2003 Legislative Session: 4th 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, MAY 13, 2003

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 15, Number 11

CONTENTS

Routine

Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Provincial Revenue Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003 (Bill 42)

Hon. B. Barisoff

Integrated Pest Management Act (Bill 53)

Hon. J. Murray

Water, Land and Air Protection Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 55)

Hon. J. Murray

Flood Hazard Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 56)

Hon. J. Murray

Environmental Management Act (Bill 57)

Hon. J. Murray

Health Professions Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 62)

Hon. S. Hawkins

Statements (Standing Order 25 b )

Revelstoke Community Forest Corporation

W. McMahon

Youth in Action awards

I. Chong

Family caregivers

G. Trumper

Oral Questions

Softwood lumber border tax

T. Bhullar

Hon. M. de Jong

Children and Family Development ministry reorganization

J. Kwan

Hon. G. Hogg

J. MacPhail

Hon. G. Collins

Employment standards in agriculture industry

K. Stewart

Hon. J. van Dongen

Reports from Committees

Select Standing Committee on Crown Corporations, first report

K. Stewart

Committee of the Whole House

Industry Training Authority Act (Bill 34) (continued)

J. Kwan

Hon. S. Bond

Reporting of Bills

Industry Training Authority Act (Bill 34)

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Health Planning (continued)

R. Hawes

Hon. S. Hawkins

P. Nettleton

G. Trumper

L. Mayencourt

B. Suffredine

Estimates: Ministry of Health Services (continued)

Hon. G. Cheema

R. Masi

B. Locke

[ Page 6725 ]

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003

The House

met at 2:03 p.m.

Introductions by Members

Hon.

G. Cheema: I would like to welcome someone who is a passionate advocate for

mental health in our province. She's a dedicated and hard-working patron of

British Columbia's health system, and we are very lucky to have her as a part of

our team.

Irene

Clarkson, the executive director of mental health and addictions for the

Ministry of Health Services, has joined us in the House today. I would ask that

all members please make her feel extremely welcome.

S. Orr:

Today I have the pleasure of having three very special friends of mine in the

House, who are not only great supporters politically and personally but great

friends to our entire community here in the capital region.

Firstly, we

have Mr. Benj O'Connor, who is absolutely no stranger to this House. He's past

chair of the Hospital Foundation, and he's now chair of the capital campaign

Together We Care. Their goal is $17 million, and under Benj's incredible

commitment, they're already at $12 million.

[1405]

Secondly,

with Benj we have Eric Charman. Eric is the recipient not only of the Order of

B.C. but also of the Order of Canada. Eric has fundraised in this community for

nearly 50 years — he's only 51 — and he's fundraised in the arts, education

and health care. They've never determined how much money he's actually raised

for this community, but we know that it's in the tens and tens of millions of

dollars.

Lastly, we

have with them their guest, Bob Bardagy. Bob is very special to us, because he's

moved here from Chicago. Bob made his money in the high-tech industry, and he is

an entrepreneur, as is his wife, Pauline. Bob is actually in the high-tech

industry; his wife, Pauline, is an entrepreneur in her own right. The wonderful

thing about Bob and Pauline is that they have huge contacts in the U.S. market,

and they bring these very, very wealthy, influential business people to stay

with them at the weekend in their fabulous home on Beach Drive. They're doing

more for U.S.–Canada trade than most of us realize.

Interjection.

S. Orr:

I haven't finished. Thank you, member.

They are

philanthropists — unlike Minister Bruce — in our community, and we are

blessed to have people like these in our community. They not only give of their

volunteer time, but they give tons of their own money. Would the House please

make them all very welcome.

Interjections.

Hon. G.

Bruce: I've been called by popular demand before. Well, kidding or not,

we're here, and I'm getting notes already.

You know,

there's the Masters, there's the Grey Cup, there's the Stanley Cup, and there's

Wimbledon. And then there is that classic tennis match between the press and the

members of this august body here. It is about to be rescheduled again for later

in June of this year.

Today in

the House are a number of people responsible for putting that together. They've

had lunch with the Speaker and the Clerk — the Clerk being, of course, the

coach of our team. Just in case anybody forgot, and particularly the press, they

have never won this tournament — at least, not legitimately.

This

tournament is being sponsored by Hayes logging. Hayes logging has been around

the Cowichan Valley as long as or perhaps longer than the Bruce family. In the

House today the principal of Hayes Forest Services, Jeff Hayes, is here. We

certainly appreciate Jeff and the Hayes family sponsoring this tennis match.

Incidentally,

any of you who can play any calibre of tennis should let the Clerk know. You'll

have to demonstrate that probably through a very gruelling exercise at the

Clerk's house.

Along with

Jeff Hayes is Rick Jeffery, vice-president of corporate relations for Hayes

Forest Services, and Allan Case, who is the president of the South Cowichan Lawn

Tennis Club. It is the second-longest housed lawn tennis court in the world.

Finally….

This is very important. I'm getting to a question shortly. [Laughter.]

I was only

kidding. I was only kidding. No, really, I was only kidding.

Along with

this, on the Friday night before the Saturday, is the Providence.…

Interjections.

Hon. G.

Bruce: Come on, give me a break. I'm new to this.

The

Providence Farm Hoedown is a great facility for the mentally handicapped and a

number of other people that come in our community. Joining us here today is Jack

Hutton, the director of Providence Farm, and also Chuck Johnstone, who is the

tournament coordinator and director. With that, ladies and gentlemen, would you

please make them all very, very welcome.

Hawes: I notice in the gallery today a longtime community advocate from my

riding — from Mission — Kathleen Mcdonald, who has recently moved to

Victoria. I'm sure she's looking to get involved in this community. So would the

House please make her welcome.

[1410]

Trumper: I certainly would like to recognize Eric Charman, who I know is a

very good fundraiser for finances, and I would also like to recognize Jeff

Hayes. They have come into the Alberni Valley as one of our largest employers in

the forest industry.

With us

today we have, from Alberni District Secondary School, 27 students visiting with

their teacher,

[ Page 6726 ]

Brian Lavery. They have Ms. Croteau with them and also Matt Lucas. Would the

House please make them welcome.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: Sitting in the precincts today is the province's chief nurse

executive, Anne Sutherland Boal. I think it's very appropriate to recognize her

today and all the accomplishments we've made with her help over the last year

and a half with respect to nurses in this province, as it is Nursing Week. I'm

sure all the members will join with me in conveying to all the nurses across

this province how much we appreciate their commitment, their dedication and the

work they do on behalf of patients across this province.

Mayencourt: I'll just take one moment to introduce a very good friend of

mine, Ms. Martine Donahue, who is visiting the city here on a bike tour. Martine

is someone that has worked in my constituency as a volunteer and worked on my

campaign. Would the House please make her very welcome.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I can remember over the last few years how I would sit here and be

castigated by the member for Kamloops–North Thompson over the Blazers, the

hockey organization in his town. Then last year I think I took abuse from the

member for East Kootenay over Kootenay ICE. I have to say how proud I am of the

Kelowna Rockets ice hockey organization — Bruce Hamilton, the GM. Our Kelowna

Rockets are the WHL champions, and they're off to the Memorial Cup. It's on

Saturday, if anybody has some spare time. I know I'm going to be watching and

cheering very loudly. As you know, or you may not know, Kelowna is hosting the

Memorial Cup next year. I hope they come back as winners so we can defend it in

Kelowna next year. Congratulations to the Rockets.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

PROVINCIAL REVENUE STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2003

Hon. B.

Barisoff presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled

Provincial Revenue Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003.

Hon. B.

Barisoff: I move that Bill 42 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. B.

Barisoff: Bill 42 proposes a number of amendments to the Motor Fuel Tax Act

and the Social Service Tax Act, which are administered by the Ministry of

Provincial Revenue. These amendments result from ongoing consultations with

business. They are made to ensure fairness and equity for taxpayers, to reduce

the administrative burden for business and to provide efficiencies in tax

administration and collection processes. I will elaborate on the nature of these

amendments during second reading of this bill.

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 42

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.

INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT ACT

Hon. J.

Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled

Integrated Pest Management Act.

Hon. J.

Murray: I move that Bill 53 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

[1415]

Hon. J.

Murray: This bill repeals the Pesticide Control Act and replaces it with the

Integrated Pest Management Act to accomplish three important goals. First, the

new act will promote the use of integrated pest management to ensure that

pesticides are only used once all options have been considered. The goal of

requiring integrated pest management is to reduce our reliance on such

substances and, over time, reduce their use. Second, it will focus ministry

activity on monitoring and enforcing environmental standards and provide

significantly higher fines for those who do not comply. Finally, it will focus

provincial resources on activities and substances that pose the greatest risks

to public health and environmental protection.

Our goal

with the legislation and with the requirement of integrated pest management is a

reduction in the amount of pesticides we use as a province. These changes will

modernize the way pesticides are controlled in British Columbia. They will

encourage responsible pest control and provide for enhanced public safety in a

protected environment.

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 53

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.

WATER, LAND AND AIR PROTECTION

STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2003

Hon. J.

Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled

Water, Land and Air Protection Statutes Amendment Act, 2003.

Hon. J.

Murray: I move that Bill 55 be read a first time now.

[ Page 6727 ]

Motion

approved.

Hon. J.

Murray: This bill amends a number of statutes administered by the Ministry

of Water, Land and Air Protection. The amendments include changes to update,

streamline and clarify certain provisions of the Park Act and the Wildlife Act

and to update the schedules to the Protected Areas of British Columbia Act.

This bill

also furthers this government's deregulation initiative by providing for the

repeal of a number of statutes because they are outdated and no longer needed.

These acts are the Commercial River Rafting Safety Act, the Drainage and Dyking

Adjustment and Repeal Act, the Park (Regional) Act, the Weather Modification Act

and the West Coast National Park Act.

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 55

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.

FLOOD HAZARD STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003

Hon.

J. Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill

intituled Flood Hazard Statutes Amendment Act, 2003.

Hon. J.

Murray: I move that Bill 56 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. J.

Murray: This bill amends a number of statutes governing flood hazard

management in order to facilitate a comprehensive shift in the provincial

approach to flood hazard management in British Columbia.

Its

fundamental purpose is to establish more efficient, cost-effective and locally

responsive means for ensuring flood protection. It will reduce regulatory burden

and protect public safety while achieving the strategic shifts presented in the

service plan of the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.

The

amendments will enable the following changes. They will make possible increased

local government control and accountability over land use decisions associated

with floodplain development. They will provide communities and developers with

increased flexibility in meeting flood hazard standards and will enable the

provincial government to focus its efforts in areas of the greatest interest to

public safety and the environment.

addition, the changes will facilitate — through the provision of appropriate

tools for developers, local government and professionals — a cooperative

approach to flood hazard management in British Columbia.

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 56

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.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT

Hon. J.

Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled

Environmental Management Act.

Hon. J.

Murray: I move that Bill 57 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

[1420]

Hon. J.

Murray: This bill repeals the Waste Management Act and the Environment

Management Act, replacing them with the new Environmental Management Act.

