2007 Legislative Session: Third Session, 38th 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 15, 2007

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 21, Number 2

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order

25 B )

Dry grad

H. Bloy

May Day Hyack Festival

Puchmayr

Healthy choices in school vending

machines

Whittred

Child Care Provider Appreciation

Day

Trevena

Turn It Off Day

I. Black

Economic benefits of mining in

B.C.

Horgan

Oral Questions

Role of Liberal officials in RCMP

investigation of government staff

C. James

Hon. W.

Oppal

Ralston

J. Kwan

Simpson

Fleming

Robertson

Chudnovsky

Simpson

Hon. M.

de Jong

Horgan

Karagianis

Committee of the Whole House

Teaching Profession (Teacher

Registration) Amendment Act, 2007 (Bill 21) (continued)

Macdonald

Cubberley

Hon. S.

Bond

Report and Third Reading of

Bills

Teaching Profession (Teacher

Registration) Amendment Act, 2007 (Bill 21)

Committee of the Whole House

Education Statutes Amendment Act,

2007 (Bill 22)

Cubberley

Hon. S.

Bond

Trevena

J. Brar

Macdonald

Simons

Fraser

C. Wyse

Mayencourt

Reporting of Bills

Education Statutes Amendment Act,

2007 (Bill 22)

Third Reading of Bills

Education Statutes Amendment Act,

2007 (Bill 22)

Committee of the Whole House

Assessment Statutes Amendment

Act, 2007 (Bill 32)

Robertson

Hon. R.

Thorpe

Gentner

Karagianis

Report and Third Reading of

Bills

Assessment Statutes Amendment

Act, 2007 (Bill 32)

Second Reading of Bills

Finance Statutes (Innovative

Clean Energy Fund) Amendment Act, 2007 (Bill 30)

Hon. R.

Neufeld

Horgan

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Economic

Development and Minister Responsible for the Asia-Pacific Initiative

and the Olympics

Hon. C.

Hansen

J. Kwan

Routley

[ Page 7997 ]

TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2007

The House met at 1:33 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

C. Puchmayr: I have the Seniors Outreach Support program of

the Centre of Integration in New Westminster here today, and I will just name

them off. They're up in the gallery: Amy Kapinga, Marie Malo, Agnes Biakudia,

Hanna Diggs, Anita Saniford, Agnes Ofori, Janis Jones, Ometa Gittens, Charles

Gittens, Henry Mwandemere, Kazimir Nzazi, Mrs. Nzazi, Paul Mulanga and Roslyn

Simon. Please make them all extremely welcome.

Hon. O. Ilich: Joining us in the gallery today are several

members from the Minoru Seniors Society from my riding of Richmond Centre. I'd

like the House to join me in welcoming president Georgina Hamilton, along with

members of the executive Jacob and Lily Braun, Eleanore Mitchell, Bill and

Melvena Sorenson, Joyce Johnston and Iris Reid. Please join me in making them

feel welcome today.

C. Wyse: In Cariboo South, the Ashcroft area is renowned

for its performing arts, art and the artists. Today I would ask you to join me

in welcoming Pauline Ogilvie, one of the Ashcroft area's renowned local artists.

Hon. T. Christensen: Today marks International Day of

Families. It's very fitting that we're joined today by a number of workers from

the Ministry of Children and Family Development who are specifically dedicated

to two programs that are geared towards reconnecting children, their families

and their extended families in their community.

[1335]

We have a number of people joining us from A Child's Roots are

Forever program, as well as the Family Finders program. I hope the House will

join me in welcoming Jennifer Popeil, Frankie Kelly, Carolle Harder, Melanie

Laird, Jessica Heath, Lynne Thanos, Darlene Hall and Jennifer Donison. Each of

these individuals makes a real difference in the lives of children in connecting

them with their family and extended family. Please join me in welcoming them to

the precinct today.

R. Chouhan: Today in the gallery we have my dear friend

Gian Sihota, his wife Mrs. Kamal Sihota, his uncle Mr. Sucha Singh Sihota from

India — a retired major — and their daughter Roma Sihota. Please join me to

welcome them.

R. Sultan: In the Legislature today are 30 students from

one of the jewels in the crown of the West Vancouver school system, Ridgeview

Elementary School. These 30 students are accompanied by several parents and two

of their teachers, Ms. Kerry Fairburn and Ms. A. Rice.

