ministry of Provincial Revenue, again, is to collect taxes or fees that

are owed to government. In so doing, we administer the policy of…. Whether it

happens to be the Minister of Forests, the Minister of Finance, the Minister of

Municipal Affairs or wherever it might lie, our job ultimately is to collect

money that's owed to the provincial government.

[ Page 513 ]

MacPhail: I'm not making these questions up out of the blue sky. I'm not

blue-skying it here. I actually went to the website and looked up the Ministry

of Provincial Revenue. That website has all of the items about collection of

royalties and freehold production taxes, has all the information about

collection of stumpage, etc. That's the basis on which I'm asking these

questions of the Minister of Provincial Revenue. I'm feeling a little bit at sea

here, because somehow, I guess, the website is out of touch with what the

minister thinks his job is.

Let me try

another aspect, then. In the administration of corporate tax collection…. The

government has reduced corporate taxes by a substantial amount. Does the

department responsible for the collection of corporate taxes expect to

experience layoffs?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: No, we don't expect any layoffs. That's simply because those taxes

are actually collected by CCRA, the federal government.

MacPhail: What impact, if any, will the tax reductions and the

elimination…? I thought the government predicted…. Actually, there have been

taxes that have been absolutely eliminated in this budget. As I recall, the

luxury vehicle tax was eliminated, and I thought there was a prediction that the

corporate capital tax, which has been reduced from 0.3 to 0.15, will then be

reduced to zero. What, if any, effect will that have on the number of FTEs, the

number of people who work in his ministry — both the luxury tax…? I accept

that the corporate capital tax is…. Well, is the corporate capital tax

collected through the CCRA? Two separate questions there, Mr. Chair.

Hon. B.

Barisoff: First of all, the corporation capital taxes will be eliminated,

but we do have a lot of procedures that will have to take place for at least

three more years. In that respect, we wouldn't know what the outflow of that

would be for at least three years to come. The luxury vehicle tax, as the member

opposite knows, wasn't totally eliminated. It starts at $47,000. It went from

$32,000 to $47,000, and then it goes to $48,000 to $49,000 for the 8, 9 and 10

percent. That's still there. We've jumped that from $32,000 to $47,000.

MacPhail: Can the minister point out to me where the number of FTEs is listed in

his vote?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: If the member would look at page 177, the figure is 817 FTEs.

[1510]

MacPhail: Well, then, in terms of the minister's admitted responsibilities of

greater efficiency, will greater efficiency take place with the same amount of

FTEs?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: The member opposite knows that we are in the process of looking at

a core review process for the new government. We are looking at ways to become

more efficient. Once we get the core review process through, we'll know where

our efficiencies lie.

MacPhail: But I thought that the mandate that the minister has been given is

not to develop policy; it's to administer. I was also advised that the Ministry

of Provincial Revenue is an amalgamation of other responsibilities that used to

be held in other ministries. So I would assume that the core review process

would be secondary to the administration efficiencies that are his sole

responsibility.

Am I led to

believe, then, that the Ministry of Provincial Revenue sits as just an

amalgamation of the departments that were elsewhere?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: The answer I have for the member opposite is that the ministry is

barely over two months old. We are going through the core review program. We are

looking at ways to maximize the revenue that comes into the Ministry of

Provincial Revenue, so that we can maintain our health care and education.

We can go

around this a hundred different ways, but the same answer always comes out. Our

job is to administer the policies of other areas of government and to make sure

that we maximize the amount of revenue that comes into the province to maintain

health care and education.

MacPhail: I'm not trying to go around this a hundred different ways. I'm

trying to figure out what the minister is responsible for and what the purpose

of the ministry existing is for British Columbians. It's a large amount of money

that's being expended on just the minister's office. I'm just trying to figure

out the value for money that flows from having a separate Minister of Provincial

Revenue.

Well, let

me try this. The core services review came down a couple of weeks ago, but this

letter to the Minister of Provincial Revenue is dated June 25. It's from the

Premier, and it says — referring to the Minister of Provincial Revenue —

that you will be accountable for integrating major sources of resource revenues.

Has that integration led to any cost or staff efficiencies, and can you name

them, please?

[1515]

Hon. B.

Barisoff: First of all, no, it won't decrease. That's simply because we have

a number of different information systems that we're dealing with, and we have a

number of appeal processes that we're dealing with. The whole idea is to bring

back the idea of how we can make the whole system more effective and efficient

and get the maximum amount of revenue in for the dollars that we need to run

health care and education.

The member

opposite is trying to make us believe that the Ministry of Provincial Revenue is

not a necessity. This wasn't just dreamed up in the last few weeks, or whatever

else. It was something that the Premier, along with staff and a number of other

people,

[ Page 514 ]

worked on for some time. They realized the importance of having a Ministry of

Provincial Revenue so we could have one minister focus on getting money

into the provincial revenue department, so we have the money to look after

health care and education.

If the

member opposite believes that the Ministry of Provincial Revenue isn't value for

the dollars, maybe next year in estimates she can ask the same kinds of

questions, and we'll be able to show her the impact that it's had, where we have

a particular ministry addressing the needs of the taxpayers of British Columbia

to make sure that we get the maximum revenue possible.

MacPhail: Thank you for that advice. I certainly will take the minister up

on it. In the meantime, let me pursue the current situation.

The

minister himself gave rise to my questions, because he somehow indicated that

the system was left in a mess and, as the government is wont to do, said that

the mess they have to clean up is so horrendous that they had to make all of

these special circumstances and that, in his particular case, that's why the

Ministry of Provincial Revenue exists — because of the mess that was left. He

actually said that just a few minutes ago.

What I was

asking for was somehow an indication of how the mess is being cleaned up. Is it

more cost-efficient? Are there fewer people having to perform tasks as

efficiently? Are the expenditures for tax collection reduced? Amalgamation of

departments have led to what cost efficiencies or reduction in staff? That's

what I was asking for. And the answer I have received is that nothing's

changed.

So I put

it to the minister that perhaps the reason why he's unable to bring about change

is that it was operating extremely effectively before, that the revenue

collection of the Ministry of Finance had gone through great change and was at

the cutting edge, and that perhaps the creation of the Ministry of Provincial

Revenue has more to do with busywork than real policy change.

The other

assignment that the Minister of Provincial Revenue received was to maximize

revenue collection within principles of fairness and equity. Where would I be

able to find those principles of fairness and equity?

[1520]

Hon. B.

Barisoff: First of all, I'd like to say that the member opposite was right

on one portion of her statement, anyhow. The finances…. The entire government

was left in a mess. And we have every ministry involved. If she looks across,

there's a number of different ministries that have been formed to deal with the

situation that was left by this government — what happened with the past

government in the last ten years. If the member opposite thinks the people of

British Columbia don't believe that this province was left in that situation,

she should undertake to look around her and find out how many members were

actually elected from her government.

I think

that the Premier of the day, our Premier, has indicated that he wants change; he

has created change; he's making change. I think the member opposite is going

down a path to find any way she can to discredit some of the things that the new

Premier and the present government are doing. We are turning this province

around; we are going to make it turn around. In my ministry, with provincial

revenue, we are going to create efficiencies. We are going to maximize the

revenues. We're going to do the things that, in our estimation and when we look

at it, were left in a mess. The member opposite can continue down the same path

as long as she wants to go down this path. We are going to turn this province

around. It wasn't done overnight to create different ministries for the sake of

creating them; it was done to benefit the people of British Columbia.

MacPhail: I'll repeat my question. The assignment is to maximize revenue

collection with the principles of fairness and equity. What are the principles

of fairness and equity under which the minister will be working?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: The principle of fairness is the fact that we are going to make

sure that we…. If you just take the word "fairness" in its context

and the fact that we are going to collect the revenue that is owed to the

government in a fair and efficient manner…. I don't know whether…. There's

nothing written other than the word "fairness." I know that the

staff…. I haven't got to meet all the staff that we have employed in the

Ministry of Provincial Revenue, but I know that they do their jobs extremely

well, and they do it in a fair and efficient manner. And that's exactly what

we're going to do. We're going to maintain the philosophy that's probably

happened in the past, and we want to enhance it to make sure that the whole idea

of collecting the revenue that is owed to the province will be done in a fair

and efficient manner.

