1976 Legislative Session: 1st Session, 31st 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)

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 1976

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

1 ]

CONTENTS

Election of Speaker

Hon. Mrs. McCarthy — 1

Hon. Mr. Bennett — 1

Mr. King I

Mr. Macdonald — 2

Mr. Smith — 3

Mr. Gibson — 3

Mr. Lauk — 5

Mr. Wallace — 6

Mr. Lea — 7

Division — 9

Mr. Speaker — 11

Hon. Mrs. McCarthy — 11

Routine proceedings

Speech from the Throne (Hon. W.S. Owen) — 11

The In-laws Act (Bill 1) Hon, Mr. Gardom.

Introduction and first reading — 13

The House met at 3 p.m.

This being the first day of the first session of the 31st

Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Columbia for the

dispatch of business, pursuant to a proclamation of the Hon. Walter

Stewart Owen, Lieutenant-Governor of the province, dated December

11,1975, hon. members took their seats, after having taken the

prescribed oath and having signed the parliamentary roll.

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, having entered the House, took his seat on the Throne.

HON. G.M. McCARTHY (Provincial Secretary): Members of the

Legislative Assembly, I am commanded by His Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor to announce that he does not see fit to declare the

cause of his summoning you at this time and will not do so until you

have chosen a Speaker to preside over your honorable body. His Honour

the Lieutenant-Governor hopes to be able to declare during the

afternoon his reasons for calling you together.

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor retired from the chamber.

HON. W.R. BENNETT (Premier): Mr. Clerk, I move that Dean

Edward Smith, Esquire, member for North Peace River electoral district,

do take the Speaker's chair to preside over the meetings of this

assembly.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Mr. Clerk, I am pleased to second that motion.

MR. W.S. KING (Revelstoke-Slocan): Mr. Clerk, I move that the

member for Vancouver-East (Mr. Macdonald) be nominated as Speaker of

this Legislative Assembly, seconded by the hon. member for North

Vancouver-Capilano (Mr. Gibson).

I would point out, Mr. Clerk, that's it.

CLERK: The question is that Dean Edward Smith, Esquire, member for North Peace River....

MR. KING: Point of order, Mr. Clerk. I suggest that the

question of nomination is debatable, I suggest further that those

candidates that are, indeed, nominated have the right, under the rules

of this House, to state whether or not they accept in the first

instance the nomination that has been placed in their name and,

further, how they intend to proceed with the conduct of the important

office of Speaker.

It appears to me that if a vote is put on the first motion, then that deprives

all of those members nominated of even indicating whether or not they are prepared

to stand for the office and, in the second instance, any support for the question

or the advisability of who should be the choice of this parliament.

CLERK: Perhaps it would be expedient to give a word of

explanation about parliamentary practice which obtains under these

circumstances.

The nomination first moved is put before the House; then further

nominations are called for, at which time it is in order for any other

nominations to be made. Then, upon nominations being closed, all hon.

members have the right to address themselves to both nominations.

The question is that D. Edward Smith, Esquire, member for North

Peace River electoral district, do take the Speaker's chair and preside

over the meetings of this session.

Are there any further nominations?

MR. KING: Yes, Mr. Clerk. I would like to place the name of

the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Macdonald) in nomination for

the position of Speaker of this assembly.

In speaking to that nomination, Mr. Clerk, I would like to say at

the outset that I rather regret the fact that the opposition finds it

necessary to place forward a name other than that proposed by the

government. I have indicated to the Premier (Hon. Mr. Bennett) that the

official opposition would consider seconding the nomination of the hon.

member for North Peace River (Mr. Smith) .

Unfortunately, matters have come to the attention of the opposition

which, in our view, present grave dangers to the rights of parliament,

to the rights particularly of opposition members in this House. And as

the House knows, it is the solemn duty of the Speaker to protect the

rights and the privileges of all members of this institution.

We feel that certain questions have arisen, particularly with

respect to the Speaker-designate, namely the member for North Peace

River, having subordinated the authority of the office of Speaker to

both treasury benches and to certain ministerial intervention, indeed

to the intervention of some executive assistants which reside in the

office of, members of the executive branch.

This is a threat to the traditional independence and impartiality of

the Speaker's office, and we feel that without some assurances from

those candidates for the office of Speaker that they will act

independently from the government, from the executive branch of

government, that they will act in a manner calculated to protect the

rights and privileges of each and every member of this assembly,

unfortunately we cannot make the election of a

[ Page 2 ]

Speaker unanimous.

I refer, Mr. Clerk, to an exchange of correspondence which took

place between leaders of the Opposition parties and the Speaker's

office with respect to staff for the functioning of parliament. We are

in receipt of a letter to the Speaker-elect under the signature of Mr.

Dan Campbell, who, to my knowledge, is not an elected member of this

assembly, which presumes to dictate to the Speaker the extent to which

he might exercise his authority in providing resources and facilities

to parliament. That letter is dated January 5,1976. It is directed to

Mr. D.E. Smith, Speaker-designate, Speaker's office, Victoria, B.C.,

and it reads — and I quote:

"Until further notice there is — repeat — no

entitlement for the hiring of staff persons beyond those currently in

the estimates under vote 1. For greater clarity, this involves five

persons available to the government members as provided for in 1975-76

estimates, three persons for the NDP caucus, two persons for the

Conservative caucus, and two persons for the Liberal caucus. Further

authority for the hiring of additional employees beyond these above

indicated must await conclusion of a study currently underway with

respect to the personnel complement which will be authorized with

respect to each of the caucuses. Signed, Dan Campbell."

Mr. Clerk, the members of the opposition view with grave concern the

incursion and the erosion of the independent and the prerogatives of

the Speaker's office by those people who are retained by Crown

ministers — not even elected people — who would intrude on the

Speaker's authority to provide and designates the facilities and the

resources which only this House, only this Legislature, has the right

to empower the Speaker to provide.

We find that the Speaker-designate seconded and subordinated this authority to those admonitions.

Under those circumstances, we cannot possibly have confidence in the

impartiality or the independence of such a candidate for Speaker.

I would like to point out just briefly that the Speaker's office has

traditionally been used in parliament in Great Britain, in the senior

House in Ottawa and most of the provinces as second only to the Crown

in terms of precedence in the Legislature. We have the suggestion by

members of the government executive, and indeed by the Premier, that

the Speaker's prerogative must be subordinated to the dictums of

Treasury Board. This is a serious threat to any confidence the

opposition could have in terms of impartiality, in terms of

independence, in terms of the separation of the Speaker's office from

the executive branch of government.

But under these circumstances, as much as we regret — and indeed we

do — that we cannot support unanimously the candidate put forward by

the government, we would suggest that if there is someone in the

government benches who the government wishes to put forward who has not

succumbed to dictums from Cabinet ministers and executive assistants,

who is not tainted by capitulating to those kinds of overtures, we

would we prepared to consider unanimous endorsation. Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

CLERK: Shall leave be granted to put this motion before the House, a motion in writing not having been received?