This new

act will accomplish several goals. It will consolidate and better organize our

environmental legislation. It will establish clear environmental standards and

tough penalties for violators. It will allow ministry staff to spend more time

in the field ensuring compliance with the environmental laws of the province,

focusing on activities that pose the greatest environmental risk.

It will

enable the use of groundbreaking and innovative regulatory tools for waste

management, including economic instruments, administrative monetary penalties

and area-based planning. These tools will encourage compliance while making it

easier to punish polluters.

The act

will harmonize our approach to special waste with that of other jurisdictions,

eliminating duplication and confusion. The current contaminated-sites regime

will be modified to begin implementation of the expert panel's recommendations

and speed the rejuvenation of these areas.

Finally,

the new act will improve ministry consistency and accountability by making sure

decisions are applied evenly across the province. These changes represent the

first comprehensive review of this legislation in over 20 years. These changes

are overdue, and they will significantly improve this government's ability to

achieve its goals: a safe and healthy environment and a robust economy.

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 57

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.

[ Page 6728 ]

HEALTH PROFESSIONS

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003

Hon.

S. Hawkins presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill

intituled Health Professions Amendment Act, 2003.

Hon. S.

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

Motion

approved.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: These amendments aim to improve public accountability, protect

patient safety and provide a consistent framework for the regulation of health

care professions by including all health professions under one statute.

These

amendments will repeal six stand-alone statutes that regulate chiropractors,

dentists, physicians, optometrists, podiatrists and registered nurses, meaning a

reduction of overlap and duplication as well as a net reduction of over 800

regulations.

The

amendments contained in this act stem from recommendations of the former Health

Professions Council in its 2001 report Safe Choices: A New Model for

Regulating Health Professions in British Columbia. Since last summer

we have been working to develop these amendments in consultation with the

colleges that regulate health professions in B.C.

These

amendments aim to increase public confidence in health care professionals and to

ensure that professional colleges have direct responsibility for ensuring

patient safety. For example, the public will have greater access to complaints

about individual health care practitioners, health care professionals will be

required to report to their professional college a health professional who poses

a public safety risk, and the colleges will be required to implement quality

assurance programs to improve health services for patients.

addition, these amendments enable the designation of a new health professional,

the nurse practitioner, by the Registered Nurses Association of B.C. The nurse

practitioner designation aims to expand the role of nurses in our health care

system in order to better serve our patients and citizens as we renew primary

care.

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 62

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.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

b) REVELSTOKE COMMUNITY

FOREST CORPORATION

McMahon: I rise today to acknowledge the Revelstoke Community Forest

Corporation. On Saturday, May 3, the corporation celebrated its tenth

anniversary with the community. I was there to join in the celebrations and had

the pleasure of being handed a chainsaw to cut the cake as the rain poured down.

Looking

back on the past ten years, it is important to recognize that in 1986 the

community was in a severe economic slump. Megaproject construction had ended,

mills were shut down, and unemployment was over 30 percent. The community

developed an economic recovery plan with four main goals, the fourth one being

to strengthen the local forest industry.

[1425]

From 1986

until 1993, when the Minister of Forests signed the transfer of TFL 56 to the

newly formed Revelstoke Community Forest Corporation, the city lobbied strongly

for more processing of local timber, and many would say they aggressively

pursued their fourth goal.

The

corporation shareholders are the citizens of Revelstoke, represented by city

council. In addition to profit motive, the company must support community

objectives and values. According to the TFL, they are not allowed to own or

operate a timber manufacturing plant. Fifty percent of the timber must be sold

by open competitive bid to the highest bidder, and the other 50 percent goes to

the three industry partners at cost. They must process an equivalent volume in

the community.

While there

were many, many individuals involved in the formation and successful operation

of the community forest, I would like to acknowledge Geoff Battersby for his

unfailing leadership. Today Revelstoke Community Forest Corp is a success story.

It has developed into a stable and profitable company in the highly volatile and

competitive forest sector while contributing to the city of Revelstoke's vision

of achieving a sustainable community by balancing environmental, social and

economic values.

Congratulations,

Revelstoke. Your foresight and determination are paying off. Your success is an

example of what can be accomplished in British Columbia's forest industry.

YOUTH IN ACTION AWARDS

Chong: It is my pleasure today to speak about an important program in

Victoria, the Youth in Action Awards. This program was started in 1990 by the

Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce with the goal of celebrating the positive

contributions that young people make to their communities.

recognizes youth in six categories: perseverance, practical arts, performing or

visual arts, community service, athletics and academics. Students are nominated

for the awards by their teachers, and the presentations are made at a gala

banquet in the springtime of every year.

I was

fortunate to have attended this dinner last Thursday at which 18 outstanding

young people were recognized for their achievements. This banquet represents the

culmination of the active efforts of the late Dr.

[ Page 6729 ]

David Poole, who in 1994 convinced the chamber board to include an awards

dinner as part of their program. One of the original sponsors, CIBC Wood Gundy,

continues to be involved to the extent that they have enabled the awarding of

not only plaques but also cash awards to the very deserving recipients each

year.

These

awards are jointly sponsored by the Greater Victoria, Saanich Peninsula and West

Shore Chambers of Commerce and include students from school districts 61, 62 and

63. In addition to the winner of each category, two honourable mentions are also

awarded. The youth, although nominated in specific categories, are incredibly

well-rounded. As each award recipient was introduced, we were provided with

insight into their very many accomplishments in their young lives.

I applaud

the chambers for their initiative of this program, and it is important we

recognize our youth for their positive contributions to our society. Programs

such as the Youth in Action Awards help to inspire young people to have a

positive role in their communities and to set their goals high.

I wish to

also say how proud I am that in my riding of Oak Bay–Gordon Head, nine of the

18 recipients hail from those schools. Congratulations to this year's award

recipients: Jennifer Abel, Dean Pucsek, Katie Lochhead, Jason Rogers, Sara

White, Brent Hodge, Steve Fallows, Graham Roebuck, Emily Heayn, Claire Jutras,

Nikki Hodgkinson, Lindsay De Leeuw, Stephanie Connolly, Colin Lundeen, Erin

Little, Jennifer Ruskey, Yichuan Wang and Xiangning Fan. These high achievers

represent our leaders of tomorrow, and I wish them all the best in the future.

FAMILY CAREGIVERS

Trumper: I rise today in recognition of Family Caregiver Week, May 11 to 17.

This week family caregivers across British Columbia will be recognized for their

enormous and selfless volunteer efforts that provide high-quality care for adult

family members or friends who may be chronically ill or disabled.

A family

caregiver is a family friend, a friend or even a neighbour who provides support

to those who are physically or mentally challenged, chronically ill, frail and

elderly, either at home or in a care facility. Family caregivers provide care to

all age groups regardless of the care receiver's disease, disorder or palliative

situation. They come from all walks of life regardless of age or income. They

can be spouses, partners, adult children, in-laws, siblings, young children and

other extended family members.

These

individuals are distinguished from volunteers through their own personal bond or

connection to the care recipient. Accordingly, many family caregivers feel that

providing a better quality of life for loved ones is their most important

responsibility in life. For those of us in the House who have been family

caregivers, we know how stressful it can be at times.

[1430]

The

prevalence of family caregiving in this century is unprecedented in history, due

to the fact that we can expect to have third, fourth and even fifth generations

still alive. Daughters and sons in this century can expect their parents to live

well beyond the age of 70. Add to this a declining birth rate, and it is

apparent what the future trends will be.

Currently,

in British Columbia there are approximately 152,000 caregivers. Over one-half of

these volunteer caregivers are in the paid workforce, and 73 percent are women.

As we know, many of B.C. caregivers have either reduced their work time or left

the workforce to provide full-time care, so the negative impact on their

financial status when retirement age sets in will be tremendous.

On this

note, devotion given by British Columbia's family caregivers needs to be

recognized and honoured. If families across Canada are not carrying out their

responsibilities for ailing loved ones at home, the health care system, as we

know, could not function for even half a day.

Mr.

Speaker: That concludes members' statements.

Oral Questions

SOFTWOOD LUMBER BORDER TAX

Bhullar: My question is directed to the Minister of Forests. Can the

minister please impart to this House precisely how the border tax that has been

proposed to solve the softwood dispute would function and whether this border

tax is an interim measure pending the final ruling of the WTO?

Hon. M.

de Jong: Thanks to the member for a timely question. He may know — and if

he doesn't, I will tell him now — that this week we are exploring with our

federal partners whether there is some basis for the resumption of more formal

negotiations with the Americans, and that is tied to whether or not we think

there has been sufficient common ground achieved to lead us to conclude there is

some prospect for succeeding.

His

specific question relates to a temporary or interim border tax that might

replace the existing tariff. In large measure, that is what the negotiation will

be about — the structure, the amount, what items are captured by it. It is one

of two key issues that remain unresolved and stands between us and an interim

agreement — the second, of course, being the $1.2 billion question, which is

what happens to the significant moneys that have been left on deposit with the

Americans.

CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT

MINISTRY REORGANIZATION

J. Kwan:

Last week when we asked the Minister of Children and Family Development

about the mess he has created for child protection, he said everything was under

control. This week we learned how untrue that was. A private management resource

team — rescue

[ Page 6730 ]

team, I should say — has been called in to save the minister's political

skin.

Will the

Minister of Children and Family Development acknowledge that hiring a consulting

firm to meet his budget targets is an admission that his plan to reorganize

child protection has been a costly waste of money?

Hon. G.

Hogg: I want to reinforce that the first priority of this government is the

health and safety of children in this province. I also want to reinforce that…

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. We will have order during question period, or we'll

end question period right here.

Hon. G.

Hogg: …when this government was formed and looked at this ministry, we

realized that changes needed to be made — not just reorganizations that had

taken place in the past, but that we had to transform this ministry to provide

services. We were told that by international experts, we were told that by

experience, we were told that by service providers, and we were told that by our

staff. We are doing that, and we're doing that in a focused way.

We have

brought in all the supports that we can have to look at and to manage this

process. We are looking at contractors in terms of being able to provide us

better data and better information so that we can make the best decisions

possible for the most vulnerable children of this province.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary

question.

J. Kwan:

The best decision possible for this minister is to make sure that his budget

is fully met so that there will be no cuts in the funding for child protection.

[1435]

The

government is spending some $25 million on the botched transition to a new model

of child protection — $25 million that should go to programs for kids at risk.

Now they're spending hundreds of thousands more dollars because the Minister of

Children and Family Development has blown it.

When will

the Minister of Children and Family Development admit that people on the front

lines for child protection are telling him that his budget cuts threaten the

child protection system, and with that, the system will collapse? When will he

do the right thing and resign?

Hon. G.

Hogg: There has been a lot of talk about $25 million, and that's been a

budget that has been out there. About $11 million of that was expended last

year. None of it has been expended beyond that. That $11 million was expended to

engage our communities in looking at service provision.

We've had

over 14,000 people attending meetings and looking at a better service provision

model for the people of this province. That involvement of those people is going

to make a difference in terms of how we deliver services and how we move

forward.