MacPhail: Well, I would assume that is one of the three tasks that the

minister is given. The Premier, in his letter to the minister, is indicating

that there would be change required in order to have taxed revenue collection

within principles of fairness and equity. What changes does the minister

anticipate having to make to meet that requirement of the Premier?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: From my perspective, we brought all the different ministries

together into the revenue-collection side of it. We're trying to create a

fairness and equity that didn't happen in the past, where some people were

charged in different ways, or interest was charged in different ways, or means

of collecting the revenue that was owed to the government — whether it

happened to be from the Ministry of Forests or from the Ministry of Municipal

Affairs, or wherever it might have come from, whatever ministry that we're

actually starting to take over — to make sure that all British Columbians are

treated on a fair and equal basis.

[ Page 515 ]

[1525]

MacPhail: Does the minister anticipate putting in place a system that treats

everybody the same?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: I think that treating people the same, in the words of

fairness…. Yes, that's what we're trying to do. We want to treat people in a

fair and equitable manner. If that's what she means by the same, that's what's

going to happen.

MacPhail: The Premier has also asked you and your senior officials to

provide him…. Or you are provided, I should say, with the opportunity to bring

forward other priority issues that you believe are critical for us to address

— "us" being the executive council, I assume. What's on that list of priorities for

the Minister of Provincial Revenue?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: With the establishment of the Ministry of Provincial Revenue, we

are looking to bring in other revenue sources from other different ministries,

so from that perspective — and a lot of that will go with future policy — I

don't think I want to enter into what future policy might be.

MacPhail: I was just trying to take the minister's advice to prepare for the

next set of estimates and to set the bar or the threshold. That's why I was

asking the question, so I could prepare for next year's estimates. But clearly I

won't be afforded the opportunity to do that.

I note with

interest the situation in Alberta, where there is a Minister of Revenue and a

Minister of Finance. The Minister of Revenue in Alberta is responsible for

managing and investing financial assets. Is the Minister of Provincial Revenue

in British Columbia responsible for that?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: No.

MacPhail: The Minister of Revenue in Alberta — the only other place where

there is one, other than the federal government — manages risk associated with

public asset loss. Is the Minister of Provincial Revenue responsible for that in

British Columbia?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: No, that's the Minister of Finance.

MacPhail: The Minister of Revenue in Alberta regulates Alberta's capital

market. Is the Minister of Provincial Revenue in British Columbia responsible

for that?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: No.

MacPhail: I assume that the other task of the Minister of Revenue in

Alberta is administering tax and revenue programs, so the Minister of Provincial

Revenue in British Columbia has one out of the four duties of the Minister of

Revenue in Alberta.

Hon. G.

Collins: Made-in-B.C. solution.

MacPhail: A made-in-B.C. solution, where the cabinet — the largest in the

history of British Columbia — is such because the duties have been divided

into minutiae.

The

Minister of Provincial Revenue works how, then? Could I say: what is the working

relationship on a regular basis with the Minister of Finance?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: It is a regular working relationship. If the member opposite would

care to come down, we'd even tour her through our offices that are connecting,

down on the first floor. If she wants to come down, we'll give her a tour.

MacPhail: I know earlier last week I referred to a logistical situation. I

don't mean a logistical situation in this circumstance; I mean a working

relationship. Is there a committee of economic ministers? Is there a daily

working relationship? Are the officials of the Ministry of Provincial Revenue

integrated with the Ministry of Finance officials?

[1530]

Hon. B.

Barisoff: My staff and the Minister of Finance's staff work on a regular

basis. I talk to the Minister of Finance on a very regular basis. In fact, we

have joint meetings at least a couple of times a week and probably more than

that at this stage of the game. So yes, we're in contact on a very regular

basis, and staff are in contact on a regular basis.

MacPhail: Are there officials of the Ministry of Provincial Revenue that are

also officials of the Ministry of Finance?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: Yes.

MacPhail: You don't have to name names, but could you name positions and how

many, please?

Hon. B.

Barisoff: The deputy minister.

MacPhail: The Deputy Minister of Provincial Revenue is also the Deputy

Minister of Finance.

Hon. B.

Barisoff: Yes.

Vote 39

approved.

Hon. G.

Collins: I would like to call the estimates for the Ministry of Health

Planning. If we could just recess to the call of the Chair, it would give

members a chance to get the documentation and the staff and the minister that we

need to proceed.

The

committee recessed from 3:32 p.m. to 3:43 p.m.

[J.

Weisbeck in the chair.]

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF HEALTH PLANNING

On vote 32:

ministry operations, $4,798,000.

[ Page 516 ]

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I have some opening comments. This is a new ministry. It's my

pleasure to introduce the estimates for the Ministry of Health Planning for the

fiscal year 2001-02. Before I begin, I'd like to introduce three officials who

are with me here today. Mr. John Tegenfeldt, on my left, is Deputy Minister of

Health Planning. To my right is Anne McFarlane. She's the acting Deputy Minister

of Health Services. Penny Ballem is special adviser to the minister. I welcome

them.

This is the

first estimates of this new ministry. The ministry was created because our

government felt that there were a lot of pressures on British Columbia's health

care system and on the providers and that they needed some help to meet some of

those needs and the needs of patients. Our government's vision for British

Columbia includes high-quality public health care services that meet all

patients' needs where they live and when they need them.

[1545]

The new

ministry is dedicated to making it possible for the health care system and

caregivers to achieve their goals for patient care over the longer term. So

while the Minister of Health Services devotes his time and full attention to the

immediate care of patients, the Ministry of Health Planning is focusing on the

development of a long-term plan to sustain the publicly funded health care

services that British Columbians value so highly. In developing that plan, we

will be guided by input from health care providers, health administrators and

all British Columbians from across the province.

Two key

components of this government's health plan will be governance and

accountability. The Ministry of Health Planning will oversee the establishment

of clear provincial health standards. We want to ensure that all citizens in

every part of the province are entitled to equitable, reliable, high-quality

health services, and performance measures will be built for each of those health

standards. We want to ensure that provincial and regional health authorities

will meet expectations to provide the required levels of patient care.

In the

coming weeks we will take the first steps to simplify the organizational

complexity in the province's health system. We want to draw clearer lines of

accountability to ensure that British Columbians are receiving the greatest

possible value from their investment in health care. More specifically, we will

be examining the governance structure in the health system and making

recommendations for the alignment of health authorities, including a recommended

structure for the Vancouver-Richmond health board.

We will

develop an accountability framework for health authority boards and an

arm's-length appointment process with identification of clear expectations and

performance measures. Our plan will develop new frameworks for funding

allocations to ensure that programs are responsive to needs and that health

facilities and equipment are properly maintained. When we toured the province on

our dialogue on health care, when the Premier toured last fall with some of the

members, that was a huge concern. We want to ensure that British Columbia is

well positioned to address emerging priorities in health care, which we know are

always on the horizon.

People are

the heart of British Columbia's health care system, and without adequate numbers

of doctors, nurses and other health care providers working in communities where

they're needed, our province doesn't have an adequate health care system. This

ministry will lead with the development of a long-overdue ten-year health human

resources plan, which will be focused on education support and creating

fulfilling career opportunities for the increasing number of skilled health

professionals that we need on the front lines of patient care in every part of

our province. We will be completing and implementing parts of that plan this

year.

Our current

shortage of health professionals across a number of disciplines requires an

aggressive plan. That plan will minimize the use of highly skilled professionals

to provide services which could be safely and effectively delivered by a

professional with a different, appropriate skill set. This will reduce the costs

in the long term and provide more options to address provider shortages.