Leave granted.

CLERK: The question is that Mr. Alex B. Macdonald, first

member for Vancouver East, should take the Speaker's chair and preside

over the meetings of this assembly. Are there any further nominations?

Are there any further nominations? Are there any further nominations?

I declare the nominations closed, and it is now in order for the

members to address themselves to the two nominations placed before them.

MR. A.B. MACDONALD (Vancouver East): Mr. Clerk, even without

the benefit of a microphone, as a candidate for the honoured position

of Speaker, I'd like to say very briefly what the qualifications of

that office should be as I see them — and with all becoming modesty.

And I'm thoroughly entitled to that. (Laughter.)

The Speaker must, of course, as the hon. member has said, bring to

that office strict impartiality and a smattering of dignity. But he

must be totally non-partisan in the functions of that office. He must

see that his Legislature abides by the rules and ancient privileges of

parliament and the ancient precedents. In other words, he must be fair

to all members, and particularly to backbench and opposition members of

this Legislative Assembly. In saying that, I'm not only mindful of the

rights as they are laid down, Mr. Clerk, in the rule books and in the

precedents, but he must see to it that the members of the assembly have

the resources at their disposal to make themselves effective and useful

elected members. That does include reasonable clerical assistance. It

includes reasonable space within the precincts of the Legislature, and

it includes mailing privileges. The elected members must not be allowed

to be reduced to ciphers in a parliamentary democracy.

Finally, the Speaker must protect the rights of the Legislature

against the overweening powers of the executive arm of government. The

Speaker's office has been set out as to its duties by

an Act passed

unanimously by this Legislature, Legislative Procedure and Practice

Inquiry Act, and that office must be upheld without diminishment.

[ Page 3 ]

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): Mr. Clerk, in keeping

with the traditions of parliament, when an election is called and there

is more than one nominee, I declare that I will vote against my

nomination and support the nomination of the other nominee.

MR. G.F. GIBSON (North Vancouver-Capilano): Mr. Clerk and

hon. members, I hoped to hear something more from the man who was

nominated by the Premier to be Speaker of this House when he stood in

his place and said how he proposed to vote, and that, hon. members, is

that he proposed to vote for his opponent.

The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Macdonald) did give us some

indication how he views the traditions of parliament. The usual

procedure is to settle this important question by consultation and

agreement in advance. I have examined the records back to the beginning

of the Second World War, and find that except on this occasion in the

British Columbia Legislature there has not been significant debate.

There were few exchanges of pleasantries in 1972, but no serious

debate. There is today because of the lack of consultation and lack of

agreement in advance.

The attitude of the government today makes it necessary for us to

debate this question. But for those in this province who may be

impatient to get on with the government business of this day, which is

the advice to this House of the intentions of this government, I want

to say that we are both commanded by His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor

and by the Constitution Act to address ourselves first to the question

of who should be the Speaker. That is appropriate because if any given

decision is important, or any given policy is important, none are as

important as the democratic process by which we reach those decisions,

and the Speaker is central to that process. He governs all we do here;

he is the protector of the rights included in the parliament, the

members, and therefore the people. Parliament was set up as a

protection against tyranny. We must never forget that. The tyrant was,

and the potential tyrant always is the government of the day of

whatever stripe.

I invite the hon. members to consider some of the dimensions of the

office of Speaker, as set out in May I quote from the 18th edition, p.

225: "The chief characteristics attaching to the office of

Speaker...are those of authority and impartiality." I will refer later

in my remarks to which of those characteristics are shown by the two

men nominated. Later on p. 225: "Confidence in the impartiality of the

Speaker is an indispensable condition of the successful workings of

procedure...." An indispensable condition, hon. members.

Then later: "The Speaker's rulings, whether given in public or in

private, constitute precedents.... The Speaker has control of the

accommodation and services..." — the building we are in, and the staff of

these precincts.

Now let me pass on to the financial authority of the Speaker as has

been practiced in the Province of British Columbia. We have heard a

good deal from the government on the subject of financial authority of

the Speaker, and they have pretended that he is subject, and that this

House is subject, to the dictates of Treasury Board.

I would refer to that

section of the Constitution Act, under which

they and all governments must operate, until they are repealed.

Section 71:

"... do hereby grant to Her Majesty annually such sums

as are required to pay the amounts of the annual allowances, including expense

allowances, to the persons entitled under

sec. 64, and the necessary expenses

of the Legislative Assembly."

It is obligatory, the first charge on revenue. It has nothing to do with Treasury Board.

I am advised by the former Speaker of this House that whatever the

faults of the previous government — and I was no mean critic of theirs

— there was never at any time a variation by the Treasury Board, by the

then Treasury Board, of the budget submitted by the Speaker for the

Legislative Assembly. Later on I will contrast that with the attempted

variation by this government.

I suggest to you, Sir, and to the members, that any other procedure

than an absolute entitlement to this Legislature for the funding of its

operation would put this Legislature under the complete control of the

government.

That is not the purpose of the parliamentary system. Any fit Speaker must uphold this.

Next, Sir, I would draw your attention — and I will come back later

to all of these questions which describe how the Speaker falls under

these categories — I draw your attention to the law relating to the

exercise of the Speaker's authority between parliaments. In most areas,

in Ottawa, Ontario, Quebec and the United Kingdom, for example, it is

provided that the old Speaker carries on until the new Speaker is

elected by the assembly. I suggest that is a good law for us to adopt —

but that is not our law. Our Constitution Act, see. 44, makes it clear

that the Provincial Secretary is to act in most of the services and

staff duties of the Speaker until such time as he is known and elected.

Most unusual procedures were followed in this case.

I suggest next it is the duty of the Speaker to uphold the rights of

parliament and the Speaker's office and of members, and I say let us

now examine certain events to see how they meet the test of these

criteria. These events, sir, and hon. members, have importance more for

the way they are exemplary than of themselves. But they happen to be

events which are documented, which are available to members

[ Page 4 ]

of this assembly, which were alluded to by, the hon. member for Revelstoke-Slocan (Mr. King) . Let us look at the order.

In December of 1975, the new cabinet was named. The Speaker was

designated in the same announcement. That put a partisan coloration on

the office of Speaker from day one. Subsequently the Speaker-designate

moved into the office of the Speaker, told the existing staff they were

no longer required, and engaged new staff. The authority under which

the existing staff was dismissed is not clear. I would have wished that

the Speaker-designate designated by the cabinet, could have clarified

that point.

Early in 1976, a special committee on vote 1 — vote 1 being the

appropriation under which members of this assembly are paid, the

appropriation under which we are allowed to go about our business, the

business of the people in questioning the government day after day — a

special committee on vote 1 was produced, was appointed by the Premier.