Again, the

people out there are talking about the change and the change being the right

transformation. Every international expert that has looked at us, including

people who were here last week, has said this transformation is the right

transformation to ensure the health and safety of children and vulnerable adults

in this province. That will always be the number one priority of this ministry,

and we will ensure that we focus our resources to make sure that does happen.

Mr.

Speaker: Member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a further supplementary.

J. Kwan:

The best way for the minister, once again, to ensure children are protected is

to ensure that the programs are funded. Maybe the minister hasn't actually had a

look at the risk registry. Citizens of B.C. already spend millions of dollars on

the minister and a senior executive team to run B.C.'s child protection system.

They have failed — miserably, I might add. The grand design is falling apart

and is costing millions of dollars in wasted resources.

Why should

the Minister of Children and Family Development continue to earn one more penny

in salary as a member of cabinet when the government has hired a private rescue

team to do his job for him?

Hon. G.

Hogg: I want to reinforce that we have the largest bureaucratic service

delivery for children and families in Canada. It's inefficient, and it's

ineffective. We have to go to a new model for doing that and providing that

service, and that's exactly what we're doing. We have been saying, in our

service plan, since day one that we had a plan in place and that we have a

process in place to ensure that we protect and provide those services. We are

still on that plan. We recognize there are some challenges in the year '04-05,

and we're wanting to make sure that we deal with those in a responsible,

effective way.

I know

other governments have looked at risk needs and have looked at risk analysis and

have looked at processes to ensure that they do make good decisions. We are

doing everything we can to gather the information necessary to make the most

positive and responsible decisions possible to ensure that we do make the right

decisions for the people of this province.

MacPhail: While this minister is incompetent and every day proves that, the

real tragedy, of course, is not his incompetence. The real tragedy is that the

services to protect vulnerable kids are being affected because of not only his

incompetence but the incompetence of this government.

opposition leader, the now Premier told British Columbians he would spend more

on child protection

[ Page 6731 ]

services, not less. He said the government would spend whatever it took to

protect kids. As it turns out, that's not true. Rather than throw good money

after bad on a scheme that is completely out of control, why won't the Minister

of Children and Family Development step aside and allow someone new to take

over, who can fight for the resources they need for protecting kids — for

doing the job that's needed and that's not being done now?

Hon. G.

Collins: In fact, the minister responsible for children and family has been

doing exactly that. The minister knows these are the priorities of government.

When the Premier was in this House and Leader of the Opposition, he did say we

would do what we needed, as opposition, to try and help and make sure that the

transitions happened, make sure that the services were there for children when

they needed them — a much different response than what we've seen from the

Leader of the Opposition currently, I might add.

[1440]

The reality

is that we have identified challenges in '04-05 to the financial plan for that

ministry. We want to make sure…. While last year they came in on budget and on

target and this year they will come in on budget and on target, we're concerned

there may be risks in 2004-05. We're dealing with that now, eight months in

advance — unlike what we saw with the previous government, who didn't know

until halfway through the fiscal year that they had challenges and problems in

the ministry. We're getting ahead of it. We have brought in some outside

consultants to help us improve the data collection for the ministry. So when we

make a decision, we're making it with good information.

The

minister responsible is doing exactly the thing he should be doing. The money

that's being spent on the transition is money that's used to consult with those

very people the member says have issues. We want to get out there and talk to

the people. The minister was in Penticton yesterday dealing with them. That's

what the funds are for, and we'll continue to focus those dollars appropriately.

Mr.

Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question?

MacPhail: Boy, an incompetent children and families minister being rescued

by the most incompetent Finance minister, who's run the three largest deficits

in the history of British Columbia. What's wrong with that picture? Why is the

story changing on a daily basis?

Not only is

there a raft of quotes from the then opposition leader, now Premier, completely

going against what the Minister of Finance is now saying, but what the Finance

minister is saying is completely different from what this minister of children

and families said just a few short weeks ago.

Over and

over again the now Premier said, while he was in opposition, that the cost

didn't matter — children were worth the money. Did he mean something different

when this incompetent Finance minister put in a three-year budget — cutting,

cutting, cutting? What's changed? And he said — the Leader of the Opposition

then, now Premier — he would work with government and those outside to spend

whatever it took to protect kids.

Here's a

good quote. He said: "Big changes to child protection cost money."

After two years on the job we've got a lame-duck minister, an incompetent

Finance minister, a child protection system in danger of collapse and hundreds

of thousands of dollars being spent on a private management system…

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Would the member now please put her

question.

MacPhail: …to try and clean things up.

Mr.

Speaker: Question, please.

MacPhail: If the minister refuses to step aside, will he at least put his

reorganization on hold, live up to the promise made by the Premier, begin to

involve the public and the child protection community in an open and transparent

review of child protection to ensure that vulnerable kids are not at risk, just

like the Premier claimed he would do seven years ago?

Hon. G.

Collins: The seven years is interesting, because of those seven years, this

government's been in power for less than two. Her government was in power…

Interjection.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. G.

Collins: …for five of those years, and it's indicative of the challenges

that remain in that ministry, because they weren't dealt with five or seven

years ago.

Interjection.

Mr.

Speaker: Order.

Hon. G.

Collins: In the last couple of weeks I've taken the time to go back and read

every one of the comments of the now Premier when he was Leader of the

Opposition in this House as it relates to this issue. What he said was that the

resources that were required need to be available, and he offered to help in

order to make that happen. He also said he would be willing to help the

government of the day look elsewhere in government to find those resources.

I've read

all of the comments of the now Premier with regard to this issue, and the policy

and the priorities remain. The first priority is to make sure that vulnerable

adults and vulnerable children receive the pro-

[ Page 6732 ]

tection that is required, and we will do what it takes to make that happen.

But as the

minister has said over and over again, we inherited the most bureaucratic,

expensive delivery model in Canada. The system has to change. It has to be

improved….

MacPhail: Independent officers, children and youth advocates — all of

which you voted for — you've now dismantled.

Mr.

Speaker: Order.

Hon. G.

Collins: Those issues need to be pursued. The system does need to change. We

need to get more of those services directly to the front lines. The minister has

been engaged for almost two years in open consultation — transparent

consultation — with literally tens of thousands of British Columbians from one

end to the other — service providers and families as well. We're going to put

the resources required there in the most efficient way possible to make sure

that those goals are maintained.

[1445]

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

IN AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY

Stewart: My question today is to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and

Fisheries. In my riding of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows the agriculture industry,

specifically the blueberry and cranberry industry, plays an important role in

the local economy. However, each year in British Columbia and across Canada

there have been problems with workers' agreements and the payment of casual

labour. Can the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries tell me what the

government is doing to improve working conditions on farms and to attract more

workers into this industry?

Hon. J.

van Dongen: Every year as we approach the harvest season, we certainly have

concerns about employment standards and, in particular, unpaid wages, which we

regard as a core issue. We have worked closely in the past year with the farming

industry and the Ministry of Labour to address these issues.

The

Minister of Labour last year passed some clear employment standards rules with

stiffer penalties to ensure that employers comply. We do have agreement of the

industry this year to include site inspections as part of the enforcement

regime, and we will also have a liaison officer with the Ministry of Labour to

work with the farming industry on education and compliance issues.

To sum up,

we want to be sure that workers get paid and that we have working conditions

that meet the standards. We want to have an industry that is competitive across

Canada in terms of the rules, and we want to have an industry that has the

capacity to harvest its crops in a timely manner.

[End

of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. G.

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

members, we'll be discussing the estimates of the Ministry of Health Planning as

well as the Ministry of Health Services as it pertains to the Minister of State

for Mental Health and the Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home

Care.

In this

chamber I call committee stage debate of Bill 34, the Industry Training

Authority Act.

Mr.

Speaker: Just before we go to that, we have a report to be tabled by the

member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows.

Reports from Committees

Stewart: I have the honour to present the first report of the Select

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations.

Mr.

Speaker: Please proceed.

Stewart: I move the report be taken as read and received.

Motion

approved.

Stewart: I ask leave of the House to permit the moving of a motion to adopt

the report.

Leave

granted.

Stewart: I move that the report be adopted.

Motion

approved.

[1450]

Committee of the Whole House

INDUSTRY TRAINING AUTHORITY ACT

(continued)

The

House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 34; J. Weisbeck in the

chair.

The

committee met at 2:53 p.m.

section 1 (continued) .

J. Kwan:

We were dealing with the

definitions

section under the bill, Bill 34. Could the

minister please advise how a person will know what training to take for a

defined trade?

Hon. S.

Bond: They will learn that procedure the same way they do now. Currently, a

trade has a particular set of criteria and requirements. It will be the same

process. The good news, though, is that, over

[ Page 6733 ]

time, students and learners will have the opportunity of choosing where they

may take a particular course that leads to the certification. We hope to also

look at things like on-line learning — so in essence, the same way.

We will

have a website. It will list a trade. The criteria will be listed there as well.

[1455]

J. Kwan:

Will there be a system in place to obtain industry trends, to keep track of the

relevant training and to make sure that they're current?

Hon. S.

Bond: One of the most significant goals of the new Industry Training

Authority is precisely that. It's to look at how industry changes — what the

requirements are.

We want the

system to be more responsive to that, so one of the tasks of the Industry

Training Authority is to work with trainers and industry to determine new

courses that are required and to better match how we train people to the needs

of industry.

One of the

recent things that we've done in our ministry is that our curriculum is now

on-line. It allows trainers to work with educators and industry to actually

develop and update that curriculum on a regular basis.

J. Kwan:

In the definition of "trainee" it states in the act that it means

"an individual registered as a trainee or apprentice under

section 9."

Will the employer still have responsibility for indenturement of an apprentice?

Hon. S.

Bond: Yes, there is a requirement in the legislation that requires all

apprentices — and we're now including trainees — to register.

J. Kwan:

How will legal issues — i.e., WCB, liability, etc., — be handled if the

employer does not have…? How would it be handled?

Hon. S.

Bond: Nothing will change in that respect. In fact, employers will continue

to be responsible for their workers' safety, and standards will continue to be

in place as they are now.

J. Kwan:

Do the private trainers of apprentices in the province fall under the

definition of "training institution" in

part 1, or are they recognized

as institutions under the College and Institute Act?

Hon. S.

Bond: Private trainers are defined as trainers. Training institutions are

the public colleges, university colleges and institutes.

J. Kwan:

The private trainers with private institutions — then they fall under the

College and Institute Act?

Hon. S.

Bond: In fact, private institutions would fall under the definition of

trainer.

[1500]

J. Kwan:

The definition of trainer, according to the act, means "a person

designated as a trainer by the authority under

section 8 (1) (m)." Then

when you go to (m), it goes on to say: "The authority may do one or more of

the following: (

m) designate persons as trainers and define their duties."

Private

trainers, then, can just be made up and be sanctioned to do that work from the

authority. Who will govern them? Who will provide the oversight of the private

trainers to ensure that they're doing a proper job and to ensure that there's

protection for the students?

Hon. S.

Bond: The Industry Training Authority will have a relationship with private

trainers similar to the one they have with public institutions in the province.