Certainly,

in the coming year the Ministry of Health Planning will initiate plans that will

help our province to recruit and retain nurses, doctors and other health

professionals. We will be collaborating — and we have been collaborating,

working very hard — with the Ministry of Advanced Education to make sure that

we have the education seats we need. We've been working with the minister

responsible for immigration on a plan to go aggressively for offshore

recruitment. We will also be focusing on improving workplace safety for workers,

and we will be looking at providing appropriate equipment in the workplace. We

of health services in rural and remote areas of the province.

In addition

to good planning, innovation and accountability, we feel British Columbia's

health care system needs a restored funding partnership with the federal

government. Certainly, earlier this month the provincial Premiers called on

Ottawa to restore federal funding for health to 1994 levels — 18 cents of each

dollar spent on provinces' health systems. We will be pushing for that. As

Minister of Health Planning, I will continue to press the federal government to

live up to its responsibility to support health care. This is the public service

that all Canadians, and certainly British Columbians, expect their government to

provide.

[1550]

In spite of

the pressures on health care, I am happy to see that British Columbians continue

to get healthier. We're fortunate in being the healthiest provincial population

in Canada. Our life expectancy is 79.5 years — 82.2 years for women and 76.8

years for men. We're living longer. Our infant mortality rate of 3.7 is

as low as any in the world. Our smoking rate among adults is the lowest in the

country and amongst the

[ Page 517 ]

lowest in the world. British Columbians are more physically active than

people in other parts of Canada. I think that's something to be proud of.

There are,

however, concerns for some population groups who don't enjoy such good health:

aboriginal peoples; people living in poverty; and people, certainly, who live in

rural areas. The provincial health officer will be advising me and the ministry

on how to intensify our efforts to promote wellness and to prevent disease and

injuries through programs such as immunization, education, dietary habits and

physical activity. Certainly the continued good health of our population depends

on these preventative measures and on access to quality health services.

The

operating budget for the Ministry of Health Planning for fiscal year 2001-02 is

$4.798 million. It's certainly my commitment to the people of British Columbia

that these funds will be applied to developing a comprehensive plan for a

cost-effective, sustainable, equitable, quality health care system in this

province. That plan is long overdue.

I want to

take this opportunity to thank the many staff in the various ministries: the

Ministry of Health Services, the Ministry of Health Planning, the Ministry of

Advanced Education, the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services

and the others that have worked with us so very hard in the last couple of

months to help start initiating some plans. We have begun our task. Everyone is

working very hard. I know we have a challenging year ahead. I certainly

appreciate all the efforts that everyone is making, and I certainly appreciate

the support I receive every day. I look forward to questions the members may

have with respect to the creation and the work of this new ministry.

MacPhail: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for those opening remarks. I think the

minister is surrounded by a group of excellent health professionals. I know them

all professionally and some of them personally. She's well served.

Just to

confirm, the minister is part of a team that has the Minister of Health

Services, the Minister of State for Mental Health and the Minister of State for

Long Term Care. I'm going to open with some questions about the integration of

various planning processes that are in place with the government before I move

to the specifics of the money that the minister is responsible for. In her

opening remarks the minister made some reference to the cooperation of working

with other ministries. Is there a formal structure in place where there must be

planning together? And if so, what?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: No, there is no formal structure, but there certainly is an

understanding. That emanates right down from the Premier — that the

interministerial boundaries must be broken down; that there must be more

cooperation between the ministries; that we don't operate in silos; and that a

lot of the planning that happens in government happens in cooperation with the

members in this House, not only the ministries but the private members as well.

The

planning to date has been done with a lot of cooperation. We're learning every

day how we can break some of the barriers and work closer together so that when

we're working on a plan, we fit the pieces together from different ministries,

and we streamline and make things move along a little faster.

MacPhail: So there's no cabinet committee for integrating of services. Who

calls together the parties that the minister referred to?

[1555]

Hon. S.

Hawkins: There's no cabinet committee that coordinates all this. It is a

directive from the Premier that we all work cooperatively and, if we've got a

goal, that we all focus on that goal and work towards it. Who quarterbacks that?

Well, right now, when it's planning for health care, I guess I'm the

quarterback.

What I've

been doing is if we have identified a high priority — and certainly one of

them is the health human resources strategy; one of the components may very well

be the physician strategy or the nursing strategy — we look at which

ministries might be involved in helping us. With the health human resources

strategy, we identified that Advanced Education was one, because they look at

educating and training spaces. We looked at the minister responsible for

immigration, because we know there's a provincial nominee program that can help

us fast-track the health resource personnel that we need. And we look at Health

Services, because they help us identify the kinds of front-line workers we need.

When we've

identified the different components of the different ministries that can help

us, we set up a game plan to get together. I'm happy to say that we've had

wonderful cooperation all the way down the ministerial levels. The Minister of

Advanced Education and I have been meeting once a week, if not more often.

Certainly the Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services has lent

his support and his staff. It seems to be working on that basis fairly well,

because if we identify it as a priority, we make sure that we move things along

as fast as we can.

MacPhail: The reason I'm interested is because I thought that if this

government is giving this such a high priority, and there's a minister carved

out specifically for planning, there would be a formalized structure across

government. How often has the minister met? On what basis does the minister meet

with whom? Is it a weekly planning session?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: We're trying to get away from those bureaucratic,

committee-building, formalized kinds of structures that would otherwise, I

think, hinder progress. So what we've done, as the minister responsible for

planning…. Certainly in planning some of the immediate short-term strategies

that we think are important to help in this example that I gave, the

[ Page 518 ]

nursing or physician shortage, we identify the components of the ministries

that we think we need to work with to fast-track and get the planning underway.

I think

it's worked out very well. If we had a committee that decided when we should

meet and how often, you just get into that bureaucratic stuff that the Premier

is trying to get us away from. I think that what we're doing so far is working.

We're getting together as often as we think — sometimes a couple of times a day, at least once a week with myself and the Minister of Advanced Education. If

she has information for me, we meet in the hallway. It's nothing as formal as

getting together and setting up a committee structure and working that way.

In fact, I

think we've made better progress by doing it in the informal way and letting

people work on their own and then coming together. We have a time that we have

set that's once a week, whenever we can arrange that. I think we've made

incredible progress in two months, just doing that.

MacPhail: I assume that the public will soon find out what the progress is

that the minister has made. If there's no formal structure for working together

amongst the ministers, is there a deputy ministers' committee for planning?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: There is a deputy ministers' meeting on social policy. They meet

monthly. There is also a government caucus committee, as the member is aware,

that meets and reviews health policy.

[1600]

The

meetings that we've had in two months…. The member is aware that when we

formed government two months ago, there were some immediate items that needed to

be dealt with. One of them certainly was the shortage of nurses. We had patients

who felt they weren't getting the care they needed. We knew we had to move on

making sure that we could address some of those immediate concerns.

So that is

what we have been doing, as far as our ad hoc meetings and trying to fast-track

and brainstorm ways of making sure that we can get some of the health human

resources that we need immediately.

MacPhail: Yes, I understand the health care system has faced some

substantial crises in the last two months, but this is the minister…. There's

a minister specifically for health planning, and I would assume, given her

mandate, that her goal is to plan for the long term and not on a day-to-day

crisis basis that's resulted in the stuff of the last two months.

I'm trying

to get a handle on it. It's interesting that Minister of Health Planning

implies, rightfully so, medium- and long-term thinking and therefore implies

action that involves future policy. My questions are around the goals of the

minister, knowing full well that the policies about planning for health care are

still to come. None of them has been announced yet.

appreciate that there's been no action taken by the government, and that's why

I'm exploring in a fairly detailed way the process, the structure, the

infrastructure of government that will make planning work. There's no cabinet

committee, and there's a monthly deputy ministers' committee. Is there a process

for getting regular input from health care professionals on a formal basis?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I think — and I'm sorry if I interpret this wrong — what the

member is asking is: how are we planning the planning? What's our plan for the

planning? And I want to say that we're not going to get caught up in all kinds

of bureaucratic "we're going to meet once a week three times a month on a

Tuesday afternoon" to decide where we're going to go. I think that if the

member looks at the website, she will see the service plan that the Premier has

set out for the ministers, and definitely, if she looks under Health Planning,

she'll see what the goals are and what key projects the Premier has asked this

minister to be accountable for. If she looks in the New Era document, she

will see what Health Planning is responsible for.