As chairman of that committee we had a person who is not an elected

member, who is an official in the Premier's office, who is supposed to

be in the business of telling this assembly how its finances were going

to be run. The hon. member for Revelstoke-Slocan read the

extraordinarily arrogant memorandum that the chairman of that committee

sent to the Speaker-designate under date of January 5.

Hon. members, I suggest to you that had the hon. member for North

Peace River (Mr. Smith) intended to protect the office of Speaker as

Speaker-designate, he would either have resigned on the spot from that

nomination, or he would have in no uncertain terms chastised the

Premier and told him that he, the would-be Speaker, was not a servant

of the Premier's office.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GIBSON: A little bit later an undated memo came forward

from the Speaker-designate, received in my office on January 12.

Addressed to Mr. Campbell, it made recommendations — not saying how the

Speaker is going to run things when he is appointed, but making

recommendations to a government official. I say that is not good enough

for the position of Speaker. A little bit later, in a memo dated

January 12, we see that the Speaker-designate, while later on he will

pretend he has no authority, is in fact exercising certain authority in

inviting members to submit their requirements with respect to

stationery and business cards. He advises them they have authority

regarding the appointment of constituency secretaries. The next day, on

January 12, he signs another memorandum inviting the caucuses to

indicate to him which of their staff they propose to keep on and which

they propose to lay off, pursuant to his thoughts on an earlier

memorandum. Let there be no question but that when it suited him, the

Speaker-designate found it expedient to exercise his supposed authority.

On January 15 a letter was dispatched to the secretary in one of the

caucus offices advising her of her termination, obviously an executive

act.

On January 28 members of the opposition were sufficiently disturbed

that they sought and after some time received an opportunity to meet

with the Premier in this regard. We gathered in the Premier's office.

The hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Stupich) was there, the hon. member

for Oak Bay and myself, as well as a person taking notes. At that time

an interim accommodation was reached in the matter which was under

discussion, but unfortunately no accommodation was reached in the far

more important constitutional question of who was in charge of the

privileges of the House.

The day after, another letter was written by the hon. member for Oak

Bay which I will not cite in case he wishes to do so himself. On

February 19, the Provincial Secretary sent a letter canceling mailing

privileges that had been instituted by the previous Speaker. I don't

question the legality of that move. It was entirely competent upon the

Provincial Secretary. I did not hear any protest from the

Speaker-designate on this removal of members' privileges, and I did see

some editorial comment that a bad move was made.

Another interesting little sideline later on in the month by

direction of the executive council was an attempt to administer loyalty

oaths to opposition caucus staff which would have the effect of

muzzling them if they came across any information in the pursuit of

their ordinary duty...would not be allowed to make it public without

proper authority — presumably government authority. I heard no protest

on that.

AN HON. MEMBER: That's garbage.

MR. GIBSON: I heard someone on the government benches say: "That is garbage." I hope that person will stand up and elucidate later on.

Later on, after we had attempted to achieve meetings with the

Speaker-designate to go over these things, we were having difficulty.

He said: "Write me some letters." We wrote letters and in due course

got replies back saying this — and these were requests for information

as to our requirements in terms of the Legislature: "I have passed your

letters along to the chairman of the Treasury Board, the Hon. Evan

Wolfe, without comment." The Speaker-designate did not on that occasion

find it expedient to exercise the general powers he found it expedient

to exercise in the other matters earlier on.

Mr. Clerk, the important thing for the purpose of

[ Page 5 ]

this debate is not the nasty and small-minded attack of the

government on certain resources of the opposition. The question is the

way in which this example has laid bare the role of the government

nominee and his acquiescence in that attempt.

Earlier on, I referred to some tests of a Speaker. The first that

May cites is authority. Hon. members, government interference should

have been rejected. It was not. There is failure on the test of the

maintenance of the authority of the Speaker.

The second test suggested by May is impartiality, without which, he

says, it is an indispensable condition of the successful working of

procedure. Does impartiality lie in this nominee? Evenhandedness in

dealings with ordinary members of the government are not in evidence.

There was first of all the fact of the nomination of the hon. member

for North Peace River by the Premier, which I suggest is a retrograde

step in this Legislature.

It was the custom in this House for many years, but in 1972 the

British practice finally prevailed in British Columbia, that the

Speaker was nominated by a government backbenchers and seconded by an

opposition backbencher. That is in line with the very wise advice of

May. He says: "It is customary for the mover and seconder to be

unofficial members. In 1789 Mr. Pitt was desirous of proposing Mr.

Addington himself; but Mr. Hatsell, on being consulted, said: 'I think

that the choice of the Speaker should not be on the motion of the

minister. Indeed, an invidious use might be made of it, to represent

you as a friend of the minister, rather than the choice of the House."

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GIBSON: As evidence of lack of impartiality I cite the

acceptance of direction by the Premier's aide. As evidence of lack of

impartiality, I submit the supine acceptance of the authority of

Treasury Board over the budget of this House is improper, and is

against that provided in our Constitution Act,

section 71.

MR. GIBSON: That is hardly the Premier's view. He said on

television last night in Vancouver: "Any decision in this regard must

be made by Treasury Board. They make the decisions for all

departments." For all departments, hon. members. This House is not a

department.

The test of the Speaker is the understanding of the law of this

House. We have seen on the one hand the assumption of the privileges of

office and on the other hand the shirking of the responsibilities

office where it suited convenience. A test is feeling for the rights of

the members and it has been strictly the government against the rest.

There's been little appreciation of the role of members of all

parties as the protectors of the people. Staff is a start — mailing

privileges — for telephone calls out of the province we may have to get

permission. Maybe it will be telephone calls across the inlet — I don't

know....

MR. L. NICOLSON (Nelson-Creston): Don't give them any ideas.

MR. GIBSON: Mr. Clerk and hon. members, I suggest that every

opportunity for consultation was attempted by this opposition over the

last two months. We did our very best to prevent this day coming to

pass. The government, and in particular the hon. member for North Peace

River (Mr. Smith), did not avail themselves of these opportunities to

respond to the points we made.

Therefore we reach today a debate that could have been avoided. We

reached today with a Speaker that in all probability will be elected to

this House — not only without general support but over the active

protest of the combined opposition. That is not a contribution to the

record of parliamentary practice in British Columbia. That sad

circumstance, Mr. Clerk and hon. members, I suggest to you, will haunt

the life of this parliament as a direct result of the actions of this

government.

MR. G.V. LAUK (Vancouver Centre): Hon. members, Mr. Clerk, I

will be brief. But one must realize that, although we grow impatient on

opening day, the issue here is so fundamental and so far-reaching,

insofar as the democratic process in British Columbia is concerned,

that when we weigh your patience — and it has been gracious — with the

issue, we must take these few minutes now to bring to the attention of

this new government the vital rights and privileges of not only the

opposition hon. members; I'm speaking now to all hon. members. Even

official members in their role as members of constituencies need their

rights and privileges protected. And the backbenchers of the new

government — their rights must be protected.