J. Kwan:

But the public institutions fall under the College and Institute Act, so there

is a governing body that will oversee problems and make sure there is a standard

that's being met. Is it the case, then, that the authority is going to be doing

that? If there is a problem with a private trainer, which would be a private

institution, who would deal with those problems? Is it the authority? What is

the process following that?

Hon. S.

Bond: Private trainers will be governed. Some of them will be societies;

some of them will be corporations. Obviously, those would be governed by the

Society Act or the Company Act. They would also currently be registered with the

Private Post-Secondary Education Commission. That will obviously have a

successor pending the passage of current legislation.

J. Kwan:

What is the recourse available for students who are receiving training from a

private company or private institution when that private institution goes belly

up? What recourse is available for the students to recover their tuition fees,

amongst other things?

Hon. S.

Bond: Well, currently 15 out of the 17 private trainers are actually joint

union-employer boards, so apprentices or workers that are in that particular

situation are obviously protected by their unions. In addition to that, if they

are registered currently with PPSEC, there is a bonding provision in place which

takes care of students in that particular circumstance. In the legislation that

is before the House now, there will be a student protection fund as well.

[1505]

J. Kwan:

I want to canvass this a little bit because the concern, of course, is that some

of the students in other areas, where they have engaged in private institutions

for training in whatever area, have actually run into problems because the

institution that they are receiving the training from has gone into bankruptcy.

In some cases they've simply taken away the equipment and the resources in the

classroom and reduced the standards in the classroom for the students. In those

[ Page 6734 ]

instances, a lot of the students actually don't have recourse.

Is the

minister saying that the students would be protected? Will they get a full

refund, then, if they run into a problem in that instance?

Hon. S.

Bond: Certainly, and I'm sure we're looking forward to the discussion about

the broader principles about this under the other piece of legislation, because

it really is a broader issue of student protection with private training

institutions and trainers.

In fact,

there will be the creation, under the new legislation, of a student tuition

protection fund which would ensure that students have two options. One would be

the opportunity to train out with another institution, should there be a

problem, and the other would be a tuition refund.

J. Kwan:

I just want to be clear. Is that a full refund?

Hon. S.

Bond: Dependent on the circumstances, but, again, that is an issue that will

be covered under the legislation, under the new private career training

authority act.

J. Kwan:

The relevance, of course, to this act is that the private institutions could

provide training, and then the trainers under the private institution are

designated by the authority under this act. Therefore, the protection for the

students and the trainees needs to be made clear under this act, which is why

I'm pursuing this line of questioning here. Yes, there's a broader context and

other programming, but we're talking specifically here about the industrial

training components.

How will

the determination be made whether or not a person gets a full refund? The

minister advises that it would depend on the situation. What does she mean by

that? Is it institution by institution, and it depends on their own policy in

terms of how they go about doing that? Or is there a provision within the

governmental guidelines that would apply to stipulate that after so many days of

training a person has received, if there should be problems after that, then a

person gets a portion of the refund? How would that work?

[1510]

Hon. S.

Bond: Every training institution would have to have refund policies, and the

provisions and guidelines around that policy would be outlined in the bill that

we're not debating now.

J. Kwan:

But generally speaking, is the minister suggesting that it is up to the private

institutions themselves to set up whatever policy they will bring forward?

Hon. S.

Bond: That will be the bill that will lay out — and has already been

tabled in this House — at least the procedure and the criteria for the student

tuition protection fund.

J. Kwan:

Relevant to this area here, could the minister advise what those rules will be?

Hon. S.

Bond: Actually, I'm going to offer to bring that information when we address

the other piece of legislation, because there are changes to the student tuition

protection fund. I'd like to be able to bring back the accurate information

about that. This is actually two bills that are crossing over here, in terms of

student protection.

J. Kwan:

They do cross over, which is why I'm canvassing these questions, as it is

relevant to this sector. I'm not talking about the other sectors.

As long as

I'm able to ask these questions, with the other bill and with the assurance from

the minister, I'm prepared to table these questions until we deal with that

bill. Could I just get that on the record from the minister?

Hon. S.

Bond: I'd be happy to address those issues when that bill does come to the

floor, and it will give us a chance to be more specific about the changes that

are being made.

J. Kwan:

Perhaps related to that…. I want to make sure also, in terms of the training

costs associated for this sector…. Is there a grid or a set of guidelines that

would apply in terms of the training costs? What I'm trying to get after is, of

course, the apprentices…. Is it anticipated that the costs for them to obtain

the training would increase under this new act?

Hon. S.

Bond: As of September 2002, apprentices in the province of British Columbia

did pay a tuition fee. That will continue. We do not set the tuition fees, as we

do not set tuition fees across academic public institutions either. I should

just point out that currently the percentage of a course fee attributed to

tuition is 15 percent.

J. Kwan:

Does the minister anticipate that the costs will go up?

Hon. S.

Bond: That is a decision that is in the hands of institutions, as we have

looked at tuition completely in the sector. Tuition for apprentices is handled

in the same way.

[1515]

J. Kwan:

In other words, there is nothing that will control the tuition fee costs that

trainees may be faced with. It's completely deregulated, and therefore there

could be a substantive increase in the cost for someone to obtain the training.

This is problematic, in my view, because part of the issue here is to increase

the number of trainees. With the skill shortage that exists in British Columbia,

one would have thought that the government would bring in legislation that would

ensure and maximize the number of trainees across the province.

Having said

that, I'm ready to go to

section 2. Just for the information of the House, the

opposition caucus

[ Page 6735 ]

has tremendous problems with Bill 34. Instead of voting against each

section

individually, to save time we'll be voting against the bill in a collective

effort. So we won't be spending time on each section's vote.

I'm ready

to go to

section

Section 1

approved.

On

section

J. Kwan:

Section 2 deals with the Industry Training Authority, and then within that

there's the component about the Industry Training Authority and how it is

established.

Section 2(1) states: "The Industry Training Authority is

established as a corporation consisting of a board of directors appointed under

section 3."

Could the

minister please advise how the ITA will manage all sectors without an ITAC-like

body between the ITA and industry?

Hon. S.

Bond: We are moving away from the formal trades advisory committee

mechanism. As the member knows, there were 65-plus of those. Having said that,

this legislation does not constrain the Industry Training Authority in terms of

how they consult with a variety of sectors. They could choose to set up regional

advisory committees. There's just a multitude of opportunities for the Industry

Training Authority as they consult within the sectors.

J. Kwan:

Could the minister please advise: how will small businesses have a voice on

such a small ITA?

Hon. S.

Bond: The Industry Training Authority, as I mentioned in our earlier

discussion this morning, will not represent particular groups. What we will be

doing is appointing nine people in British Columbia who are experts and who have

a vision for skills and trades training in the province. But it's important that

the Industry Training Authority understand and fully appreciate the role of

small business and the challenges they face, and we've certainly heard a lot

about that with the current training model. I know that as the advisory system

is set up for the Industry Training Authority, the concerns and considerations

of small business interests will be taken into account.

[1520]

J. Kwan:

Well, then I go back to the problem that exists with this act, because it

doesn't actually ensure that there's broad representation accordingly. I did

mention this earlier this morning. Small business, as the minister knows, is a

key component in this industry. One would assume that there would be some way to

ensure that their voice is at the table, but it appears that there isn't. It's

just going to be some nine appointments made up by the minister — and then end

of story.

The

minister consistently says that everything will be fine, but there's nothing in

legislation to ensure there's protection and broad representation to that end.

So the minister is just asking people to take her word for it. As I mentioned,

quite frankly, it's not good enough. It's not good enough. I don't trust much of

what this government does, and so simply saying it doesn't need to be in

legislation and everything will just be fine, I think, is problematic.

Now I want

to ask the minister about budgets for the authority. Is there a budget

established for the authority? If so, what is the amount?

Stewart: Mr. Chair, I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave

granted.

Introductions by Members

Stewart: Today we have visiting, from the beautiful riding of Maple

Ridge–Pitt Meadows, a group from Fairview Elementary, and they are here with

their teacher, Ms. Labelle. They've been touring the facilities for the day, and

they just came in here to see how we conduct our business in the House. So would

the House please make them all very welcome.

Debate Continued

Hon. S.

Bond: Well, certainly I do want to comment on the appointment process for

the Industry Training Authority. We have in government a principle of appointing

boards, authorities and commissions on a principle of merit. I am delighted to

have received dozens of names from across British Columbia of outstanding

individuals who I know will lead and guide this process with a visionary and

aggressive approach that will meet the needs of learners in this province. We

will be using the process set up by the board resourcing and development office

and the principles that are used there, so I am certain we are going to have an

authority that is outstanding and will do an excellent job.

In terms of

the budget allocation for the Industry Training Authority, in

section 16 of the

bill it clearly outlines the fact that there is $78.438 million set aside for

the authority.

J. Kwan:

Yes, I see it on

section 16. Thank you for that.

I just want

to go back and comment. I know the minister talks about the merit-based

appointment, and I do want to point out that to decide on a merit-based

appointment does not mean you cannot achieve the other goal of broad

representation. Those two things are not exclusive. They can actually come

together, and you can achieve both goals.

That's the

point that the minister consistently fails to understand. Those things can

actually come together, and you can actually have the cake and eat it too, in

this instance — have merit as well as broad representation. That could be in

legislation to ensure that those goals are achieved.

[ Page 6736 ]

[1525]

I've

already gone on about how I don't trust the minister's and this government's

approach to appointments, because the history has actually shown that the

government, instead of basing it on merit, is actually basing it on

partisanship. We've already seen that in the communications branch and in other

areas as well. I won't belabour that and go into it again, but I do just want to

point that out. One thing is not exclusive of the other, and that seems to be

the point the minister is missing.

Perhaps

I'll ask the other question related to the budget. Or I can ask it now. I'll

seek the advice from the minister relating to the budget: how does that compare

to the ITAC budget formerly?

Hon. S.

Bond: In terms of looking at the budget, I want to compare apples to apples.

As you know, there's been major transition in the Industry Training and

Apprenticeship Commission, including offices, etc. But one of the most relevant

features is the program budget, which is the actual training dollars. The

2002-03 dollar amount, in terms of ITAC, was $71.250 million, and in 2003-04 the

program budget will be $73.781 million.

J. Kwan:

So then there's a substantive decrease in the amount in terms of the budget for

this authority versus ITAC. No matter how you slice it, it's a substantive

decrease — almost by half. Is that not correct?

Hon. S.

Bond: The reduction in dollars was simply in things like overhead. The

numbers I quoted…. Let me give them to you one more time. Program dollars in

2002-03 were $71.250 million, and this year, in '03-04, it is $73.781 million.

So in the program area alone, we're looking at a significant increase of several

million dollars.

J. Kwan:

The $70 million — is that for programming, or is that just for administration?

Mr. Chair,

I can ask those questions under

section 16 — whatever the minister prefers.

Hon. S.

Bond: The $73 million is the program budget.

J. Kwan:

The total budget is $78 million approximately, and the program budget is $73

million. So is the administration the difference between — that is, about $5

million…?

Hon. S.