I must say that I've had a written correspondence with each of

these students, who have grilled me on life at the Legislature. Now they've come

to see it in the flesh, so would you please make them welcome.

J. Horgan: This is an introduction of some great distance.

I've just confirmed with my colleague the Minister of Energy that while my son

was travelling in Bulgaria, he happened upon his stepdaughter. So the spirit of

collegiality that the minister and I have is now being shared by our children on

another continent. I didn't want to miss the opportunity.

R. Lee: Joining us in the Legislature today are 30 grade 5

students from Holy Cross Elementary School accompanied by some of their parents

and their teachers, Mrs. Sabina McCloskey and Miss Lena Fernandes. They are here

to learn about the Legislature and how government works. Will the House please

extend a very warm welcome.

J. Yap: Further to the introduction by the Minister of

Labour and Citizens' Services, I'd like to welcome a few more of the wonderful

seniors from Richmond and the Minoru Seniors Society, who are here for a field

trip in Victoria to witness democracy in action here in the House.

We have in the public gallery the following folks: Jean Fey,

Beverly Phillips, Barry and Kay Ogilvie and from my riding of Richmond-Steveston,

Daryl Whiting and Wayne Colling. Would the House please make them welcome.

I. Black: I have two introductions to make today. I would

first like to welcome members from the BCAA Traffic Safety Foundation, Allan

Lamb and David Dunne, as well as representatives of the RCMP locally and Dr.

Jocelyn Pedder of RONA Kinetics, who are into the interesting area of

biomechanics. They are all here today with respect to an announcement on booster

seats on the front steps. Would the House please make them feel welcome.

Secondly, we all have our role models in this world. Two of mine

are here today. My mom and dad are here. Would the House please make them feel

welcome as well.

D. Hayer: I'm pleased to introduce two sets of guests who

are here in the House today. Some of the very special guests include Jane Adams,

who is the new president and CEO of Surrey Memorial Hospital Foundation, and my

wife Isabelle Martinez, who is one of my volunteers and who is also a volunteer

director of the Surrey Memorial Hospital Foundation.

This foundation has raised over $45 million for equipment in the

past 15 years for Surrey Memorial Hospital. Now they have a new fundraising

campaign underway to raise $15 million for the new Surrey Memorial Hospital's

emergency centre, which will be state

[ Page 7998 ]

of the art and will triple the size. At the same time our government has

invested more than $220 million to improve the health care infrastructure in

Surrey. Would the House please make them very welcome.

[1340]

H. Bloy: I rise in the House today for a very special

occasion on behalf of myself, my brother Randy, my sister Debby and our extended

family. Today is the special birthday of my dad. My dad Robert Bloy turns 93

years young today. [Applause.]

Thank you for acknowledging that. I know he watches every day.

It's great that we have family that watch us here in the House every day. I want

to wish my dad a happy birthday and all my love.

Hon. L. Reid: Further to the booster seat announcement

today, I'd like to welcome to the precincts the two booster children who were so

very kind to assist us today, Annie and Jack Blundell. One is six, and one is

eight. They're exactly the audience we are hoping to reach with our booster seat

announcements today. I would ask the House to please make them welcome.

D. Hayer: I also have another special guest. That's my son.

Anthony Singh Martinez is here. He was 12 years old when I was first elected in

2001. He was constantly one of the key volunteers on our team in Surrey-Tynehead

and is one of the hardest-working members in Surrey. Would the House please make

him very welcome.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) DRY GRAD

H. Bloy: The month of May marks the beginning of an

exciting time in many students' lives across the province — high school

graduation. I'm sure some of the members in the House can remember.

Today I want to talk about dry grad. Dry grad can help develop an

attitude among students in the community that a good time can be had without

alcohol or drugs, increasing awareness of the dangers of combining drinking and

driving.

It is with great pride that I announce two high schools in

Burnaby, Burnaby Mountain Secondary and Burnaby North Secondary, that are both

strong supporters of dry grad. Many dry grad ceremonies encompass a theme such

as the one hosted by Burnaby Mountain Secondary, a Night in Neverland. The night

will include dancing, playing casino games, food and over $2,000 worth of prizes

to be won.

Recently, B.C. liquor stores encouraged customers across the

province to donate $1 for each purchase to support dry grad celebrations in

their communities. Burnaby schools received $15,000, and Coquitlam schools

received over $25,000 towards dry grad celebrations.