I know that they may be a little shy in speaking out on opening day,

but I also know that their rights and duties and privileges are being

offended as much as the opposition. And I expect that at least one

spokesman from government backbench will speak.

Indeed, when the hon. Liberal leader (Mr. Gibson) states that this

thing is just beginning, we are suspicious; but we are loyal. We are an

opposition that wishes to support the Crown and to support the British

parliamentary system, but we must protect our rights and privileges in

this House. And, hon. members, there is only one person who stands

between the power of the Crown, the government,

[ Page 6 ]

the Premier and the rights and privileges of this House, and that is

the Speaker of the House. The Speaker must be above question and above

reproach in impartiality and in his defense of individual members'

rights.

It is for that reason that there are two improprieties. There is the

conduct of the Speaker-designate — and enough comment has been made of

that to convince, I think, everyone here today that his impartiality

and his judgment certainly are in question. But there is the second

impropriety alluded to by the hon. Liberal leader. Since in the

Westminster tradition the function of the Legislature is not to govern

so much as it is to ratify, to pass, to accept more readily than reject

the proposals of government, strict respect is paid to the lines of

demarcation between parliament and the administration. The House elects

its presiding officers. The House elects its presiding officers. And it

is considered bad form and improper to be nominated by the leader of

the government.

How can we be confident, when the Crown, the government, nominates

the Speaker of our House, that the Speaker is not trotting down the

hall to the Premier on every occasion, even respecting the rights and

privileges of the members of this House? How can we be confident of

that when we see the attitude of the hon. House leader of the loyal

opposition and of the Liberal leader? Can anyone, anyone, have

confidence in the conduct of the Speaker under those circumstances? I

urge all members with good conscience here to support the second

nomination proposed. It is in your interests to do so and you must do

so.

MR. G.S. WALLACE (Oak Bay): I want to express my initial

regret, the regret being extended quite a bit by everybody picking

essential parts of my speech and leaving very little to add. But I

agree particularly with my friend from North Vancouver-Capilano (Mr.

Gibson) . We do enter this debate with regret and would have preferred

to avoid the inconvenience to our guests in having to take this matter

to the attention of the public. But a very important and vital

principle is involved. The principle is the independence and

impartiality of the Speaker.

While I joke that the member has taken my quotes from May, he hasn't

taken my quotes from Philip Laundy, who is also an authority on the

Speaker's role. He has written a book on the Speaker's role, and he

states:

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly that the Speaker

is a man who owes allegiance to no party; he is the guardian of the

rights and freedoms of all the members. And the Speaker's customary

reiteration of this fact at the outset of each new parliament serves as

a reminder that liberties are not easily won, but they may be easily

lost."

Laundy also comments on ministerial influence on the Speaker. He says:

"On no account is a candidate for the Speakership

ever proposed from the front benches. This is a further token of the

Speaker's immunity from ministerial control."

Today, the Speaker-designate has been nominated by the Premier and

Deputy Premier — No. 1 and No. 2 on the front benches. The books to

which the Speaker refers time after time throughout on the conduct of

parliament make it very clear that the administrative duties under Vote

1 are clearly the responsibility of the Speaker. Now I really do wish

to avoid repetition of events which previous speakers have alluded to

this afternoon, so I'll pass over such events as the memo that was sent

by an unelected chairman of a special committee which never existed

before giving direction to the Speaker. I still feel it was very

strange and unusual that decisions affecting the spending of public

money were being made not only by an unelected person but that that

person was giving direction to the Speaker-designate.

I also pass over the problems of holding meetings when it was clear

there was dissention and difference of opinion, and that perhaps in an

intelligent and reasonable way the opposition representatives should

meet with the Speaker to straighten out the problems. That did not

happen except for one early occasion. I take great exception to one

particular memo, which the Member for North Vancouver-Capilano (Mr.

Gibson) quoted in part, that despite the argument over extra

secretarial help, the Speaker-designate sent a memo to the chairman of

the special committee saying that of course we could have help during

the session, if there was a proven need. The extra workload of a

session has been well established over many years, and in fact the

Speaker-designate has been in this House for nine years and knows the

extra load that falls on every member of this House. I feel this other

element of communication, suggesting that even during a session we have

to prove our needs for extra secretarial help, coming from a member who

has sat in the House nine years, leaves a great deal to be desired.

Again, it raises the question as to his good judgment in filling the

role of Speaker.

I might say that yesterday the Premier commented to the media that,

yes, sessional help would be provided. But we have no commitment, none

whatever, to that effect. No memos, no letters — nothing. Again I would

have to say that experience begs the question: who is in charge of Vote

1? Is it the Premier or is it the Speaker-designate?

MR. KING: Dan Campbell.

MR. WALLACE: Now we pass quickly over the other elements of this very important debate: that in

[ Page 7 ]

the past few weeks, in some areas, the member for North Peace River

has said that he really has no authority, and yet in other respects

such as the employment of staff in his office and other useful

measures, very useful measures, such as when he held an instructional

meeting for new members of this House.... I favor the participation

and encouragement of that idea. But this activity of approving of some

authority and denying his right to use authority in other regards is,

as was well pointed out by the Liberal leader, an ambiguous

decision-making process which cannot help but have the members of this

House ask themselves whether they could have confidence in the

nominated candidate.

I would like to stress that the issue per se of secretarial help is

just peripheral to the whole debate. It is the way in which that issue

has been handled by the Speaker-designate that has caused us to

wonder, regardless of the small issue of secretarial help, what else

might lie in store for the opposition. We feel that the

Speaker-designate has not shown a capacity to remain free from

ministerial

influence.

I would like again to quote from Philip Laundy. He states:

"The Speaker protects the rights of minorities. Some

members are representatives of a wider body of opinion than others. The

lone representative of a minority group, let it be emphasized, should

never find himself handicapped."

As a lone representative of a minority group, I wish to oppose very

strongly and at the very first opportunity any step, however small, to

erode the rights of any member of this House and any move to make it

difficult for any member of this House to carry out his legitimate

responsibilities to the House and to the voters who elected him to this

House. Again, I would heartily agree with the Liberal leader. We do

feel it is unfortunate to take time of the House on this occasion which

usually emphasizes pomp and tradition and pageantry. But with the

greatest respect to our guests, I would say this is the one day when we

do elect the one person who holds a very highly responsible position

for the efficient functioning of this House. The other 364 days we have

to deal with the consequences.

While I regret the inconvenience — and I see no need whatever to

apologize — I would simply conclude by saying that we must be sure that

we elect a Speaker who resists totally the kind of claims which we have

seen emphasized by government and by the Speaker-designate. Because

when governments are allowed to take that first step to weaken

opposition parties, we feel that other steps inevitably follow. It

would not be my intention, by default, to ignore this specific issue,

only to find at a later date that the government attempts to take away

the very recognition of small opposition parties in this House.