Bond: Yes, there is $4 million in addition to the money we mentioned in

terms of program budgets. I should point out, too, that our pilot projects are

included in the program budget of $73 million-plus. So the costs out of the $4

million that exist in addition are the industry training centre in Burnaby,

which will provide resources and support to apprentices and trainees, and also

the industry training branch of my ministry.

[1530]

J. Kwan:

Could the minister please refresh my memory in terms of the closure of the ITAC

offices? Where were they, and how many were closed?

Hon. S.

Bond: There were 16 offices located around the province. There was one in

Vancouver, Burnaby, Coquitlam, Surrey, Abbotsford, Victoria, Nanaimo, Courtenay,

Kamloops, Kelowna, Nelson, Cranbrook, Prince George, Terrace, Dawson Creek and

Williams Lake — 16 in total.

J. Kwan:

There were 16 ITAC offices that were closed around the province. There will be

one replacement in Burnaby in its place under this new model, under this piece

of legislation. Given that the other locations are now being shut down, there's

only really one centralized location. How will people access the information

they were formerly able to access when there were the 16 locations available?

Hon. S.

Bond: We didn't simply close the offices around the province without

thinking about how we might provide services to students and learners in this

province. In fact, we thought there might be a better way of doing that and with

existing infrastructure. What we did is look at, for example, where a student

could write an exam, for which they would have had to travel to one of those 16

locations in the province. We managed to work out an arrangement, an agreement,

in the interim with the government agents offices around the province. As I

understand it, there are 58 government agents offices where we are now going to

provide the opportunity for students to write exams and do a variety of things,

for which they probably would have had to travel before to do.

In addition

to that, there are 15 colleges that we are working with who currently have

counsellors, people who work with industry training all of the time. One of the

things that's been extremely encouraging, as we've developed the model, is the

role that colleges have taken as they've stepped up to the plate. They are

offering more apprenticeship opportunities than we have ever had, as a matter of

fact, in terms of options for students in locations all around the province.

While on

one hand we did close the 16 offices around the province, we are providing a new

network of support to students using existing infrastructure.

J. Kwan:

Of the colleges that the minister advises will be available to provide support

to trainees — counsellors, etc. — could the minister please advise which

colleges have signed on to do this work?

Hon. S.

Bond: My staff is currently working with a consortium of all 15 colleges as

they put together a service model and look at how they can provide services to

trainees and apprentices. I can think of one in particular — North Island

College, for example — that is offering full apprentices in a number of areas

where previously they were not able to do that. In fact, they

[ Page 6737 ]

were limited to doing entry-level trades training. Now, with the new system,

they are saying: "We want to offer full apprenticeship opportunities at

North Island College."

[1535]

I should

also say there's a consortium on Vancouver Island that's working together. My

staff is working with all 15 colleges as a consortium. In terms of who is sort

of leaping to the forefront of this at the moment, we have great, exciting

initiatives happening across the sector, but in particular at BCIT, Camosun,

Capilano, Vancouver Community College, University College of the Cariboo, Fraser

Valley, Kwantlen, Malaspina and Okanagan. We have some excellent work being done

at College of the Rockies, New Caledonia, North Island, Northern Lights,

Northwest and Selkirk.

J. Kwan:

Are these colleges given additional resources to do this work or not?

Hon. S.

Bond: In fact, we did provide all the institutions that were offering trades

training with additional dollars. We called it restructuring funding. Each one

of those institutions that I mentioned did receive additional dollars in this

fiscal to assist them in the restructuring process.

J. Kwan:

And those are dedicated dollars for this program only?

Hon. S.

Bond: To clarify that, Mr. Chairperson, I want to make sure I get it

accurate.

We provided

a total of $2 million out of last fiscal — so that would be out of '02-03 —

across that number of institutions. I can certainly give the member the

breakdown should she wish that.

J. Kwan:

Yes. If the minister could do that, that would be great. I am assuming that

those dollars are dedicated dollars only for this program specifically.

Hon. S.

Bond: They were. It was called industry training restructuring funding.

While we did supplement them with additional funds, which they had more

discretion to use in terms of some dollars that we had available, this money was

designated as industry training restructuring.

Section 2

approved.

On

section

J. Kwan:

Will there be consultation with respect to the appointment of the board of

directors for the authority?

Hon. S.

Bond: The process we'll be using is the board resourcing and development

office procedure. Names have been given to us, as I said. We have dozens of

names. Those will be vetted through board resourcing and development, and the

recommendations will be presented to the minister.

J. Kwan:

The question is: will there be consultation?

Hon. S.

Bond: There will not be a formal consultation process. I can assure you that

the individuals that have been recommended — and I have looked at lists of

names — are all highly qualified, outstanding individuals. Board resourcing

and development will be continuing to work on that. The names will be presented

to me, and those appointments will be recommended to me as minister.

J. Kwan:

The concerns, then, that would be raised from the public relating to this

area…. Would it be the authority's responsibility to deal with and address

those concerns, or would it be the ministry and therefore the minister who would

be dealing with those concerns?

Hon. S.

Bond: If the member could just clarify the question around the area of

concern that people would be expressing, that would be helpful to us.

J. Kwan:

There is no specific area. I suppose I could make up one. I'm just asking

generally in terms of the process where concerns or issues are raised. I'm not

talking about complaints, because we dealt with that earlier.

Would those

matters be brought to the authority for the authority to deal with, or would

they be brought to the ministry and therefore for the minister to deal with?

What would the process be?

[1540]

Hon. S.

Bond: In the general course of operations, if individuals or people have

concerns, obviously the place that they would take those concerns would be to

the Industry Training Authority — to the chair of the board and ultimately to

the chief executive officer. That's not unusual or unlike public post-secondary

institutions, for example.

Having said

that, if there are issues concerning the legislative framework or large policy

issues, those might be brought to my attention by either the authority itself or

by individuals.

J. Kwan:

Maybe I will be specific. There are a number of issues that the public has

raised, and I wonder, in terms of these issues: would it be dealt with through

the authority, or would it be dealt with by the minister?

Some of it

actually relates to the changes of this act. Take, as an example, the mandate of

the ITAC legislation. I'm going to quote these recommendations from the public

specifically for the minister to respond to.

Under ITAC.

"The mandate of the ITAC legislation be extended for at least one year, and

remaining experienced staff — the system's brain trust — be maintained to

ensure a measure of stability to trades training. The ITAC structures should be

reinstated and spe-

[ Page 6738 ]

cific areas of concern dealt with within the structure and framework."

That's one

suggestion that's being put forward by CUPE, the B.C. division. In that

instance, when those suggestions are being brought forward, would it be brought

to the authority, or should it be brought to the minister for consideration?

Hon. S.

Bond: Certainly, my ministry and I did receive a formal request to reinstate

ITAC. In fact, that decision isn't one that would go to the Industry Training

Authority, because I have made the decision.

The

legislation on the floor of the House today represents a new model in the

province. We will be moving forward on the successful passing of this

legislation with a new model. At this point it is not contemplated to reinstate

ITAC.

J. Kwan:

What about the suggestion of governance? The recommendation from CUPE B.C.

is: "Any new governance model must include equal representation from the

four major stakeholder groups, including employers, labour, government and

public educators. These representatives should be chosen to reflect an active

involvement in and commitment to skills training and apprenticeship."

I know

earlier the minister said she's received some 60 names and that it was going to

be on a merit basis, but the recommendation here from the public is for there to

be representation from four different sectors. Will the minister be

re-contemplating that? Will the authority have the opportunity to review that

matter and then, therefore, make recommendations to the minister for her

consideration?

Hon. S.

Bond: No, I do not intend to tie the appointment process to particular

groups within the province. I have said that consistently and clearly. I want to

find nine people who are visionary, who are experts and who have an incredible

desire to see an improved training system in this province. We will be looking

at their expertise. We will be looking at their leadership capability as we move

forward with this model.

[1545]

I certainly

am confident that the Industry Training Authority that is appointed will work

with a variety of groups across the province. As I've pointed out, they will

have lots of flexibility and opportunity in determining how and who they consult

with over the course of the next number of years.

J. Kwan:

On the issue around public safety: "The proposed modularization of training

and certification of less than fully qualified trades must be rejected. More

trades must be made compulsory. There should be no reduction to the levels of

qualification such as those suggested in the proposed new Safety Standards Act,

as such changes will be detrimental to public safety."

Could the

minister please advise how she will incorporate this act and work with the

Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services, who has responsibility

for the public safety component, the new Safety Standards Act? How will she

blend the two and address the issue that has been raised in this recommendation

from CUPE?

Hon. S.

Bond: Just a comment. I know it's not the main theme of the question, but in

terms of modularization, that is not unique to British Columbia. It's not

something we're inventing — or even reinventing, for that matter. The process

is in place and working extremely effectively in a number of jurisdictions

around the globe, in fact. We think we will be able to put an incredible B.C.

spin on it, and it will be even better than the current systems in other

countries.

Having said

that, the new Safety Standards Act, which my colleague the Minister of

Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services recently brought through the House,

will require employers to have qualified workers to do restricted work in 75

trades and occupations. The Industry Training Authority which we're debating

here today will train to those standards.

There has

been a great deal of collaborative work done by my staff and my colleague's

staff, the Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services. We intend for

that to continue ministry to ministry, but we also expect that the Safety

Standards Authority and the Industry Training Authority will work very closely

together as we look at the issue of safety standards in the province.

J. Kwan:

The other issue that CUPE has raised also include mobility, which we covered a

little bit earlier today. Just for the record, I'd like to put their statement

on the record. Their recommendation is for the government to "retain a

training model that will allow every potential tradesperson the opportunity to

secure the national Red Seal certification and that the provincial government

must work with federal representatives and other provinces to increase the

potential for national standards and mobility of skilled workers, rather than

pursuing the current proposals, which will reduce the overall skill level and

restrict mobility." I know we canvassed the issue on mobility a little bit

earlier, but I do want to put their concern on the record. If the minister wants

to respond to that, I will look forward to it.

I also want

to put a couple of other items in terms of recommendations and whether or not

these recommendations would be dealt with by the minister or dealt with through

the authority.

[1550]

On the

issue around qualification, the recommendation is that once indentured,

apprentices must be supported both by employers and by government through

provision of adequate training and necessary advisory services so that they can

complete their full apprenticeship training and meet the total qualifications

within the specified time frame.

[ Page 6739 ]

On the

issue around the role of government, which is financing, the recommendation is

that the government must continue to play a critical role in the coordination

and provision of skills training. Tax-derived funding must not be turned over to

the business sector, thus becoming a subsidy. The government must be accountable

to the public for the long-range provision of training, based on broad public

policy interest — not the narrow, shortsighted demands of employers.

On the

issue around tuition costs, there must be no tuition fees or further cost

increases to apprentices who have chosen to pursue a skilled trade

qualification. Such increases will further discourage the needed increase in

trades enrolment and be a detriment to training programs as a whole. Indeed,

funding reductions for post-secondary initiatives are already negatively

impacting access to ELT programs, and funding should be increased.