If the

member wants me to refresh her memory, I can read through some of the plans that

we are responsible for. Certainly, it is to work with other ministries. With the

Ministry of Health Services, my ministry is responsible for developing a

hospital facilities plan that identifies each health region's key capital

requirements and funding priorities. We will work with the Minister of State for

Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care to look at an intermediate- and long-term

facilities plan that addresses the needs of our aging population and frees up

existing acute care beds. We are going to develop a medical machinery and

equipment plan. We are going to develop a comprehensive technology plan, as I

mentioned before. We are responsible for developing a health human resources

plan as well. We are going to establish a rural remote health initiative to

ensure that families get the care they need where they live.

[1605]

These are

the kinds of commitments we have made. So as far as the goals, they're open;

they're transparent. They're on the web page, and the member can access them. As

far as how we're doing it, we are right now in the process of identifying what

are the short-term issues that we need to address, what are the medium-term and

what are the long-term. We are in the process right now of building our

service plans for this year and then looking at what we will need to address in

the long term.

She's

wondering why I am involved in the day to day. Well, I think that as the Health

Planning minister, I need to work fairly closely with the Health Services

minister to see the kinds of pressures and challenges that that minister is

facing and that the health care system is facing on a day-to-day basis, and then

take a step back and look at what's going on and say: "Okay, what do we

need to work on right away? What kind of planning relief can we give this

minister so that we can start addressing some of the issues that are hitting

that ministry day to day?" Then again, the short term, the intermediate and

the long term….

[ Page 519 ]

You know,

I'm not going to get caught up, because I think the easiest way to not plan is

to get caught up in some kind of bureaucratic mess where you're going to meet

three times a week on a Tuesday or whatever, whatever, whatever. I think what's

working right now for us is that we identify a strategy, follow that stream and

work to its end. I think we're making a lot of progress doing that — breaking

down interministerial boundaries, pulling out the people and resources that we

need to work on what we identified as short-term and intermediate goals, and

working to resolve them to the end.

MacPhail: I'm not trying to capture the minister in some bureaucratic

committee structure. I'm trying to find out who she's working with on a regular

basis with regular input to do planning. Has the minister got a formalized way

or an informal way of input from health care professionals on the front line?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Yes, this government has committed to working with health

professionals, to working with front-line workers, to working with patients, to

working with all British Columbians to get input. Certainly there is a Health

Human Resources Advisory Committee that we will be working with. But I think

that in the short term, we have taken advice from….. I certainly meet on a

very regular basis with my colleagues in Health Services; in Advanced Ed; in

Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services; with the deputies and ADMs in those

ministries; and with Dr. Ballem.

In eight

short weeks I think we have met with a fair number of people. We have met with

different organizations. I take their advice into account when we're making

decisions towards planning.

MacPhail: I've got to back up a step here, Mr. Chair. My apologies. There

are two ministers of state that I listed. Does either of those ministers of

state come under this minister's vote?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: No, they don't.

MacPhail: Are those — the Minister of State for Intermediate and Long Term

Care and Minister of State for Mental Health — part of your ad hoc meetings?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Where it involves those two discrete areas of responsibility, yes,

they would be. They would be involved in planning around mental health and

around continuing care. But they fall, right now, in the Ministry of Health

Services.

[1610]

MacPhail: The Health Human Resources Advisory Committee — is that the committee

referred to? How long has that committee been in existence, and when did it last

meet?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: This committee met about two months ago. It has been in existence

for 18 months, under the last government. It's composed of about 30 members.

They include members from professional associations and unions, administrators,

educators. They provide advice to government about health human resource needs,

and I understand there's a meeting coming up sometime this fall.

MacPhail: Has the minister met with the committee?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: No, I haven't.

MacPhail: Well, let me try to add some other layers of planning processes to

find out from the minister how they're all integrated in her responsibility as

Minister of Health Planning.

The core

services review was established by the Premier, and it is headed up by the caucus

member from Delta South, I think.

An Hon.

Member: Yes, that's correct: Delta South.

MacPhail: Delta South. Earlier this week the caucus member responsible for

core services review listed Health as her highest priority for review. What is

her role in relationship to the role of the Minister of Health Planning?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Can I just back up to the last question? I wanted to make

sure I gave a full answer to the member. That Health Human Resources Advisory Committee

we were discussing, which was established under the previous government, met

every two months. So it met about two months ago. The minister under the

previous government had never met with the committee. This minister hasn't met

with that committee either, but I hope to. There is a meeting coming up this

fall. I'll see if I can get to that one, but my understanding is the minister

has never been present or has not officially met that committee in the previous

government.

The member

asked about core services review. Our ministry will be undergoing a review as

well. We'll be reviewed just like every other ministry. Basically, the impetus

of that core review is looking at what works, what's needed and how it will be

provided. I think that's very important information for this ministry and this

minister, because I think it's incumbent on me to understand what the needs of

the population are, what we're doing out there to address the needs, and what we

need to do to provide the best, efficient and sustainable way to make sure that

we are addressing patient needs.

[1615]

MacPhail: The reason I'm asking is because I'm examining the letter dated

June 25, sent to the Minister of Health Planning from the Premier. On page 7 of

his letter to the minister, under "service plans," there is quite an

extensive list of matters for which she will be accountable. Then I am looking

at the core services review process that the member for Delta South is

[ Page 520 ]

heading up. With the member for Delta South listing Health as her highest

priority, I am just wondering if we could go through the specifics of where the

two overlap.

The core

services review process has a few tests involved. Let me just put them on

record. It requires the committee — the core services review — to ask

questions about what we are doing, why we are doing it, how we are doing it and

how we will measure our progress. Then there are answers for specific questions

listed, such as the public interest test, the affordability test, the

effectiveness and role of government test, the efficiency test and the

accountability test. That's the core services review process.

Underneath

that, in each one of those, there are categories of how the core services review

will go about determining that. They are to look at service delivery models.

They are asking whether there is a legitimate role for government; is the

package of programs affordable; are there alternatives; what are the current

measures and reporting mechanisms to account for the program activity or

business unit performance. That's the core services review.

Of course

there is overlap, as far as I can see it, with the Minister of Health's

responsibility as well. For instance, she is to develop an accountability

framework for the boards — that would be the community health councils and the

regional health boards — and the member responsible for the core services

review is to do an accountability test. She is to review the Medical Services

Commission structure and recommend new structures as appropriate. The member

responsible for the core services review is to look at current organizational

and service delivery models to see whether they are the most effective. The

Minister of Health Planning is to develop a framework for financial and human

resource allocation, including capital and equipment, and that overlaps with the

test of the core services review as well.

There are

several other examples listed here, as well, that to me are overlapping. For

instance, the minister responsible is to recommend the appropriate governance

model for licensing functions, and she is also supposed to look at the

advisability of including Pharmacare, ambulance services and Medical Services

Plan in regional authority budgets. So there is a substantial amount of — the

best face we could put on it — integration in the two tasks, and the negative

part, we could say, is that there is a great deal of overlap.

Could the

minister responsible for health planning as her sole responsibility advise how

she plans to make sure there is no waste and duplication in the two processes?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Our goal in health care is to make sure that health care in B.C.

— and I want to make it really clear — is universal, accessible, portable,

comprehensive and publicly administered. We aim to keep those principles of the

Canada Health Act. That is not going to change.

[1620]

The core

review asked very legitimate questions, all very good questions. It's about

sacred cows. Just because we've always done things the way we have doesn't mean

they work the best way. So the core review committee is looking at things at a

very high level of what it is that government is doing, why they are doing it

and should they be doing it. So the different components of, and programs in,

the Health ministry will be subject to the same kinds of questions. It won't be

a duplication, but it will fit into that process. Each of those programs will be

subjected to that kind of scrutiny by core review. So it's not a duplication;

they funnel into the process.