Big governments must not be encouraged to encroach on larger

freedoms by being allowed to nibble away at the smaller ones. The price

of freedom is eternal vigilance, and the members on this side of the

House today are exercising that vigilance.

MR. G.R. LEA (Prince Rupert): Mr. Clerk, hon. members, I

represent, as the hon. member for Prince Rupert, the riding of Prince

Rupert. Prince Rupert for many years had their MLA as the Speaker of

this House, Bill Murray. That former member is here today. I am proud

that when he was representing Prince Rupert and was the Speaker of this

House that the Chair had integrity, impartiality and, indeed, courage.

As a matter of fact, that Speaker, Mr. Clerk, made decisions in this

House that were voted down by members of the same party he belonged to

— the Social Credit Party. I suggest that that is the kind of Speaker

we need in this assembly or, indeed, in any other assembly.

What are we discussing today? We are discussing democracy.

AN HON. MEMBER: And freedom!

MR. LEA: We heard about freedom. We heard about freedom a lot

before December 11. We want to keep hearing about freedom. The only

way, hon. members, is to have a Speaker who is impartial, a Speaker who

is fair, is honest and, above all else, to back up those other things,

he must have courage and he must not take orders from anyone except the

hon. members of this House.

Now what we are discussing today, hon. members have said they

discussed this with regret. I believe that's true of all hon. members

on both sides of the House. But it surprises me that maybe, later, Mr.

Clerk, hon. members of the backbench of government.... I know members

of this House who have expressed doubts many times, whether they were

in the government back bench, ministers of government or any other

capacity. The hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Shelford) has spoken out many

times against injustice regardless of what it may do to him

politically. I fully expect, hon. members, to hear from him today

because we're looking at a possible injustice. I expect to hear from

him and other veteran members of this House. The hon. member for

Columbia River (Mr. Chabot), the hon. member for North Okanagan (Mrs.

Jordan), the hon. member for Chilliwack (Mr. Schroeder), but, above all

else, hon. members, we should hear from the hon. member for North Peace

River, the person that is nominated by the Premier and the Provincial

Secretary to be the Speaker of this assembly.

The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Macdonald) has stated what

he sees the duties of a Speaker should be. I believe this assembly

should

[ Page 8 ]

expect the same kind of outline from the hon. member for North Peace River.

Now the question has been raised in this House, hon. members, of

whether indeed the Speaker-designate is taking his duties seriously,

and whether he is handling them with courage, impartiality and

integrity. Correspondence has been read out indicating one memo went to

Treasury Board, saying the requests of the members of this House had

been passed on to Treasury Board without comment. It seems to indicate

that the Speaker-designate is not quite willing to take on the

executive council of government. That must be, if we are in a democracy

in this House, and indeed in British Columbia. That has to happen, that

the Speaker of this assembly is under obligation not to the executive

council, but under obligation to all hon. members of this House.

Now what has happened, I remember shortly after the new government

came in that the quarters, the offices of the official opposition were

visited by Mr. Dan Campbell, who is from the Premier's office. I walked

into a meeting where Mr. Campbell was talking with John Wood, executive

assistant to the NDP caucus, wanting to know what he could tell him in

regard to what the Speaker's duties should be, whether there should be

a bloc vote for funds for the hon. members, how he should carry on, so

he could tell the Speaker what to do.

Furthermore, this has proved to me, hon. members, that that has been

going on. The direction is running not only from Mr. Dan Campbell of

the Premier's office but from the Premier himself. What is it? When the

three opposition parties went to the Premier's office and said, "What

about our staff?", the Premier said, "You'll have your staff, till

March 31." I suggest, hon. members, that it was not the duty, or the

right, of the Premier to tell the hon. members of the opposition

parties that they had that right or they didn't have that right or

privilege. It should have been the Speaker-designate.

We had to, the opposition had to go to the Premier's office, because

the Premier had already taken on those responsibilities for himself.

Press releases, interviews in the press indicated to us that the

Premier and members of the Treasury Board were telling the public

exactly what the duties and what kind of money this legislature would

spend. Now I hand delivered a letter to Mr. Speaker's office a few days

ago. I forget the exact date but I don't think that matters for the

purposes of debate. I was in talking with the executive assistant to

the Speaker-designate, Mrs. Challen. She had informed me previously

that Mr. Smith was out of town. I handed the letter to Mrs. Challen. As

I was talking with her, Mr. Dan Campbell entered. Within 15 minutes I

had a letter delivered to me, signed for the Speaker-designate. I

suggest that there was not enough probability that the

Speaker-designate be contacted and to have his opinion. I suggest, hon.

members, that

even the office of the Speaker is taking directives from a non-elected

member, namely Mr. Dan Campbell. Now that is the point all hon. members

have been making: that the office of Speaker must not only be fair,

must not only have courage, but it must be seen to be fair not only by

hon. members of this House but the general public of this province.

They have to be reassured that democracy will prevail in this House.

The only way that can happen is if you have a Speaker who has courage

and integrity. At the same time, he must have administrative ability.

Now we were notified, as hon. members, that this session would be

taking place, through the hon. Provincial Secretary's office, by the

Deputy Provincial Secretary. I have received an invitation from the

Premier to attend. It seems rather strange.

"The Premier and executive council of the Province of British

Columbia request the pleasure of the company of Mr. G.R. Lea, MLA, at the opening

of the Legislative Assembly in the parliament buildings on Wednesday, March

I7, 1976 at 3 p.m."

HON. MR. BENNETT: I withdraw it. (Laughter) .

MR. LEA: ...and it says that if I don't pick up my tickets, my

reservations will be cancelled. (Laughter) . So even the administrative

ability of Mr. Speaker-designates office has to be questioned.

I suggest the government at this point should probably let go of the

reins, let someone from the government back bench make another

nomination of another hon. member that could be seconded.... I am sure

that any member of the NDP caucus will second any motion to nominate

another member of the government side to stand in this parliament as

Mr. Speaker.

One final thing, hon. members. How will the people of British

Columbia ever be sure — ever be sure — of the intentions Mr. Speaker

will carry out unless the Speaker-designate stands in this House and

lets us know, as did the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Macdonald)

? We have a right to know and the people of British Columbia have a

right to know the views of that hon. member.

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Clerk, I move that the hon. member for North Peace River now be heard. (Laughter.)

CLERK: The hon. member has already spoken in this debate. He cannot be permitted to speak twice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave, by leave.

CLERK: Shall leave be granted?

[ Page

9 ]

Leave not granted.

CLERK: Hon. members, you are now ready for the question. In

accordance with the standard practice, the motion for the person first

nominated is put first to the hon. members.

The question is that Dean Edward Smith, Esquire, member for North

Peace River electoral district, do take the Speaker's chair to preside

over the meetings of this assembly.