Many other companies, such as Lougheed Town Centre, participated

in fundraising and awareness events as well. Fraser Health has donated over $400

to each high school throughout the Fraser region, and they have produced a video

But I AM in Control . I can tell you it is worthwhile for everyone to see,

and it will be shown to all high school students.

With further support and increased awareness about dry grad

celebrations, we can continue to provide our students and communities with a

safe graduation season. Congratulations to all graduating students. You are our

future. Have a safe, happy and dry grad.

MAY DAY HYACK FESTIVAL

C. Puchmayr: This Saturday is the first day of the May Day

Hyack Festival in New Westminster. It includes sporting tournaments,

multicultural festivals, art exhibits, heritage displays, fireworks and more.

On Victoria Day at noon in Queen's Park stadium, the honourable

Hyack anvil battery does a 21-anvil salute to the Queen. It's very interesting.

They have two very heavy anvils. They put a shot glass of gunpowder in between

them, and they light them with a long red-hot poker. It's quite loud and makes a

lot of noise. It's quite a spectacle. It sets off a lot of dog alarms as well.

Wednesday May 23 is the 137th May Day. The member from Port

Coquitlam spoke about their May Day. Ours goes back to 1870, and I'm sure some

of the members on the other side recall that first May Day in New Westminster.

They might have read about it because they're such great historians.

This is an incredible event. There are over 70 events, and most of

them are free of charge. They include a dog agility show that is absolutely

spectacular and bands playing in the park on Monday. There's a carnival. There

are fireworks down at Westminster Quay.

[1345]

It's an incredible festival. There's more information available on

the Internet. If you go to hyack.bc.ca, log on and get more information. We hope

to see you next Saturday, not this Saturday coming up, for the great Hyack

parade with, over 140 participants from Canada and the United States, including

the Seattle Seafair Pirates. It's an incredible display with marching bands and

motorcycle drill teams. I'm sure that most of my colleagues on both sides of the

House will be there with me, enjoying this great festival.

HEALTHY CHOICES IN

SCHOOL VENDING MACHINES

K. Whittred: Childhood obesity is a serious problem with

serious long-term consequences. The scope of this issue is discussed in detail

in the report of the all-party legislative Health Committee.

Some of us in this House can remember schools actually without

vending machines. Everyone in this House can picture vending machines stocked

with pop, chips, Cheezies, chocolate bars, gummy bears and suckers.

I'm proud to say that vending machines stocked full of junk food

are a thing of the past at North

[ Page 7999 ]

Vancouver's Carson Graham School. Located in my riding, it is the first

school in British Columbia to give students the only option of a healthy snack.

Filled with apples, vegetable dips and even some healthy chips, the vending

machines are said to be a hit. From all reports, the healthy snacks are so

popular that they can barely keep the machines stocked to meet the demand.

The goal of the Ministry of Education is to have all school

vending machines dispense only healthy snacks by 2009. Congratulations to the

North Vancouver school district and Carson Graham School for taking this

important step to ban junk food. Let them be an example of the difference a

healthy choice can make in a student's life and be a model for all schools in

British Columbia.

CHILD CARE PROVIDER

APPRECIATION DAY

C. Trevena: I rise to speak about Child Care Provider

Appreciation Day. It's great that there is such a day. Today is the day. It's a

day where we can acknowledge and celebrate child care providers.

In most households these days, both parents work because they

cannot afford not to, so they need child care. Single parents also need child

care because they too have to go to work, and they need support for their

children. Some parents who are not at work also choose to opt for child care.

All these people appreciate their providers. Parents talk in

glowing terms about those who look after their children — that is, if they can

find child care. If you talk to a parent about child care, the story soon turns

to the desperate hunt for it — the phone calls, the visits, the wait-lists, the

trips from one centre to another to find space and the trek across the city

because the only available space is 40 minutes from home or work.

There are the rural communities where there may be only about

seven spaces to start with for the whole community. The demand is there, but no

one can actually afford to open up a new centre.

Parents are forced into difficult choices. Do they quit work?

That's if they have the luxury to be able to afford to quit. Do they leave their

child with a neighbour or a friend or a relative? There's the 72-year-old

grandmother who's looking after her two-year-old autistic grandson, or the young

woman who wants to get off welfare and go back to school but can't find child

care or the nurse who hasn't gone back to work because she can't find child

care.

Child care providers nurture our children. They provide early

education, socialization, learning through experience and learning through play.

They deserve to be appreciated. Parents know this. They want this choice, and

they want the best possibilities for their kids.