MacPhail: Accepting the minister's assertion on the face of it, can she give

comfort to British Columbians on how she will avoid the duplication? What are

the structures she's put in place? What are the plans to avoid waste and

duplication in the two review processes? What mechanisms has she set up to avoid

that?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I appreciate the member's concern about duplication and wasting

time and bureaucratic processes. I understand that the ministry staff have met

with the deputy of core review to look into that very question, so we're not

doing the same things twice, and to try and streamline and cut down bureaucracy

or duplication around this process. But let me say that it's really early in the

core review process, and I think that as we move along, we will find ways to cut

the duplication if it looks like we're wasting time doing that. It's very early

on; we're learning. I understand that there's already been a meeting to address

that very concern the member raises.

MacPhail: The only reason I raise it is because I heard the member

responsible for the core services review say that her first priority was Health.

So I assumed, by her suggesting that her first priority in the core services

review was Health, that the work had been done on integration of planning and

making sure there was no waste and duplication, because that's the very purpose

of the core services review.

Well, let

me ask another question, then. I actually don't know the answer to this. Is

there a government caucus committee that will be examining issues that relate to

the minister's portfolio?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Yes, I did say that it was the Government Caucus Committee on

Health. That's the name of the committee.

MacPhail: I'm sorry. I didn't hear that last part.

We had

the innovation of them — that the government had certainly been talking at

how important the government caucus committees were and how they were going to

change the way this Premier was going

[ Page 521 ]

to do the business of government. What is the planning process to avoid waste

and duplication between the government caucus committee, which is publicly

funded, and the minister's responsibilities?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Well, let me say that I think it's incredibly important to have a

government caucus committee on health that scrutinizes and holds the minister

— there are several ministers who sit on that committee — and the ministry

accountable for the programs they are going to develop and implement. I sit as

vice-Chair on that committee. So if the member is asking what the coordination

is, that's certainly one of the coordinating points of that committee. I think

it's been extremely valuable.

[1625]

Health is

not a partisan issue; the member is right. We have members from around the

province that come to the meetings of that committee and give their input.

Certainly there's been a lot of interest, a lot of concern and a lot of issues

raised. They provide a very valuable service in scrutinizing and making sure

that government stays focused and accountable and that we're keeping to the

new-era commitments that we've made to health care. I think that's very

important. It's a committee that's going to keep this ministry focused on

patients, quality health care and the needs of patients in this province.

Introductions by Members

Hon. G.

Plant: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave

granted.

Hon. G.

Plant: I wanted to say that earlier this afternoon we had in the gallery a

representative delegation from Guangdong province in the People's Republic of

China, a delegation of lawyers here to learn a little bit about our judicial

system and our political system and to try and initiate a relationship between

the province of British Columbia and Guangdong province.

I had the

opportunity to meet with the following people: Tong Yun, the deputy chief

prosecutor; Guan Yingyan; Jiang Jiyun; Lai Xiangdong; Chen Yinmiao; Wu Xiaoping;

and Wei Wei. I hope the House will acknowledge that they were here this

afternoon, that they followed the proceedings with interest, and make them

welcome to the province of British Columbia and this chamber.

Debate Continued

MacPhail: The minister sits as the vice-Chair of the government caucus

committee, and I thought I heard her say that the committee had met. I just

couldn't hear whether she said that they'd met with members of the public or

something. But let me ask a couple of questions, then. The government caucus

committee is staffed by whom? Are there agendas? Is there public input? How does

the public know about the government caucus committee meetings? How does the

public have access to it? Who does the follow-up work for the government caucus

committee?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I'll try and answer these questions as best I can. Yes, there is

staffing support provided to this committee. I can get the specifics of that for

the member. Yes, there is an agenda. Yes, there is public input. The Chair of

this committee is — no, I won't get this; I'll have to remember this — the

member for Saanich South. I wanted to make sure I had the riding correct. She

certainly gets all kinds of requests for presentations at this committee. We

have had public input to date. The committee has met several times, and we have

heard…. So there is public access, yes.

Is there

follow-up? Yes, there is. The items on the agenda for this committee are items

that are public policy in nature and certainly include decisions that government

caucus and cabinet would consider. So there is some very good work that's done

in this committee. Certainly the kinds of plans and programs I'm responsible for

would get scrutinized through members of this committee.

[1630]

MacPhail: I missed the minister informing us of who staffs the committee —

whether they be public servants or caucus staff. Who are they?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: The government caucus committee is a committee of cabinet and has

access to cabinet documents. They scrutinize programs that ministers put

forward. They get support from a cabinet officer.

MacPhail: The government caucus committee is staffed by cabinet operations

staff.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Yes, because of the nature of the documents that this committee

scrutinizes and holds the government accountable for, they get support from a

cabinet officer.

MacPhail: It's interesting to note the minister's assertion in relationship

to the discussion that we had this morning under the omnibus bill led by the

Attorney General. It does seem to be a bit at odds, but once again we'll see

what the public has to say about that. My gosh, it certainly is innovative, then

— this government mixing inexorably the role of the executive council with the

Legislative Assembly and the role of caucus. How does the public find out about

the government caucus committee meetings, and how does one get to attend? I'm

sure my invitation is in the mail.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: What a novel idea that government would be open to all members of

the Legislature and that any member of the Legislature in a government caucus

would be able to question a minister on the kind of spending and programs that

we would bring forward. What a horrible idea. What a

[ Page 522 ]

horrible idea to have more openness and accountability for members in the

government caucus. Gee, isn't that awful?

We actually

believe, and the Premier actually believes, that each member of the government

caucus should have a role, should be able to hold a minister accountable, should

be able to scrutinize spending and should be able to have input into government

decisions. That is what this government caucus committee does. It does a great

job; it does it well. The public has access, and guess what. We're actually

getting work done, and we're getting planning done, more than that member did in

ten years in her government.

MacPhail: My advice to the minister would be to stop digging a hole deeper.

I gather she missed the debate this morning in the Legislature. I know she's new

to the job, and I know that the government caucus members who were here would

probably be horrified at how she has confirmed some of the worst fears that were

listed this morning in the debate. Nevertheless, I'm sure that will come back to

haunt her. Actually, I did ask a question about it, and I didn't get an answer.

Perhaps the minister could answer my question.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: The public can ask to meet with the minister or members any time.

The public can ask to meet, if they would like a meeting, with the Government

Caucus Committee on Health. They simply make a request to the Chair, who is the

member for Saanich South. As you can imagine, this is a new process, so we are

looking at the request and meeting with members of the public as we feel is

appropriate.

[1635]

MacPhail: It wasn't a speculative question. The minister said that there's

been a meeting of the government caucus committee, and the public attended. I'd

just like to know how that took place. How did the public get notice of the

meeting, and how did the public attend?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I think we are confused, or at least I was confused, as far as

public input. It is a public group that met with the caucus committee, not the

general public at large.

MacPhail: Fair enough. I just want to know: did the government caucus

committee submit invitations to groups? Who was it that the government caucus

committee met with? Do they meet on the record, or do they meet in camera?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I don't think it is a secret. It was UBCM. They had a presentation

to make to their government caucus committee. They asked for the meeting, and

the Chair of the meeting deemed that that was appropriate. They gave a very good

presentation and a brief. It was very much appreciated, and they are the ones

that initiated the request. It was accepted, and the presentation was very much

appreciated.

MacPhail: Are the meetings open? Are they on the record? Are minutes kept?

Is Hansard used?

An Hon

Member: How did they come up with the idea?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Yes, minutes are kept. It's not Hansard. It is open to

broad-based groups, and when broad-based groups are presenting, it is open to the

public. In fact, I believe the media were present at a Natural Resources GCC

when they were making a presentation on oil and gas.

This

morning we met with HEU. They asked about the government caucus committee

structure, and we said it was very appropriate for them to make a submission.