Motion approved on the following division:

YEAS — 35

McCarthy

Gardom

Bennett

Wolfe

McGeer

Phillips

Curtis

Calder

Shelford

Chabot

Jordan

Schroeder

Bawlf

Bawtree

Fraser

Davis

McClelland

Williams

Waterland

Mair

Nielsen

Vander Zalm

Davidson

Haddad

Hewitt

Kahl

Kempf

Kerster

Loewen

Mussallem

Rogers

Strongman

Veitch

Lloyd

Macdonald

NAYS — 19

King

Stupich

Dailly

Cocke

Lea

Nicolson

Lauk

Gibson

Wallace, G. S.

Levi

Sanford

Skelly

D'Arcy

Lauk

Barnes

Brown

Barber

Wallace, B.B.

Smith

CLERK: It is ordered that D. Edward Smith, Esquire, member

for North Peace River Electoral District, do take the Speaker's chair

and preside over the meetings of this assembly.

MR. N. LEVI (Vancouver-Burrard): Don't pull him too hard now, Bill. Gently.

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. members, permit me to return my humble

acknowledgements to the House, and to express my grateful thanks for

the great honour that you have been pleased to confer upon me by

choosing me to be your Speaker.

Hon. members, I declare a short recess, but request you to keep your seats until my return.

The House took recess at 4:09 p.m.

The House resumed at 4:14 p.m.

Prayers.

CLERK ASSISTANT:

Office of the Deputy

Provincial Secretary,

Parliament Buildings,

Victoria.

February 25,1976.

Mr. Ian M. Horne,

Q.C. Clerk of the Legislative Assembly

Parliament Buildings

Victoria, B.C.

Dear Sir:

RE: General Election, December 11,1975

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor by his proclamation

issued on the 3rd day of November, 1975, was pleased to dissolve the Legislative

Assembly of the Province, and it was necessary to hold elections to fill vacancies

caused by such dissolution.

The elections were duly held pursuant to the provisions

of the Provincial Elections Act.

I transmit herewith certificates dated January 30,1976 and

February 19,1976 (in duplicate) of the Chief Electoral Officer and Registrar-General

of Voters, setting forth the names of members who have been elected in the electoral

districts indicated on the certificate.

Yours very truly,

(Signed) L.J. Wallace,

Deputy Provincial Secretary.

Office of the Chief

Electoral Officer and

Registrar-General of Voters

January 30,1976.

L.J. Wallace, Esq.

Deputy Provincial Secretary

Parliament Buildings

Victoria, B.C.

RE: General Election — 1975

Dear Sir:

The thirtieth Legislative Assembly of the Province of British

Columbia was dissolved on November 3,1975, and Writs were issued on that date

calling for a General Election. The Writs were made returnable on January 5,1976.

November 27, 1975, was designated as the day for the nomination

of candidates, and December 11,1975, was designated as Polling Day.

Requests were made under

section 122 (1) (

c) of the

[ Page

10 ]

Provincial Elections Act for Rechecks in six

(6) Electoral

Districts; namely, Burnaby North, Coquitlam, Esquimalt, North Vancouver-Capilano,

Shuswap and Vancouver-Burrard. All Rechecks were conducted in conjunction with

the Final Counts.

Because of requests made under

section 130 (1) of the Provincial

Elections Act for Judicial Recounts in the Burnaby North and Coquitlam Electoral

Districts, the date for the Return of the Writ from these Districts was amended,

in the case of Burnaby North Electoral District to January 16,1976, and in the

case of Coquitlam Electoral District to an indefinite date due to an appeal

to the British Columbia Court of Appeal arising from the Judicial Recount.

The date for the Return of the Writ from the Skeena Electoral

District was amended to January 12,1976, due to delays in completing the Final

Count.

I hereby certify that the following members have been elected

to represent their respective electoral districts as set out hereunder:

Alberni — Robert Evans Skelly

Atlin — Frank Arthur Calder

Boundary-Similkameen — James Hewitt

Burnaby-Edmonds — Raymond Loewen

Burnaby North — Eileen Elizabeth Dailly

Burnaby-Willingdon — Elwood Neal Veitch

Cariboo — Alexander Vaughan Fraser

Chilliwack — Harvey Wilfred Schroeder

Columbia River — James Roland Chabot

Comox — Karen Sanford

Coquitlam — Vacant

Cowichan-Malahat — Barbara Brookman Wallace

Delta — Walter Kenneth Davidson

Dewdney — George Mussalem

Esquimalt — Lyle Benjamin James Kahl

Fort George — Howard John Lloyd

Kamloops — Kenneth Rafe Mair

Kootenay — George Wayne Haddad

Langley — Robert Howard McClelland

Mackenzie — Donald Frederick Lockstead

Nanaimo — David Daniel Stupich

Nelson-Creston — Lorne Nicolson

New Westminster — Dennis Geoffrey Cocke

North Okanagan — Patricia Jane Jordan

North Peace River — Dean Edward Smith

North Vancouver-Capilano — Gordon Fullerton Gibson

North Vancouver–Seymour — John Davis

Oak Bay — George Scott Wallace

Omineca — Jackie Joseph Kempf

Prince Rupert — Graham Richard Lea

Revelstoke- Slocan — William Stewart King

Richmond — James Arthur Nielsen

Rossland-Trail — Christopher D'Arcy

Saanich and the Islands — Hugh Austin Curtis

Shuswap — Leonard Bawtree

Skeena — Cyril Morley Shelford

South Okanagan — William Richards Bennett

South Peace River — Donald McGray Phillips

Surrey — William N. Vander Zalm

Vancouver-Burrard — Rosemary Brown

Vancouver-Burrard — Norman Levi

Vancouver Centre — Emery Oakland Barnes

Vancouver Centre — Gary Vernon Lauk

Vancouver East — Alexander Barrett Macdonald

Vancouver East — Robert Arthur Williams

Vancouver–Little Mountain — Grace Mary McCarthy

Vancouver–Little Mountain — Evan Maurice Wolfe

Vancouver–Point Grey — Garde Basil Gardom

Vancouver–Point Grey — Patrick Lucey McGeer

Vancouver South — Charles Stephen Rogers

Vancouver South — William Gerald Strongman

Victoria — Charles F. Barber

Victoria — Robert Samuel Bawlf, Jr.

West Vancouver–Howe Sound — Louis Allan Williams

Yale-Lillooet — Thomas Manville Waterland

Yours truly,

(Signed)

K. L. Morton,

Chief Electoral Officer

and

Registrar-General of Voters

And another letter:

February 19, 1976

L.J. Wallace, Esq.,

Deputy Provincial Secretary,

Department of Provincial Secretary,

Parliament Buildings,

Victoria, British Columbia.

Sir:

Pursuant to my certificate of January 30,1976, I now enclose

the Writ of the Coquitlam Electoral District.

The date for the Return of the aforementioned Writ was amended

to an indefinite date due to a Judicial Recount before the County Court of Westminster,

followed by an Appeal to the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Said Writ was

returned to me on February 19,1976.

Therefore I certify that George Herman Kerster has been

elected to represent the Electoral District of Coquitlam.