Finally, on

the concern around equity initiatives, the government must continue initiatives

put in place by ITAC to ease and promote the entry of women and minorities into

non-traditional trades training, as well as provide specific assistance to first

nations people wishing to enter skills training and apprenticeship programs.

Could the

minister please advise on all of these items? Should they be directed to the new

authority to be reviewed and looked into, or is that a policy decision that

rests with the minister?

Hon. S.

Bond: Well, those are certainly views that I am fully aware of, because we

had consultation across the province. We received numerous responses to our

website and to our discussion paper. Those are views and concerns that were

taken into consideration both with the development of this legislation and with

the model that is represented by the legislation on the floor today.

I am

confident and very optimistic about the new model. I know that it will begin to

much more reflect the needs that we have in this province and be able to respond

more quickly to the changes that are necessary. I do want to point out that we

have a number of pilot projects underway around the province, which will address

some of the concerns that have been expressed in the issues that the member read

into the record. We also have a number of pilot projects that we will be

awarding in the next number of weeks, which talk about things like transition

and competency-based training.

I do want

to point out that as the model evolves, operational issues — issues that deal

with the day-to-day operation of the new model — will absolutely be directed

to the Industry Training Authority and not to the minister.

J. Kwan:

Will the authority be required to set up a consultation process with the various

stakeholders to ensure that there is consultation in matters and maybe,

therefore, be in the position to make suggestions or recommendations to the

minister for her consideration?

Hon. S.

Bond: Well, I guess we're going to take a different approach to this as we

move forward. I simply am not prepared to have legislation compel people to do

those kinds of things. I don't think that statute compels people to consult; I

think common sense does.

[1555]

I think

that this Industry Training Authority, composed of leaders who understand the

needs of industry and who understand the needs of leaders, will consult as they

see appropriate. They will design the system for consultation, and they will

have their needs met through the system that they choose to use.

J. Kwan:

The problem here is this: one would assume that common sense would compel people

to consult. The reality is, though, that this Liberal government — this

minister included — campaigned on openness and consultation and transparency,

but so far the government has actually not delivered on those promises.

On the

issue around the authority, in terms of the role of the authority and how

consultation will be met, the minister is basically saying…. You know what?

She's not putting any stipulation around consultation, and it will just be up to

the authority to deal with it.

Even for

this piece of legislation, consultation was lacking. It was only at the last

minute that various stakeholders were actually invited to the table, and their

recommendations and suggestions for the minister seem to have fallen on deaf

ears. The consultation process that this minister had embarked on for this piece

of legislation has fallen short.

The

authority is not required to do consultation. They can do consultation if they

see fit. How will the authority and therefore the minister and the ministry

attempt to deal with input from the public?

Perhaps I

can ask the minister this question as well. Is the minister aware that in April

of 1997 an industry-sponsored survey of some 300 building contractors, the

majority of whom are non-union, found that some 73 percent of building

contractors think apprentices should be required to learn all facets of the

trade before being granted journeyperson status?

Hon. S.

Bond: Let's talk about the issue of consultation first. I want, first of

all, to thank my staff for doing an extraordinary job of consulting around the

province. I heard nothing but great things about how they managed during some

very challenging discussions where, unfortunately, some people at those meetings

were not able to express their views because they certainly weren't given that

opportunity. But my staff did an extraordinary job under challenging

circumstances.

To begin

with, we held eight regional forums around British Columbia, and when concern

was expressed that some members of the sector were not be able to actually be

accommodated, we accommodated not only them but more than 700 people in eight

regional forums. I would suggest that is consultation.

In addition

to that, we had 165 written submissions, all of which were read and analyzed. At

the end of the

[ Page 6740 ]

day I'm fully aware of the report that the member references. My staff did an

excellent job over the last year and a half of not just analyzing that report

but looking at current trends and looking at opportunities.

The fact of

the matter is that there has been limited growth in apprenticeship. The numbers

have been static, in fact, over the last number of years. It is simply time for

us to make the changes that we have represented and reflected in legislation

today. We would concur that we need high-quality, absolutely excellently trained

workers in British Columbia. We certainly will see the apprenticeship program

continue in this province, where it's appropriate, but the responsible thing to

do is look at a system and how to enhance it, and ensure we have the quality and

quantity of workers that this province needs now and in the future.

J. Kwan:

Maybe I can just add some other information that the minister has omitted in the

process here. The consultation process that the minister has proudly said her

ministry has engaged in. One of the things she's forgotten is this. At every

meeting that was held, yes, there was overflowing capacity, but at every meeting

some 90 percent of the participants were against the proposed changes.

[1600]

It is a

farce to label that process consultative. The minister, quite frankly, just

didn't listen to the critiques that were made, didn't answer a single point that

was made regarding the concerns that people have.

[R.

Stewart in the chair.]

Yes, you

can say you've gone out and had regional meetings. You can say you've done that

process and say you've consulted. But the reality is that when people

participate in that consultation process and the majority have problems with the

direction that the government is going, then one would argue that the

consultation process is just an empty process. It's not listening to people and

addressing their concerns. I just want to make sure that is, in fact, on the

record here.

I'd like to

ask the minister the question around the survey I had mentioned. She seemed to

not have answered the question of whether or not she's aware of that survey. I'd

like the minister to comment on that, please.

Hon. S.

Bond: First of all, I did clearly say that I was aware of the report. That

report informed the creation of the Industry Training and Apprenticeship

Commission. When we became government, one of the things we said very clearly

was that we were going to look at existing structures and services and see if

they were actually meeting the mandate they had been created for. In fact, as I

pointed out, despite the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Commission, the

number of apprentices in the province was virtually static over that period of

time. Simply put, the system that was created as a result, partly, of the survey

the member refers to was not reaching and fulfilling the targets and the

expectations it was created for. So, yes, we're aware of it, and we are looking

to a model that will see an increase not only in the number of trainees in this

province but also IN the quality of those trainees.

I feel

absolutely compelled to respond to the fact that 90 percent of people at the

forums were not in favour. I want to point out that I received numerous e-mails

and contacts. I met personally with groups of apprentices. Many people said they

simply didn't even have the opportunity to express their views because there was

a particular opinion expressed repeatedly by a number of people at every single

forum.

I do want

to point out that through the 165 written submissions we have received as a

ministry, there are the following industry sectors — not individuals but

sectors in this province — that have expressed positive support for the new

model as outlined: the aerospace industry, the automotive and recreational

vehicle retail and services industry, the heavy industry in the province,

horticulture and nursery, hospitality and tourism, manufacturing, motion picture

and television, power line contractors. In addition, the residential

construction and independent construction components of the construction sector

are in support of the new model. We have support in terms of public institutions

and private trainers.

I want to

make it clear, on the record, that we have significant support for a new

direction for a look at how we train in this province in order to ensure we have

the quality and quantity of workers we need now and in the future.

J. Kwan:

The minister cites the people she says are supportive, but on the flip side of

it, there are a significant number of people who are not supportive of that

piece of legislation.

Is the

minister aware that there's a group of 88 electrical contractors who recently

signed a petition voicing their concerns with this new model?

Hon. S.

Bond: Yes.

[1605]

J. Kwan:

Who else has the minister received information from, who has raised concerns and

objected to this new model?

Hon. S.

Bond: Well, certainly it's been clear that this discussion, legislation and

change always bring debate and discussion. I think that's healthy, and I think

it's important.

I think

it's fair to say that organized labour has been generally opposed to this change

and most changes related to skills and trades training in the province. I can

also say that concerns have been expressed to me by the commercial construction

sector.

J. Kwan:

Are those the only groups that are opposed to the legislation that the minister

is aware of?

Hon. S.

Bond: I think it's fair to say that these are certainly the two largest

groups in terms of how I

[ Page 6741 ]

might describe the people who have expressed concerns to me. I have met with

both of those groups and sections of them on a number of occasions.

addition, anytime you change a system, anytime you look at a new way of doing

things that changes the status quo, people express concerns. So, in fact, there

may well be individuals across a number of organizations and sectors that are

concerned about this bill, but I can assure you of this: the significant

majority of people involved in trades training as we move forward have expressed

the concern that we must create a system that is flexible and responsive to the

needs of industry and the needs of learners in this province.

In fact, we

have support, and we are going to move forward. This is going to be an exciting

opportunity for us to look at a new way of enhancing training here in British

Columbia.

J. Kwan:

The minister keeps saying how exciting this is and that anytime there is change,

there are bound to be people who are opposed to it. The issue is this: it's not

about opposing change for opposition's sake but rather raising legitimate

concerns that need to be addressed. Of course, the concern people raise is to

ensure that when there are changes being made, you actually do it right. Do it

right so that the development is, therefore, really in the best interests of all

British Columbians, and I think that's the intent here for everyone.

I hope the

minister is not of the view that the people who raise the concerns are somehow

just opposing it because they oppose change, because that's not the sense I have

at all.

I'd like to

ask the minister this question, because changes do take place from time to time.

In fact, in the Bill Bennett era back in the 1980s, there was another similar

experiment that was embarked on. It was called the trades access program known

as TRAC, which was supposed to enable apprentices to direct their own studies at

their own pace. It was a system that ended up in chaos and failure. After two

years, some $35 million was wasted in spending, and TRAC was then withdrawn. I'd

like to ask the minister: has she learned anything from this experience of the

Bill Bennett era? I'd like to have the minister's comments on that.

[1610]

Hon. S.

Bond: I think it is important we learn from things that have happened in the

past. Certainly, while there were challenges with TRAC, I think we should note

for the record that part of what TRAC spawned was entry-level trades training,

which is a significant component of the training system that exists today in the

province.

One of the

challenges with TRAC is that it was a classroom-based program. We're saying

there needs to be a work-based component to any sort of training, and that is an

important lesson that was learned. So while TRAC had some challenges, from our

perspective, one of the components of the system that exists today came as a

result of the TRAC system. In excess of $50 million, in fact, currently is in a

system that was created through that particular initiative.

In addition

to that, with regard to the comments about being willing to listen and wanting

to make sure we get it right, I can absolutely agree with the member. We want to

get this right. Really, one of the most discouraging parts of this discussion

has been the fact that some people are simply saying: "It won't work. We

don't want change. We're simply not prepared to work with you." That is

very unfortunate. In fact, I continue to hope people will come and sit down and

work with us as we ensure that the new model is rolled out effectively and

appropriately in this province.

We are

creating pilot projects around the province which will see new ways of training

— opportunities for the young people of this province. You know, I am

concerned when the average age of an apprentice in this province is 28 years

old. We need to look at ways of encouraging and attracting young people to

skills and trades training in this province. The most important thing is that

the cornerstone of training in this province, the basic parameters, will

continue to exist where that's appropriate.

What's been

unfortunate is that often the information that has been shared simply does not

line up with the information that has been presented by this government. Red

Seal will continue in this province. Over and over and over again, I heard

people saying that Red Seal will be discontinued in the province. That is simply

not factual. It's unfortunate when that kind of rhetoric is involved in this

kind of a debate.

So you're

right: it is absolutely appropriate that we get this system right. That is what

we're going to do. The legislation today will allow for more flexibility and

choice for training in the province.