If we truly wanted to appreciate child care providers, we'd invest

in their hard work. We'd ensure that providers could pay staff a living wage and

create more spaces. Without those commitments, Child Care Provider Appreciation

Day is little more than a rhetorical flourish.

TURN IT OFF DAY

I. Black: "There's got to be 50 lights on in this house."

It was a line that I recall hearing often as a child. I think my grandfather and

then my parents took ownership of it, and it was up there with: "Are you trying

to heat the whole neighbourhood?" or "Were you born in a barn?"

The first of these heartfelt expressions of parental affection has

a theme consistent with the day of significance in our energy plan's objective

to be energy self-sufficient by 2016. Tomorrow, Wednesday, May 16, is Turn It

Off Day in British Columbia.

B.C. Hydro, in partnership with the non-profit group 30 Days of

Sustainability, is asking British Columbians to turn off all unnecessary lights

and appliances in order to reduce their electricity use.

[1350]

We've been a net importer of electricity for each of the last five

years, and with our economy growing by leaps and bounds, the gap between supply

and demand could grow even worse. The first and best way of reducing this gap is

to conserve more. Turn off your computer, your printer and your photocopier when

it's not in use. Add to that your DVD players, VCRs and the stereo systems in

your homes.

If all families in B.C. that usually leave their computers and

monitors running 24 hours a day turned them off when they're not in use, the

province would save 330 gigawatt hours per year in electricity. That's almost 2½

days of our province's annual power consumption. Replace your incandescent bulbs

with compact fluorescent lights whenever possible. Unplug your cell phone,

camera and other battery chargers once the charging is complete.

We all have an individual role to play, and more than 120

businesses have pledged their support for the day through B.C. Hydro. In fact,

the government of British Columbia is the largest employer participating in

tomorrow's event. So we ask for your leadership by encouraging your family and

friends to participate. For goodness' sake, turn off those lights when you leave

the room. Grandpa would be proud.

ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF

MINING IN B.C.

J. Horgan: Mining Week is an opportunity for those of us

representing urban areas to reflect on the importance of mining to our economy.

Mining, by the numbers, is a compelling story. The average compensation in

the sector is $94,000 a year. Direct employment is nearly 10,000, with another

28,000 in indirect jobs. It's not just the jobs and economic spinoffs in rural

British Columbia but jobs and economic activity that the industry generates in

our cities, large and small.

In addition to the economic benefits, there are the more tangible,

less talked about attributes of mining in B.C. Michael McPhie of the Mining

Association reminds us today in the press that the footprint from mining on the

natural environment, in terms of the

[ Page 8000 ]

land base, is less than 28,000 hectares, or 0.05 percent of the province. For

that modest impact on the land base, we extract the minerals to manufacture a

wide range of consumer goods that most of us would be lost without.

Our coking coal from the Elk Valley is an indispensable component

of the steel that shapes our rapid transit systems and forms the strength of the

Vancouver skyline. But the industry is not without its challenges. On the

environment front, the industry is working hard to limit impacts on water and

the land, which have been the source of first nations life for generations.

Progress has been made, but much work remains to be done.

Of all our resource industries, mining is the most affected by

fluctuating commodity prices. As we celebrate Mining Week this year, the prices

have never been better. Slumping international markets in the '90s meant that

development was deferred. Since 1995 world gold prices have increased by 78

percent, lead by 221 percent, zinc by 209 percent and copper by over 330

percent.

Good times for mining are good times for all British Columbians,

provided the industry continues to respect first nations and the environment. As

we acknowledge the industry and all that it means to B.C., let us also remind

the mining community to keep sustainability at the forefront of all that they do

in British Columbia.

Oral Questions

ROLE OF LIBERAL OFFICIALS

IN RCMP INVESTIGATION OF

GOVERNMENT STAFF

C. James: Today in court we learned that following a

meeting with the Premier, B.C. Liberal Party executive director Kelly Reichert

met with the police on June 24, 2005, and told them that laying charges against

Mr. Basi for dirty political tricks would embarrass the Liberal Party.

My question is to the Attorney General. Will he inform this House:

what specific instructions did the Premier give Mr. Reichert in advance of Mr.

Reichert's meeting with the RCMP?

Hon. W. Oppal: The Leader of the Opposition well knows that

we're not going to comment on evidence that's before the courts. That's obvious.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a

supplemental.