Yours truly,

(Signed)

K-L. Morton,

Chief Electoral Officer and

Registrar- General of Voters.

HON. G.M. McCARTHY (Provincial Secretary): Mr. Speaker, I

move that the letter of the Deputy Provincial Secretary and the

certificates of the Chief Electoral Officer of the result of the

election of members be entered in the Journals of the House.

[ Page

11 ]

Motion approved.

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor re-entered the chamber and took his seat on the throne.

MR. SPEAKER: May it please Your Honour, the House of Assembly

has elected me as their Speaker, though I am but little able to fulfill

the important duties thus assigned to me. If in the performance of

those duties I should at any time fall into error, I pray that the

fault will be imputed to me, and not to the assembly whose servant I

am, and who, through me, the better to enable them to discharge their

duty to the Queen and country, humbly claim all their undoubted rights

and privileges, especially that they may have the freedom of speech in

their debates, access to Your Honour's person at all seasonable times,

and that their proceedings may receive from Your Honour the most

favorable

interpretation.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Mr. Speaker, I am commanded by His Honour

the Lieutenant-Governor to declare to you that he freely confides in

the duty and attachment of the House of Assembly to Her Majesty's

person and government, and not doubting that their respective

proceedings will be conducted with wisdom, temper, and prudence, he

grants, and upon all occasions will recognize and allow, their

constitutional privileges.

I am commanded also to assure you that the assembly shall have ready

access to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor upon all seasonable

occasions, and that their proceedings as well as your words and actions

will constantly receive from him the most favourable construction.

SPEECH FROM THE THRONE

HON. W.S. OWEN (Lieutenant-Governor): Mr. Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly:

I welcome all members to the first session of the 31st Parliament of

British Columbia and I congratulate you on gaining the privilege of

serving the citizens of our province in our Legislature. I express my

confidence in your diligence and wisdom for the lasting benefit of the

people. Particularly, I welcome the new members who are seated for the

first time, and I feel sure their knowledge will benefit the

deliberations of this House.

During the past year, our province was honoured by the visits of the President

of Iceland, His Excellency Dr. Kristan Eldiorn, and the Foreign Minister of

that country, the Hon. Einar Agustsson; the Minister of Commerce and Small Trades

of France, the Hon. Norbert Segard; the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and

Food of the United Kingdom, the Hon. Frederick Pearl; and, as well, by the visits

of ambassadors and high commissioners of 20 other countries. A brief visit was

made last month by the Prime Minister, the Right Hon. Pierre Elliott Trudeau,

and my government welcomed this opportunity to establish a working partnership

with the federal government on a number of issues.

Last April, Lord Louis Mountbatten, president of the United World

College, attended the opening of the Lester B. Pearson College of the

Pacific.

I would like to emphasize the importance of the opening of this

college and to congratulate our citizens on British Columbia being

chosen as the site of this remarkable institution which, in drawing

young people from all over the world, must have a profound effect on

maintaining and strengthening good international relations.

It was with sadness that I learned of the passing of Mr. H.R.

MacMillan, an industrialist and philanthropist of great stature whose

name has been for decades synonymous with our greatest industry.

Another loss to British Columbia was the death of Charles W. MacSorley,

who served his community as alderman and reeve of Burnaby, and his

province as president of the Union of British Columbia Municipalities

and as a member of this assembly. Brigadier-General Clark,

distinguished soldier, businessman, lawyer, and one-time member of the

House of Commons, who died earlier this year, will long be remembered

for his contribution to our society and our country.

I also wish to note the recent resignation of the second member for

Vancouver East constituency, Mr. Robert Williams. Mr. Williams served

as a cabinet minister, from 1972 to 1975 and was a member of this

assembly since 1966.

My government has a number of commitments which it plans to fulfil

during the term of its mandate, but this first session of the 31st

Parliament comes at a time when there is great concern among our

citizens for the economy of the province and Canada as a whole, and my

government's priorities will be established accordingly.

British Columbia is in a period when both government and the private

sector must practise restraint, when the demands that each makes on the

other must be reduced, and all must strive to bring greater effort to

bear on the problems which beset our province. Leaders in both sectors

must set the example.

As part of my government's plan to provide this example, you will be

asked to approve a reduction in the amount paid to all members of the

Legislative Assembly in this year of restraint. My government will also

act to reduce the costs that surround government to demonstrate

leadership not only in words but in actions.

Immediately upon taking office, my government acted quickly to

cooperate with the federal government on the problem of inflation.

Alarming

[ Page 12 ]

cost trends in both the private and public sectors of our economy

have been recognized by all governments in Canada. I am pleased to

report that my government has already announced that an independent

agency will be established to monitor the pricing decisions made by all

public service agencies and corporations, and you will be asked to

consider legislation authorizing British Columbia's cooperation in the

anti-inflation fight.

My government believes that the people of this province support a

strong and united Canada. British Columbia remains a major contributor

to the wealth and prosperity of this nation. In order to ensure that

the voice of British Columbia can be more adequately heard, I was

pleased to be advised that my new government was establishing an office

of inter-governmental relations. I am pleased to report that improved

relationships with our federal government are already in evidence as a

result of this move and that a strong western presence has been

established through new working relationships with the Province of

Alberta.

It was a commitment of my government to ensure that young people in

British Columbia be given the opportunity to achieve a medical

education in their own province. I am pleased to report that already

steps to achieve this goal have been taken by an announced expansion at

the University of British Columbia Medical School.

During the period of my government's mandate it will act to rekindle

the provincial economy and provide the programmes which will encourage

individual enterprise and create new job opportunities which are so

badly needed. My government agrees that security of employment is the

only effective income security that a free society can afford for the

vast majority of its citizens.

My government realizes that it has no money of its own, and that

only a healthy economy can provide the revenues which will pay for the

programmes which my government wishes to initiate during the term of

its mandate.

I was pleased to be advised by my government that not only were

specific programmes for this year being announced, but that programmes

for the future were under active consideration.

My government has a commitment that during the term of its mandate

it will work toward removing taxes on the homes of our senior citizens

aged 65 and over. This year you will be asked to take a major step

toward achieving this goal.

My government recognizes the urgent need to look after the

health-care needs of the province's young people...our greatest

resource.

To this end, I am pleased to report that a new provincial children's

hospital will be built in Vancouver. Construction will begin this year.

I am pleased to report that the Department of Education has been asked to review

the ways in which provincial operational funding can be offered to independent

schools.

My government feels that when a sound economy is restored, local

governments should be in partnership with the provincial government in

sharing the revenues that a growing economy can provide. I am pleased

to advise you that it is hoped to introduce legislation to reach this

goal during the term of my government's mandate.

The problems faced by our people in achieving home ownership are to

be placed high on the priority list for solution. At this session you

will be asked to make a move toward the ideal situation when all of our

people can have the opportunity to own their own home and the land

under it. Municipalities will be asked to cooperate in the achievement

of this goal.