And we will meet with groups that we feel are appropriate for the kind of

presentations that the Government Caucus Committee on Health needs to hear.

MacPhail: And are the minutes made public?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: The minutes generally are not made public. The reports are.

You know

what? If the member tunes in to open cabinet meetings, perhaps she picked up

some of the reports that the GCC Chairs gave in the past — very, very good

reports. Perhaps she would like to stay tuned and hear from some of the Chairs

herself at the open cabinet meetings.

MacPhail: Well, that's exactly why I'm exploring this line of questioning

— the curious mix between the responsibilities of executive council and caucus

and the use of funds, the mixture of funds to carry out the duties. I'm being

polite when I say "a curious mix."

Can the

minister tell me why the minutes are not made public?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: The minister wants to remind the member that this really isn't part

of the vote. It's not part of my ministry. If she wants to question around the

government caucus committee that reports to cabinet, the minutes aren't made

public because the committee does advise cabinet. Anyway, maybe if the member

wants to keep it to Health Planning in this vote, I would answer any questions

that were appropriate around health planning.

[1640]

MacPhail: In fact, that's exactly what I'm trying to do, Mr. Chair. The

minister is the vice-Chair of the government caucus meetings. Cabinet support is

given to the government caucus committee. Public funds are used. Actually, vote

1 funds are used to pay for this government caucus committee. The minutes are

kept secret, because somehow there's a cabinet confidentiality invoked — a

very curious mix. I'm trying to find out, in her role as Minister of Health

Planning, how that integrates — that's all. I would say it's perfectly

appropriate for Health Planning.

[ Page 523 ]

This is my

second set of estimates, and it's the second time I've been told that my

questioning perhaps should have gone elsewhere. Well, sorry; I beg to differ.

On the

issue of the government caucus committees and the minister's responsibility for

Health Planning, is there any money from her budget that flows to the government

caucus committee?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: No.

MacPhail: So the Ministry of Health Planning has no staff funds that go to

the government caucus committee.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: That is correct.

MacPhail: On the issue of further planning, the minister is reported as

having said, actually yesterday — this was a public report — that she has to

go to Treasury Board to get money. Is the money that…? It was money for —

and maybe she was misquoted — a nursing strategy; I think that was the

questioning. Gosh, we all know how we can be misquoted, but she has to go

Treasury Board. Is the Treasury Board submission that…? Any Treasury Board

submissions that the minister makes around the implementation of her planning

— does that come out of her budget?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: The budget for that comes out of Health Services, unless it's so

intrinsically involved in health planning that it would come out of Health

Planning. But generally, it's out of Health Services.

MacPhail: In the minister's budget I note that her minister's office budget

is $566,000, and I note that the minister's office for Health Services — I've

got to make sure I get this right — is $456,000. That would have all come out

of what used to be the ministry vote for just the Ministry of Health. What's the

percentage of increase for the minister's office, given those two budgets?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I don't have those numbers with me, so I don't want to give the

member inaccurate information. I will get those for her.

MacPhail: Can staff ballpark it for me? Is it a 50 percent increase, a 75

percent increase, a 100 percent increase?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I really do not want to give inaccurate information or a ballpark

figure, so we will commit to getting you the information.

MacPhail: Well, we're a small but hardy caucus, but maybe my caucus research

can get that information for the minister if she doesn't have it at hand.

[1645]

Let's go

through some of the issues that the minister is responsible for in her service

plans outlined in the letter that she received from the Premier on June 25.

Perhaps she can just outline for the public, for British Columbians, what

planning mechanism she has in place to carry out the matters for which the

Premier holds her accountable: examine the governance structure and make

recommendations for alignment of the community health council, community health

services society and regional health board responsibilities, including a

recommended structure for the Vancouver-Richmond health board.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I have to remind the member that we've only been around for two

months, so for some of this, there are no formalized structures in place.

This is a

small ministry. We expect to be working with experts in planning and economics.

We will certainly work with joint committees in Health Services and other

ministries such as Advanced Education and Community, Aboriginal and Women's

Services. As I mentioned before, they have immigration responsibilities with

them. Certainly we will be working with those ministries to develop plans.

If the

member's looking for detailed, formalized structures that are in place right now

that are working to build these plans, no, I don't have that in place.

For the

different responsibilities, projects, that my ministry and I will be accountable

for, as we start working on those projects and developing them, we'll judge what

kind of planning processes we will embark on.

MacPhail: I think that's fair comment. I appreciate that the minister has

been in place for almost 90 days of the new era, but I do know that the minister

has expected to assume responsibility for years, as has the government. In fact,

on his swearing-in, the Premier said: "This should have happened five years

ago." So I assume, if that's what he thinks, that he's been preparing.

[Applause.]

Well, I

wouldn't expect the caucus to applaud too loudly, because that means that they'd

have to provide some answers. If they're that happy about the fact that it

should have happened five years ago, reviews and waffling aren't acceptable.

Answers have to be provided, and the minister isn't able to provide the answers.

So it's not necessarily a supportive thing — that the members in this chamber

are applauding that.

Let me just

ask the minister, then, based on the fact that the entire government caucus

think that they should have been there five years ago: what's the time line for

meeting the first item for which the minister is held accountable — examining

the governance structure and making recommendations for alignment of community

health councils?

Of course,

that then ties into the next one, which is: develop an accountability framework

for boards and an arm's-length appointment process with identification of clear

expectations and performance measures. In what order will she be pursuing those

goals?

[ Page 524 ]

Hon. S.

Hawkins: You know what? I can say that we've gotten a lot more planning done

in two months than that government ever did in ten years.

[1650]

The

Premier, in his wisdom, split Health ministries so that we have a minister that

actually looks after the day-to-day and a ministry that steps back, takes a

breath and says: "What's going on? What's happened in the last ten years?

How do we help meet those patients' needs that were ignored and neglected for so

long under your government's watch, under your watch, member?"

Anyway,

it's no secret — I can tell the member, because she's probably heard already

— that we have an ongoing review right now on regionalization, on governance,

on accountability in our health care system. It's not part of the 90-day plan.

It's not something I'm planning to rush. It's not something I'm planning to

prolong. I want to make sure I get good advice. I want to make sure there's

input from regions, from providers, from members from around the province. We're

going to make sure that when we develop the components of the structure and the

accountability and governance models, we are doing it on sound judgment and good

advice.

MacPhail: This is the opportunity for the minister to demonstrate the

difference about what's happened in the last two months, and so far we're very

short on information. In fact, the minister just used the justification that

they've only been in government for two months to say that she doesn't have any

information. It was a bit of a contradictory statement here, of course, which is

all being recorded for posterity. So I would just advise the minister that this

is the time for her to get up and give the specifics to the public.

What's the

time line? If there is a review in place, could she outline the details of how

that review is taking place and the time line?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: If the member wants to know what planning is being done, I say to

wait for it, because unlike her government, we're not going to announce it until

we have it in place and can actually deliver it. So just wait for it.

There is an

internal review happening right now around regionalization, and we are getting

appropriate input from the stakeholders involved. We recognize that it needs to

be coordinated with the accountability framework and the governance issues. I'm

not going to rush it, and I'm not going to prolong it. It is something that's

happening as we speak. Again, I'm looking at the advice I'm getting, and

certainly that is something that will be discussed with government caucus and

the appropriate decision-making bodies. When it's ready, the member will hear

about it. But right now it's policy that's being prepared for future

implementation, so I would say to the member: wait for it.

MacPhail: Who's conducting the review, and who's being consulted in the

review?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: The review is being coordinated by my deputy minister. We're

getting advice from the regional health boards, the CHSSs, the CHCs and the

Vancouver-Richmond health board.

MacPhail: How are they submitting their views to the review?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: We've certainly had sub-missions. We've had letters, and I've had

meetings with various stakeholders.

[1655]

MacPhail: I assume that there's a great deal of interest in this from the

various levels. So is each CHC and CHSS and regional health board being asked

the same questions in a review? Is there a series of answers that they have to

give? Is there a series of issues that each council or board is being asked to

submit their views on? If so, could I have that information?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: It's been no secret. They are aware of the review. They've been

told that they can have input on it. It's ongoing as we speak.