J. Kwan:

Well, of the people who contacted the opposition caucus, none, in my view, have

expressed an approach that would preclude them from participating and working

with the ministry. The problem rests with this: the government is simply not

listening to the concerns that have been raised. The government is simply

putting blinders on and then rejecting those concerns, because the government is

of the view that somehow, when those concerns are raised, they're opposing the

new model.

When people

raise concerns with respect to the new model, then there are issues with the new

model. It is hoped, of course, that the government and therefore the minister

would open her perspective to receive these concerns and then address them

accordingly, and not just to reject the concerns outright, saying that somehow

they are not intending to work with the government and have no goodwill to work

with the government.

[1615]

Could the

minister please advise: will a trainee or apprentice be able to complete their

apprenticeship in less time than it takes today? In other words, can an

electrical apprentice complete in three years instead of four using the new

method of testing or evaluating?

Hon. S.

Bond: Certainly, there will be the possibility, we hope, in the future that

apprentices will be able

[ Page 6742 ]

to complete their training in lesser periods of time. I want to make it very

clear that neither the standards nor the criteria will change, but potentially

some of the delivery models will. For example, British Columbia, unlike many

provinces in Canada, currently does not use an on-line component in any sort of

training model. That's simply a technique and tool that is used across this

country.

What we

want to do is not look at changing the standards or the criteria, but there is

the potential — and I hope it will happen — that we can shorten the amount

of time. We certainly will not lessen the competency or qualifications that are

required, but as technology changes, as we look at new delivery models, that

potential will exist.

Locke: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave

granted.

Introductions by Members

Locke: On behalf of the Minister of State for Mental Health, who is

currently in the little House, I would like to introduce to the House a group of

students from Princess Margaret Secondary School. They are in the chamber, and I

ask that the House please make them very welcome.

Debate Continued

J. Kwan:

The minister advises that the period of time for the training may be shortened,

but the competence issue would not be compromised. Is that the view of the

employers? In other words, have the employers been asked if they will then hire

people as competent journeypersons?

Hon. S.

Bond: Well, certainly there will be variables as we look at it across

trades. Some trades will be able to make that adjustment, and some won't. We

recognize that. Some employers will be in favour of that and some not.

I want to

point out another case example of where it's being done and how it works. In

Ontario, for example, seven trades complete and write the Red Seal examination

after two years. We simply cannot do that in British Columbia. That's a

disadvantage both to competent workers and to employers in the province.

J. Kwan:

Well, the issue around the consultation with the employers is key, because at

the end of the day they are the people who will be hiring these trainees. With

the authority, who's been charged with this responsibility to bring forward and

enact the intentions of the model…. Could the minister please advise: is the

authority required to consult with employers to ensure they agree with the plan

that would be devised under this model? How will they ensure that the employers

actually buy into this concept and therefore hire the trainees that would arrive

as a result of Bill 34?

[1620]

Hon. S.

Bond: I would agree with the member that employers are absolutely key to

this process. The creation of the Industry Training Authority allows employers

in this province to relate directly to those people who will create the programs

that are necessary to train workers. One of the things we've heard consistently

is that there has tended to be a disconnect in the training models and the needs

of workers and employers in the province. What we know the Industry Training

Authority will do is bring employers into a key relationship with the Industry

Training Authority to design training programs that meet their needs.

J. Kwan:

Could the minister please advise: what is the term of the appointment, under

this section, for the directors?

Hon. S.

Bond: Current policy is that board members will be appointed for a term of

one year and will be eligible for reappointment for two further terms of two

years and three years respectively. We would hope to have those appointments

staggered to ensure consistency.

J. Kwan:

"In accordance with general directives of the Treasury Board" —

under

section 3 — "directors may be paid remuneration and must be

reimbursed for all reasonable travelling and out of pocket expenses necessarily

incurred in carrying out their duties." What will their salaries be?

Under 5(2):

"The Public Service Act and the Public Service Labour Relations Act do not

apply to the authority, its officers or its employees…."

Why do the

Public Service Act and the Public Service Labour Relations Act not apply to this

legislation?

Hon. S.

Bond: The Public Service Act and the Public Service Labour Relations Act do

not apply because this authority will be arm's length from government, and

employees will not necessarily be public servants.

addition, to the issue of compensation, I want to make it clear that the board

will simply be compensated as per government policy in terms of per diem and

expenses. They do not receive a salary.

[1625]

J. Kwan:

Arising from the minister's answer, she says the authority is at arm's length

from the government, and therefore the Public Service Act and the Public Service

Labour Relations Act do not apply. Yet under

section 2, the authority is an

agent of the government. It is stipulated under

section 2(3) that the authority

is an agent of the government.

How could

it be that it is an agent of government, but at the same time it is not part of

government?

Hon. S.

Bond: The authority will be an agent of government. It is not a ministry; it

is not directly related to government on a day-to-day basis — hence arm's

length. It is important also that we ensure we can

[ Page 6743 ]

meet our obligations as a government to other provinces, particularly the

labour mobility

chapter of the agreement on internal trade, and that relates

directly to the Red Seal trades.

J. Kwan:

The minister advised, and per the legislation, that the remuneration will be in

accordance with the existing practice. Could the minister advise: what is that

rate of per diem right now?

Hon. S.

Bond: It is current Treasury Board guidelines. I don't have the specific

number, but I'd be happy to get that and get it to you.

J. Kwan:

Is there a differential between the chair versus the other directors?

Hon. S.

Bond: Yes, in the guidelines there is a differentiation for the chair from

the other members.

J. Kwan:

Will there be a limitation as to how many meetings could be held and, therefore,

how much of the administrative portion of the budget would be utilized towards

remuneration and expenses such as travelling, etc.?

Hon. S.

Bond: There are no maximum or minimum numbers of meetings, but I think we

can anticipate that at the beginning of this process there will be more meetings

than there will as the process unfolds. So it will be up to the Industry

Training Authority to determine the needs that they have as they begin the

startup of the new program and as the board begins to work together.

J. Kwan:

Is this new entity subject to freedom of information?

Hon. S.

Bond: Yes.

Sections

3 to 5 inclusive approved.

section 6.

J. Kwan:

Section 6 deals with the financial administration component of this act, and

section 6 states: "At least once in every year, the accounts of the

authority must be audited and reported on by an auditor appointed by the

Minister of Finance." Then it goes on with the various sections, and then

subsection (5) reads: "At the times specified by the minister, the

authority must submit to the minister for review and approval a multi-year

business plan that includes all of the following…." Then it lists four

things under subsection (5).

Could the

minister please advise: how will labour and industry be able to comment on the

business plan?

Hon. S.

Bond: We would expect that the authority would make its business plan

public, as we have across government, and we would assume that as they consult,

as they see fit, that would also be a public process. So we would expect them to

make that plan public.

J. Kwan:

Is the minister saying that the plan would be made public — would that be the

draft plan that would be made public — and then it becomes finalized?

Hon. S.

Bond: We'll allow the Industry Training Authority to determine how the input

is garnered as they put the business plan together. The end result is that they

will be expected to make the business plan public.

Section

6 approved.

[1630]

On

section

J. Kwan:

Section 7 deals with the borrowing and deficit for the authority. It stipulates

that the authority must not borrow money without the prior approval of the

minister and the Minister of Finance and that the authority must not run a

deficit without the prior approval of the minister and the Minister of Finance.

What will

happen if the new entity runs into a deficit situation?

Hon. S.

Bond: We don't anticipate that happening.

J. Kwan:

Yes. That may be the hope and anticipation of the minister, but the question is:

what if it does happen? What will happen?

Hon. S.

Bond: It's not a matter of hope; it's a matter of expectation. The Industry

Training Authority will be expected to present a three-year plan that represents

a balanced budget. That's certainly the practice of this government, and the

Industry Training Authority would be expected to use the same practice and

principle.

J. Kwan:

Well, even governments have instituted a mechanism to ensure that ministries do

not exceed their budget, and that is a penalty that would apply to the minister

responsible. Even for government there's a mechanism that is in place for

ministers. So is there no mechanism in place for the authority?

Maybe I can

give a further example. Maybe the CEO of the authority would be penalized with

his salary or her salary if there should be a deficit. I don't know. I'm just

asking the question because that's the mechanism the government has put in place

for ministers.

Hon. S.

Bond: In fact, I will repeat it one more time. The expectation will be that

this Industry Training Authority will balance their budget. They will have a

three-year plan in place as they work through those years.

The other

thing is that the

section we just passed,

section 6, says clearly that they're

not allowed to bor-

[ Page 6744 ]

row any money. In fact, they will need to work with the dollars that they

have been given, and they will be expected to present a balanced budget.

J. Kwan:

It will be interesting to see what happens because, as we know, the Ministry of

Children and Family Development has run into problems with its budget. In fact,

they've run into problems with respect to putting children at risk, given the

directive of the Minister of Finance and the Treasury Board for their ministry.

As such, the ministry has to have an outside consultant come in to assist that

minister in achieving their budget parameters.

[1635]

It's

interesting to note that you have expectations. It is the expectation of the

minister for the authority to meet their budget and therefore not run into a

deficit situation, but the reality is that problems do arise. As well, there may

be a situation…. I may anticipate that there are insufficient dollars to meet

all of the goals that the ministry has set out, and that is to increase the

trainees by 10 percent, more particularly, and to increase the skilled labour

force for British Columbia.

In that

situation, where you don't have enough resources to do the job that needs to be

done, where will the authority go? It appears that the authority has no

mechanism to deal with that, because they're not allowed to run a deficit.

Mr. Chair,

I'm ready to go to

section

Section 7

approved.

On

section

J. Kwan:

Section 8 deals with the industry training apprenticeship, and the heading under

8 is "Powers of authority respecting training programs."

Section 8(1)

states: "The authority may do one or more of the following: (

a) designate a

training program, including a training program for a trade or an occupation, as

a recognized program."

canvassed this a little bit under the

definitions section. Could the minister

please advise how industry will have input in the new programs or the

designations?

Hon. S.

Bond: Industry will be able to come directly to the Industry Training

Authority with any proposals they may have in terms of their training needs.

They will also be able to present needs to the Industry Training Authority. In

addition, I fully expect that the Industry Training Authority itself will engage

industry on a regular basis in terms of the training programs necessary in their

sectors.

J. Kwan:

Subsection (

b) of

section 8 states: "Recommend to the minister that a

training program, including a training program for a trade or an occupation, be

designated as an accredited program." Could the minister please advise on

whose recommendation it is based? Is it industry? Is it business? The ITA?

Hon. S.

Bond: The recommendation to the minister will come from the Industry

Training Authority. That will come after consultation, after analysis and after

all of the excellent work that the Industry Training Authority will do. But the

recommendation comes directly from the Industry Training Authority to the

minister.

J. Kwan:

Has there been any consideration for how this will affect the existing training

system?

Hon. S.

Bond: Certainly, our hopes and our expectations of the new model are that

the system will be more responsive, more flexible, and will create more

opportunities for choice for individuals. In the existing system — the Red

Seal trades — as you know, the 45 will be protected under the accredited

designation, and the 150-plus trades that were designated by ITAC will continue

to be known as recognized trades.