My government also plans to make available Crown lands for moderately priced home sites for British Columbians.

My government advises me that it is necessary to further protect the

consumer in British Columbia, and you will be asked to take major steps

in legislation to assure the individual safer transactions in the

market place.

You will be asked to approve legislation establishing the office of

ombudsman for the province to further guarantee the rights of citizens

against the weight of big government.

For the first time in British Columbia, my government has

established a Department of Environment to reflect its concern and

commitment to safeguard our environmental heritage.

Members of this assembly will be asked to consider legislation which

will establish for the first time a provincial auditor-general. This

office will provide an independent watchdog over the finances of the

province, which will guard us against errors of the past.

To bring further accountability by government to its citizens, my

government is working toward the provision of quarterly financial

reports.

The Province of British Columbia has a history of commitment to

those people in our society who are in need. This Legislature (in 1942)

was the first in Canada to provide a supplement to the old-age pension,

and subsequent Legislatures have maintained British Columbia's

leadership by extending benefits to lower age groups.

To guarantee the continuance of these programmes, my government will

make the necessary adjustments to ensure that government payments go

only to those in genuine need.

With proper regulation, my government can continue to extend income

aid to those in genuine need beyond the age limits now in place. You

will be asked to consider the British Columbia Guaranteed

[ Page 13 ]

Additional Income for Need Act. This new Act will extend income

benefits to qualifying persons in the 55-59 age group and all

single-parent families. This new British Columbia income-assistance

plan will be further evidence that British Columbia shall once again

lead this nation in providing income support to those in genuine need.

My government believes that the Legislature must retain its

fundamental role as the custodian of the taxpayers' trust. Through

centuries of struggle, parliament fought for and won the "power of the

purse". In order that this Legislature can once more enjoy the

privilege of this ancient right, you will be asked to approve

amendments to the Revenue Act which will prevent the Minister of

Finance investing money in common shares without the approval of the

Legislature. In addition, you will be asked to approve legislation

which will prevent other ministers of the Crown from making investments

in their own right.

You will be asked to approve changes in legislation relating to the

Insurance Corporation of British Columbia which will remove the

necessity for political involvement in the setting of the rate

structures.

It is further contemplated during the term of my government's

mandate to bring legislation which will create an authority to review

all rate applications made by Crown corporations and agencies.

During the term of its mandate, my government will seek to establish

an independent commission for the purpose of achieving electoral

reform. Therefore, later, and before the next election, you will be

asked to consider legislation to improve the electoral machinery,

provide for fair representation and clearly define rules for political

campaign expenditures.

It is with regret that I advise you that my government is forced to

ask your approval to borrow money for current accounts. The advice to

my government from the independent auditing firm, Clarkson, Gordon and

Company, has indicated what our financial requirements will be.

Therefore, for one time only, you will be asked to approve the British

Columbia Deficit Repayment Act 1975/6.

Unfortunately, this will be the first time since February, 1952,

that British Columbia will be forced to borrow to pay for current

accounts.

My government was shocked at the statistics of accident incidence

and resulting injuries among single male drivers under 25 years of age,

and the social costs that these represent. Because of this, my

government has introduced the British Columbia Safe Driver Incentive

Plan aimed specifically at this group of drivers.

My government hopes, through the provision of incentives which

reward the careful driver, to reduce the alarming toll of accidents and

injuries now. It also considers this to be an investment in the future

by encouraging safe driving habits which will remain with the driver

for the rest of his life.

I am more than pleased to advise you that for me first time the

Government of the Province of British Columbia has agreed to meet

people. A historic meeting has already taken place between the federal

Minister for Indian Affairs, representatives of the Nishga people, and

the minister of my government responsible for native affairs.

My government sees a strong future developing during the term of its

mandate, and a major role for British Columbia to play in Canada's

future.

I am pleased to report that, despite the current economic

difficulties which face our province and Canada as a whole, my

government has the confidence that British Columbia has the strength to

meet the challenges which lie ahead. It will plan to continue and

develop social programmes, even though other provinces are talking of

closures and cutbacks in services to people.

My government, while committed to restraint and effecting economies

in government spending, will not abandon its strong social commitment

toward the less fortunate in our society.

And so during this first session of this 31st Parliament, I give

into your capable hands these and other matters which may come before

you, and I ask your most careful attention and I pray that Divine

Providence may guide your deliberations. Mr. Speaker and hon. members,

I leave you now to the discharge of your legislative duties.

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor retired from the chamber.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. members, in order to prevent mistakes, I have obtained a copy of His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor's speech.

THE IN-LAWS ACT

Hon. Mr. Gardom presents a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor:

a bill intituled The In-laws Act.

Bill 1 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.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I move that the speech of His

Honour the Lieutenant-Governor be taken into consideration at the next

sitting of the House, and that this order have precedence over all

other business, except introduction of bills, until disposed of.

[ Page 14 ]

Motion approved.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Mr. Speaker, I move that the Votes and Proceedings

of this House be printed, being first perused by Mr. Speaker, and that

he do appoint the printing thereof, and that no person but such as he

shall appoint do presume to print the same.

Motion approved.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I move that the select

standing committees of this House for the present session be appointed

for the following purposes:

On Standing Orders and Private Bills;

On Public Accounts and Economic Affairs;

On Agriculture;

On Municipal Affairs and Housing;

On Labour and Justice;

On Health, Education and Human Resources;

On Transportation and Communications;

On Environment and Resources; which said committees shall severally be

empowered to examine and inquire into all such matters and things as shall

be referred to them by this House, and to report from time to time their observations

and opinions thereon, with power to send for persons, papers and records,

and that a special committee be appointed to prepare and report with all convenient

speed lists of members to compose the above select standing committees of

this House under standing order 68(1), said committee to be composed of

the Hon. Grace McCarthy, the Hon. R.H. McClelland, and Messrs. Chabot, King

and Gibson.

Motion approved.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I move that Harvey Wilfred

Schroeder, Esquire, member for Chilliwack Electoral District, be

appointed Deputy Speaker for this session of the Legislative Assembly.

Motion approved.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move a motion.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I move that report No. 9 of

the Select Standing Committee on Standing Orders and Private Bills,

adopted by this House on February 27,1973, relating to oral questions,

be adopted by this House for the present session.

Motion approved.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to move a motion.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I move that on each Monday,

Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of this session there will be two

distinct sittings on each day: one from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. and one from 8

p.m. until 11 p.m., and on each Friday there will be one sitting from

10 a.m. until 1 p.m. unless otherwise ordered.

Motion approved.

Presenting reports.

Hon. Mr. Wolfe presents the Public Accounts for the Province of British Columbia for the year ending March 31,1975.

Hon. Mr. Bennett moves adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 4:53 p.m.

[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright © 1976, 2001, 2011, 2013: Hansard Services, Victoria, B.C., Canada