MacPhail: I asked a very specific question, Mr. Chair. Perhaps the minister

could answer the specific question.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: There aren't specific questions being asked per se. When the

Premier last fall…. When we toured on the dialogue on health care, we

certainly heard concerns from all around the province — how regionalization,

the way her government implemented it, wasn't working. We certainly heard from

stakeholders, from patients, from CEOs, from regional health board members —

and we still hear from people across the province — that they don't think that

the system is working to the best interests of patients. So we are asking for

input on how the different regions feel that they should be organized; how we

can find the last of the efficiencies, if we can put it that way; how we can

make the services that we deliver across the province work better for the people

in the regions where they live.

MacPhail: Well, this is a very specific project that the Premier has asked

the minister to be accountable for. It's very specific: "Examine the

governance structure and make recommendations for an alignment of community

health council/community health services society/regional health board

responsibilities, including a recommended structure for the Vancouver-Richmond

health board." That's a very specific assignment.

It's not

something that I assume was dealt with during the election, where the minister

says they travelled around the province and heard input — unless it was. All

I'm asking for is: what are the questions being put to the regional health boards

so that it's a fair process, so that one board isn't being treated differently

than one CHC. There's a specific reference

[ Page 525 ]

here to the Vancouver-Richmond health board. What are the specific questions

being put to that under review?

The

minister keeps saying that it's no secret that there's a review. Well, if

there's a review, there's a review. I assume that when the minister states that

her government is doing things differently, somehow the process…. I would

assume she means that she's doing things more rigorously, that she's doing

things in a fair and equitable way, that there are opportunities for equitable

input, that there are indications of what the goals of the review are. So I

assume that's what's in place. That's all I'm asking for in the way of

information. They're technical questions; they're not political questions.

[1700]

Hon. S.

Hawkins: You know, one size doesn't fit all, so there's not a specific set

of questions for each little piece of region across the province. There are

different kinds of models that this government set up. What we're looking at is:

what makes sense? How can we deliver services to patients where they live in the

best, efficient, sustainable way? Certainly, across the regions the issues are

different. Vancouver-Richmond health board delivers provincial services, so the

questions for that are going to be different. Certainly other questions arise

out of the review that the deputy's doing.

I did not

send people in with a checklist saying: "Ask this question, ask this

question and ask this question." What I expect to get is a document that

gives me the best advice on the general question: are we delivering services in

an effective, appropriate way for the regions that patients are serviced by

across the province? Are we finding the efficiencies that we need across those

regions? I can tell you right now that there are regions and groups of CHCs that

have written to us and said: "Please regionalize us. We are not doing the

job as effectively as we can." We're

looking at the concerns of the different regions, finding ways…. And I'm

getting advice on how we can model or shape them so that it makes sense, so that we

have regions that are served appropriately for hospital services and for

referral patterns — for example, that the Vancouver-Richmond region is

providing provincial services appropriately for the population at large. So

there's not a set of questions that are specific to this review, but they

certainly are questions that are being asked specific to each region.

MacPhail: Well, this is a pretty straightforward question. When did the

review start?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I think I advised my deputy about a month or five weeks ago to

embark on the review.

MacPhail: How much is the review costing, and where is the money coming

from?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: It's part of the Health Planning budget. It's encompassed in this

budget. It's not anything extra, over and above.

MacPhail: How much has the minister allocated for the review?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: It is part of the Health Planning budget in the sense of whatever

time the deputy is spending. It encompasses staff in the Health Services budget.

It's an internal review, so staff are allocated for that purpose. It's nothing

set aside. There's no discrete, targeted fund set aside. They're staff-assigned,

and my deputy….

MacPhail: In meeting the first goal that the minister is held accountable

for on page 7 of the Premier's letter to you, will you be issuing a public

report for public discussion before a decision is made?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: No. I think this is something that's internal and is part of the

review of the way we deliver services, programs and governance accountability

across the province, so there won't be public consultation for this — no.

MacPhail: I'm not even asking about public consultation. I assume, by point

one of the minister's responsibilities, that you are to examine the government

structure and make recommendations for alignment. Maybe the minister will come

back and say status quo, but I assume that the goal here is really to make

recommendations for change. Is the minister suggesting that the recommendations

for change will not be made public? And will there not be an opportunity for

public response before the decision is made?

[1705]

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Insofar as the regions are already involved, the health regions and

the boards and other stakeholders are already involved in advising the minister

on what kinds of structural recommendations for these changes are going to be

made. That is the process in place right now.

You know, I

don't see a massive restructuring of the health care system. I don't see the

kind of changes that this member's government imposed on the health care system.

This is basically finding, I think, the last few efficiencies and just doing

some minor tweaking, if you will. There's a bunch of regions that have asked.

There are groups of CHCs that have asked to regionalize. We are looking at those

kinds of issues. This isn't something that's going to go out to public

consultation or public discussion.

MacPhail: I've already given up on the request for public consultation.

First of all, I asked whether there was a standard series of questions or tests

or whatever that the people had to meet across the province so that everybody

was being treated fairly and equitably. That doesn't exist. Change is going to

[ Page 526 ]

made by the government without them notifying what the change is for public

input before the decision is actually made. I'm wondering how the minister

expects people to think that they've been treated fairly without any

standardized — it doesn't have to be one size fits all — matters that they

have to address. Then the document will be kept secret, and the decision will be

made without public regard. Where does the test of fairness come into that?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Well, I find it very strange that this member lectures this side of

the House, our government, on fairness and equitability when under their

government, under their watch, we saw the least bit of fairness and the least

bit of equitability as far as two-tiering and rural and urban health care. The

way they set up the health care system, the rural areas have suffered. They've

been neglected, and I can tell you right now that our government is trying to

address those concerns. We are going across the province.

The regions

are aware of the review. The review is going to be based on referral patterns,

on health care services that are available, on economics, on trying to find

those last few efficiencies and — guess what — on fairness and equitability

as well. In order to apply a test of fairness and equitability, and certainly

across the regions…. If the member reads the website and what I'm responsible

for, I'm also responsible for finding a fair population-based formula to apply

across the regions for health care services, and one way to do that is to find a

structure for regions where a formula can be applied.

That is

part of this review. We know that in order for a population-based formula to be

applied, we need a critical mass of population. I believe it's somewhere in the

range of 60,000 to 100,000 people that studies have shown you can apply a

formula to that is fair and equitable. Some of our CHCs, I understand, service

fewer than 2,000 people. Part of doing this structuring, or getting advice and

recommendations on the kind of structure that we need provincewide, is so that

we can provide a fair and equitable funding for our patients across the

province.

MacPhail: Well, I'm merely asking questions. It's a little bit too early in

the process for the minister to suggest that asking questions is inappropriate.

I would note that the minister, in answering the last question, provided more

information about what the review is about than she has in the previous

half-hour, so the questions are certainly proving useful to the public.

The next

project that the minister is responsible for is to develop an accountability

framework for boards and an arm's-length appointment process with identification

of clear expectations and performance measures. How is that proceeding?

[1710]

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I can say that we have just started discussing that and have just

begun work on that point.

MacPhail: Perhaps the minister could say how she started the work. Let me

ask this: is this accountability framework separate and apart from the

independent commission for agencies, boards and commissions that the Premier has

said he's going to set up?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Yes to that member's question. And I can say that part of the

reason for setting up an arm's-length appointment process for health boards is

because that member's government was perceived to have put a lot of their party

people — NDP appointments — on these boards and politicized the health care

governance system. So we are looking at a process where we've removed some of

the politics around that. We are looking at a process that actually endorses

some of the recommendations that the auditor general made in his report, as far

as governance and the people that sit on boards as governors — people that

actually have expertise, knowledge and skills to sit on those kinds of boards.

So we are

just in the beginning of the process of deciding how we're going to embark on

this part of governance, accountability and performance measures for boards.