J. Kwan:

Is the minister anticipating that…? You know, the minister actually said there

are partnerships that are being entered into with colleges and other

institutions. Following in that vein, will these partnerships be tripartite

agreements between the post-secondary institution, the government and the new

authority?

Hon. S.

Bond: The authority will establish its own partnerships. They will be

partnerships between either a private trainer and the authority or public

institutions and the authority. Government will not be involved in that.

[1640]

J. Kwan:

Are there rules and guidelines with respect to what kind of partnerships the

authority could enter into, or is it just entirely up to the authority to

decide?

Hon. S.

Bond: The Industry Training Authority will be responsible for creating all

of the regulations and criteria and presenting them to me for my approval

initially. In fact, we look forward to the work that they're going to do, and

they will be presenting those to the minister.

J. Kwan:

So the agreements have to be approved by the minister. Now, the minister says

initially the agreements have to be approved by the minister. Does that mean to

say the first couple of agreements would have to be approved by the minister and

then, thereafter, the authority has the power to enter into any agreement that

the authority deems fit to do so?

Hon. S.

Bond: I probably caused some confusion there. The criteria and standards

would be recommended to the minister. Certainly, the agreements that are agreed

to by the Industry Training Authority partnerships — how training models will

be and relationships that will be designated — will be between the Industry

Training Authority and either the trainer or the institution.

[ Page 6745 ]

It will be

criteria and standards or designation of a trade that are recommended. Those

will be recommended to the minister. I apologize for the confusion.

J. Kwan:

Will there be a central registration process? How will someone register to

be an apprentice?

Hon. S.

Bond: We are currently piloting an on-line registration program for

apprentices and employers. That's a partnership, actually, between the

independent contractors and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

We expect to be able to use that universally in the very near future. That is

being piloted as we speak. There will be an on-line system for registering the

agreements with the Industry Training Authority.

Also, I

just want to bring the answer to the member concerning remuneration for board

members as set out in Treasury Board directives. The amount is $350 for the

chair and $250 for members.

J. Kwan:

First on the amounts — $300 and $250 respectively: is that per meeting,

per day?

Hon. S.

Bond: It's the per diem as laid out in Treasury Board directives.

J. Kwan:

For clarification, is that $300 per day? So if you have a meeting that lasts

for five days, that's $1,500?

Hon. S.

Bond: It is per diem or per day. It is unlikely that the meetings would last

for five days, considering some of the people that we're asking to do this task.

To clarify for the member, it is per diem.

J. Kwan:

There are no limitations to how many days one could meet. The costs could

actually add up.

Getting

back to the central registration process question. The minister advises that

there's an on-line system that the government is piloting with respect to that.

Is that the only registration system?

[1645]

Hon. S.

Bond: No. In fact, you can register through the industry training centre in

Burnaby. We assume that as we move forward, you'll be able to register with the

paper method with the Industry Training Authority directly as well. We think

that the enhancement of being able to register on line will be a progressive

step in the sector and in being able to register on line.

J. Kwan:

The on-line system that's being set up. I think the minister advised that it is

the independent contractors who are doing this work along with the…. I forget

the other group, actually. There was another group that the minister had advised

would be doing this work. Are they being paid to do this work — to set up the

central pilot registration process? And if so, how much are they being paid?

Hon. S.

Bond: No, the work is being done on a voluntary basis; they are not being

paid. I want to repeat for the record, because I want to make sure I get the

right title, that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers is the

partner with the independent contractors.

J. Kwan:

Thank you for that clarification. I thought the minister meant the independent

contractors association is doing this work, but that's not the case.

Okay. Now,

given that there were 16 ITAC offices across the province before, which provided

access to people who need support — who need to register, as an example, in

the various locations — and now it's being reduced to one in Burnaby…. I

appreciate that there's an on-line pilot program that has been set, but not

everyone is able to access the computer system to do that work. With the

reduction of the number of offices available in terms of access for people

across the province, could the minister explain how one office will be able to

service the entire ministry? Is the ministry anticipating there would be

contracting out of other services formerly performed by these offices?

Hon. S.

Bond: All right. It seems to be my afternoon for clarification. Maybe it's

the hour; I'm not certain.

I do want

to get this right for the record. There is a partnership piloting the on-line

registration program, and the member was correct. It is the Independent

Contractors and Businesses Association with the International Brotherhood of

Electrical Workers. The partnership is between those two groups. I want that

clear for the record. And it is voluntary.

The reason

we actually are partnering with those organizations is because the independent

contractors have 400 apprentices and the International Brotherhood of Electrical

Workers have 700. Between them, they have over 1,000 of our apprentices in the

province.

[1650]

In terms of

the Burnaby centre, at this point in time it's the transition office. We are

expecting that the Industry Training Authority will look at a combination of

mechanisms for providing support to apprentices and trainees around the

province. It may include on-line assistance, but it also is going to look at the

use of colleges. As I pointed out earlier, we're working with a consortium of

colleges. We're using the facilities available through government agents offices

to provide some services. So the Burnaby centre is a transition office. We fully

expect the Industry Training Authority to look at how to provide resources

throughout the province as they begin their work.

J. Kwan:

Is it anticipated that the colleges would also provide a point for registration?

Hon. S.

Bond: It's very likely that will be a possibility, because I need to remind

people that for the first time we will not simply be registering apprentices. We

will also be registering trainees in the province. Many

[ Page 6746 ]

of those trainees take their training at colleges around the province. So we

believe it's very likely that colleges will be points of registration. That

information would then be forwarded on to the Industry Training Authority.

J. Kwan:

The pilot project on the on-line registration. The minister advises that right

now nobody's being paid for that work. It is just being done on a voluntary

basis. When does the minister anticipate that the pilot will be completed and

therefore become a permanent program? And when it does become a permanent

program, will these two organizations be paid and, if so, how much?

Hon. S.

Bond: We hope to have the process up and ready to run across the province

and throughout industry by the end of June.

I should

point out that it's actually my staff that's done a terrific job of developing

the program, creating the possibility for on-line registration. These two

organizations are simply trying it out, in essence — so piloting the

mechanism. They are not being paid; it is voluntary. They're using the process

because of the significant number of apprentices they have, but it is actually

the staff in my ministry that are trying to make this much more streamlined and

effective for trainees and apprentices.

J. Kwan:

Actually, that makes a difference. So it is being done in-house, then, and I

would assume that once the program becomes permanent, it would still continue to

be done in-house.

Hon. S.

Bond: The transition would be from my staff to the Industry Training

Authority, so in essence, it would move from us to the new authority.

J. Kwan:

Is the authority empowered to contract out that work — or other work, for that

matter?

Hon. S.

Bond: It is expected that the Industry Training Authority will have

contractual arrangements with all sorts of trainers. That certainly was the

practice with ITAC. Other than that, there are no constraints on the authority.

But certainly, as ITAC existed, with the Industry Training Authority there will

be a significant number of contractual arrangements as they set up training

models.

J. Kwan:

In other words, they'll be free to contract out services under the ITA.

[1655]

Hon. S.

Bond: The Industry Training Authority will have the powers of a natural

person, which means they are a corporation and will have the ability to enter

into a number of contractual arrangements.

J. Kwan:

The staff that were with ITAC — will they be moving on to be part of the

ITA?

Hon. S.

Bond: We did maintain 20 of the ITAC staff, and those staff members are

working in the Burnaby centre at this point in time. We have recently extended

their work period as we move through the transition with the Industry Training

Authority. Each of those people has the opportunity to be placed in another

government position. Having said that, it will be up to the Industry Training

Authority to choose those people who will best serve their needs.

J. Kwan:

Twenty out of how many?

Hon. S.

Bond: ITAC had a complement about a year and a half ago of 115 employees. At

the end of fiscal year end this year it was 50, and we currently have 20.

J. Kwan:

That's a reduction of some 95 people. For the new authority to ensure that the

tasks assigned to them under sections 8 and 9 respectively under this act….

How many people does the minister anticipate the authority would hire?

Hon. S.

Bond: I can't speculate, actually, in terms of the number of employees that

the Industry Training Authority would require. Obviously, we're looking at doing

some things very differently, including on-line registration and a number of

other services in a number of different ways. So I can't speculate as to the

number of employees they would require.

[J.

Weisbeck in the chair.]

[1700]

J. Kwan:

Of course, the other component in terms of doing things differently would be the

authority for the ITA to contract out the work. Therefore, perhaps much of the

work would not be done in-house.

What

are the parameters around setting up a training program?

Hon. S.

Bond: May I ask the member to give me some more specifics around that

particular question and some detail about exactly what that question means?

J. Kwan:

Under

section 8, the "Powers of authority respecting training programs,

(1) The authority may do one or more of the following: (

a) designate a training

program, including a training program for a trade or an occupation, as a

recognized program; (

b) recommend to the minister that a training program,

including a training program for a trade or an occupation, be designated as an

accredited program."

[1705]

This entire

section deals with training programs and the like. Will there be some parameters

that would be established in terms of how training programs would be set up, how

they would be accredited, how the authority would recommend to the minister that

they would be accredited and be recognized, and so on?

[ Page 6747 ]

Hon. S.

Bond: The Industry Training Authority will recommend programs to the

minister that they think should be accredited. They will build on existing

programs. They will look at standards and criteria that are already in place,

and curriculum in particular. As I pointed out earlier, that curriculum is

currently on line. They will be asked to bring to the minister standards and

criteria and models that are outcome-focused, and they will need to develop

those within the framework of the legislation.

I would

also anticipate that the Industry Training Authority would look at programs that

affect a number of employers, so we want to make sure they're looking at

programs of size and scope and not focusing on a particular business. We want

them to look at programs of size and scope as well.

J. Kwan:

Would the existing standards that are now in place be the baseline?

Hon. S.

Bond: Yes, they will.

J. Kwan:

Are the existing trades automatically grandfathered?

Hon. S.

Bond: Certainly, at this point that is absolutely the case. We have moved

the 45 Red Seal trades over to the accredited status, and we have moved all of

the trades that were identified by ITAC into the recognized programs. Our hope

is, actually, that we will see those trades added to.

J. Kwan:

How will the authority develop and determine candidate eligibility for

participation in industry training programs?

Hon. S.

Bond: Currently, those standards for eligibility exist in all training

programs, and we want to ensure that new trainees are successful. There are

existing standards for eligibility, and those are in place, and we don't expect

those to change.

J. Kwan:

Will the eligibility be added to or deleted from the existing system by the new

authority?

Hon. S.

Bond: Two things about that. Certainly, we would expect the Industry

Training Authority to evaluate candidate eligibility if they think that has been

a barrier or a hindrance to success. We would expect them to evaluate the

existing eligibility requirements. The only other way that would see a

significant change in eligibility would be the competency process, where we

would determine a set of measurements and standards. If a learner could meet

those standards, they would be eligible to move to a particular level in a

program. That doesn't exist in the system today.

[1710]

J. Kwan:

Are there going to be minimum standards for examinations, assessments and

services?

Hon. S.

Bond: Absolutely. We do not intend to wa