MacPhail: Why is it a separate process from the one the Premier has set up

for an overall independent commission for agencies, boards and commissions?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: It is linked with the director of agencies, boards and commissions.

What we are doing is setting up an accountability framework for the health

boards. If the member reads down to the fifth bullet — I believe it's the

fifth bullet, if that's on hers — we will set up the arms'-length appointment

process and then the ABC director will work on the board Chair appointments.

MacPhail: Who is the agencies, boards and commissions director?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: It's Elizabeth Watson.

MacPhail: And what's her background?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: This director reports to the Premier, so those questions would be

very appropriate for the Premier's estimates.

MacPhail: The identification of clear expectations and performance measures

list — what does that refer to? Does it refer to the accountability framework

or the arm's-length appointment process?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: That refers to the accountability framework. If I can expand on

that a little bit for the member, we will set up clear expectations and

performance measures for the kind of program services that the health boards

will be required to provide and meet these standards.

[ Page 527 ]

[1715]

MacPhail: What will the performance measures be? This will certainly be

groundbreaking. I have direct knowledge of this going on in Ontario right now,

and it's certainly a very difficult issue. So what are the performance measures

that the minister anticipates putting in place?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: This is groundbreaking work. I understand there is an initial draft

of a framework that has been developed. We are reviewing it. We are also looking

at the Health Canada framework. They are starting to develop performance

measures. We are also looking at models in England and New Zealand, and we will

certainly get stakeholder input as we develop these frameworks and performance

measures and goals. Also, just for the member's information, it's Health

Services that will be implementing these measures.

MacPhail: I note further down that one of the projects for which the

minister is to be held accountable is: "Consider the advisability of

including Pharmacare, ambulance services and Medical Services Plan in regional

authority budgets. Recommend appropriate governance model for licensing

functions." I'm going to skip to that one, if I may, because it's related

to the topics that we have. Is the minister asking the advisability of doing

this in her review of the regional health boards and the community health

councils?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: No.

MacPhail: I am wondering why not. It would seem to me that this would be an

issue around workload, responsibility and performance measures. It seems to me

to be integrated.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I consider that a longer-term project. The one that we talked about

— examining governance structure and making recommendations for realignments

— I see as a shorter-term, so we're working on that first. These are very

complex programs, and I think we need to have a careful look at them. Again, I

think we are going to do things in a very measured and…. We're not going to

make quick judgments on these, so this is something that I think needs a longer

look.

MacPhail: The reason why I'm curious is…. Let's just take the example of

the Medical Services Plan — regionalizing that budget to a community health

council or a regional health board. I assume one of the considerations that the

minister would have in using the Medical Services Plan, the payment to

physicians, is to do it in a way that makes the most sense for the region. I

don't know what other reason the Premier would have in asking the minister to

consider regionalizing the budget.

[1720]

Often it's

been contemplated by people in the health care system that perhaps that's the

way to get physicians properly placed throughout the province, where the

physicians are needed. If the minister is looking at re-examining the regional

extent of authority of community health councils, for instance, wouldn't it make

sense to do both at the same time?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: No, I don't think it makes sense to do both at the same time. I

think it's important that we get our structures in place. I think it's important

that we get started working on our accountability frameworks and our performance

measures. Certainly, this is something that we have been asked to consider, to

get advice on. It is something that is not new. There are other jurisdictions

that are experimenting with this. I believe that some of the regional health

authorities of our neighbour to the east, Alberta, are looking at this. I think

it makes more sense to do things in a measured way, and that's what we are

trying to do.

MacPhail: Well, let's look at ambulance service, then.

Back to the

Medical Services Plan, I would suggest that certain community health councils

have said to this government that recruiting physicians is hard for them. If

you're going to change the community health council, wouldn't it make sense to

look at doing that in a way that also addresses the issue of the recruitment of

health professionals? If you're going to regionalize the budget, why not look at

both together? Clearly, the minister doesn't think that's appropriate.

What about

ambulance services? That's a geographic issue. Why is the minister separating

out ambulance services from the review of changing the boundaries or changing

the way community health councils govern?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Well, I think the member, from when she was minister, probably

understands that there are contract issues and structural issues that we have to

deal with. Certainly, under MSC structure the BCMA master working agreement

requires major modification. A lot of these contracts require notice. So it's

not something we're rushing into. It's something we've been asked to review and

get advice on, and that's what we're going to do. Certainly, this is in the

realm of future policy. We'll keep the member posted. She can see what progress

we're making as we roll some of this out.

MacPhail: I fully agree that the system is very complex and that much of it

is intertwined and integrated. That's why I'm curious to know what the review

process is for changing the governance structure. It is all very complex and

integrated, yet the minister has been given assignments to deal with the whole

matter. That's why I was trying to ask about the orderly fashion in which she's

conducting the review to change the governance structure when the matters are so

complex. That's why I wanted to know what the

[ Page 528 ]

process was for judging fairness and equity as she goes through the change.

Let's look

at another one, then, that I think is integrated and part of the very complex

system where they're all integrated: "Develop a framework for financial and

human resource allocation, including capital and equipment." The amount of

budget that goes toward our community health councils and regional health boards

is substantial. I think it's in the billions. I can't remember, but it's in the

billions. Those community health councils and those regional health boards are

responsible for those billions of dollars. Within those billions of dollars

there's financial and human resource allocations.

[1725]

I think

that the capital and equipment budget is separate still and is managed on a

provincewide basis, unless that's changed. Maybe it's changed. I don't know; I

can't remember. But if it has and it's been regionalized, is that part of the

review process that the minister is conducting around changing the governance

structure for community health councils and regional health boards?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I think the goal of this is to simplify the governance structure,

because as the member states, it is very complex. It's very integrated. Perhaps at this

time it makes sense to the member to do everything all at

once, but guess what. We've only been around two months. We're trying to break

off chunks and deal with them in a reasonable, measured way so that we actually

get some work done. The first step is looking at the governance structure, and

the next step is looking at accountability framework, looking at how we deal

with appointments, those kinds of things. We're trying to do it in a

step-by-step fashion.

Now, the

member asked about funding for the regions and capital funding. I think I

already mentioned the population-based formula that the Premier has asked us to

develop or advise on — how it would function provincewide. The formula that we

are considering takes into account demographics, rural versus regional, urban

issues, the social determinants that I'm sure the member is aware of: gender,

tertiary services, academic services. All of these are things that factor into

the population-based funding formula. Certainly the capital and equipment plan

and some of those kinds of financial issues that the member is talking about will

factor into the funding around those plans. Finally, the human resources plan is

also going to be done on a regional needs basis.

MacPhail: Well, I want to get to the population-based funding in a moment.

It is

interesting to note that the minister herself acknowledges that the human and

financial resource allocation will be done on a regional basis. What region?

Unless the minister is planning on doing away with the governance structures of

community health councils or regional health boards, or both, I assume there

will be some sort of regional governance structure in place. How does one

determine that regional structure, if she's planning on changing it, so that it

makes more sense? I assume that's why she's doing it. Is it not about the

administration of the programs, the demands of the programs, the allocations

that are necessary? Would that not guide the minister's determination of how to

change the governance structure?

That's the

only reason. I'm suggesting they're all so integrated that they should be

considered together, and it should be the questions that are asked in the review

that the minister is conducting. That's all. That was what I was trying to get

at before: what is the minister considering in her review for change in the

governance structure? Anyway, I only do that to look back and suggest that that

was what I was seeking. But I understand now from the minister that those are

not part of the review, and those factors won't be considered in the review.

[1730]

On the

issue of the population-based funding: "Develop a transparent

population-based funding formula." Can the minister guarantee that no

regional health board or community health council, current or restructured, will

have their funding cut as a result of the population-based funding formula being

put in place?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: It's difficult to answer that question, because I think the member

knows that this minister is getting advice right now on the structure of the

regions. She's asking if existing regions, the way they stand, will not get

their funding cut. We have committed to keeping our commitment for $9.3 billion