C. James: The public expects answers from this government

when it comes to very serious allegations involving a court case, involving

political dirty tricks alleged in the Premier's office.

[1355]

In an RCMP document marked "Kelly Reichert. Not for disclosure,"

we learned that Mr. Reichert told the Premier that the charges would be

recommended for dirty tricks. According to the documents read in court, the RCMP

asked Mr. Reichert if the potential for harm to the B.C. Liberal Party should

take precedence over good prosecution. Mr. Reichert said it would.

Again, to the Attorney General: does he believe that protecting

the B.C. Liberal Party from political embarrassment is more important than

protecting the public from political corruption?

Hon. W. Oppal: I believe in a fair trial for the men who

are now charged in the Supreme Court.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a further

supplemental.

C. James: I think perhaps we should remind the members on

the other side that they in fact did not take a vow of silence. They took an

oath of office when they came into this position.

In 2003 the Premier said: "The important thing is that an

investigation is carried out thoroughly and diligently by the RCMP." Two years

later his party is refusing to answer and trying to cover up allegations into

political corruption.

Again, my question to the Attorney General: when the Premier met

with Mr. Reichert before the meeting with the police, did the Premier tell Mr.

Reichert to fully cooperate instead of trying to cover up?

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. W. Oppal: We believe in the independence of the

courts. We believe that the court….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: We believe the court will come to a just and

fair decision, and it will do us no good to comment on allegations that are

before the court.

B. Ralston: The first obligation of the Premier is to

uphold the law and maintain the highest ethical standards in the province. The

Attorney General speaks often of the sub judice rule, but in certain cases there

are exceptions. Where this kind of allegation is made, the public has a right to

know what went on in that conversation between Kelly Reichert and the Premier.

My question to the Attorney General is: will he inform the House

who ordered Kelly Reichert, the executive director of the B.C. Liberal Party, to

attempt to sidetrack the RCMP investigation into the B.C. Liberal Party dirty

political tricks?

Hon. W. Oppal: I want to quote a statement here attributed

to the member for Nanaimo. "It is essential to the rule of law…

Interjections.

[ Page 8001 ]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: …that the integrity of the judicial process

not be interfered with. High-profile prosecutions have failed in the past

because politicians felt compelled to make comments in public that were later

deemed prejudicial."

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: I would suggest to the Attorney General that

the sub judice rule has exceptions. This is one case where there ought to be an

exception, where it's a matter of the highest and paramount public interest to

know what went on in the Premier's office.

I'm asking the Attorney General to provide that reassurance…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

B. Ralston: …of the highest ethical standards and the

upholding of the law here in this House today.

Hon. W. Oppal: If the rule has exceptions, the hon. member

for Nanaimo didn't think so.

[1400]

J. Kwan: "One of the things we've done in B.C. relatively

well is that we have set up a process where these sorts of investigations can

take place and where there is no political interference." From the Premier in

According to documents read in court today, the RCMP asked Mr.

Reichert if the potential for harm to the B.C. Liberal Party outweighs the

public good in prosecution. Mr. Reichert replied: "Yes." Is this what the

Attorney General would call no political interference?

Hon. W. Oppal: "According to documents filed" — that

doesn't prove anything. The documents may have been filed; the documents may not

be accurate. Any allegations or any evidence that is let in a courtroom may be

factual. It may not be factual. That's why it's dangerous to jump to conclusions

and come to premature judgments. It's wrong to do that.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

J. Kwan: Will the Attorney General then commit today in

this House that he will ask the Premier if he directed Kelly Reichert to advance

the arguments that protecting the B.C. Liberal Party from political

embarrassment is more important than protecting the public from learning about

political corruption?

Hon. W. Oppal: I'll commit to letting the trial process

take its place.

S. Simpson: We've heard the Attorney General talk about

integrity in this House. The reality is that the integrity and the ethics of

this government and the public interest are what is at hand, and they are not

being served by this Attorney General and this government on this issue.

The revelations in court today suggested there were dirty tricks

that occurred by political operatives of the government from this building —

that Mr. Reichert was aware of that. He spoke to the Premier. Sometime shortly

after speaking to the Premier, he then interfered in matters. That's the

allegation made in court today.

The question I have is…. As was noted, the Premier's job is to

uphold the law. The Premier's job was to tell Mr. Reichert not to proceed in

that way. Clearly, he either didn't tell him, or Mr. Reichert didn't listen to

the Premier's advice. We don't know what that is. Will the Attorney General get

those answers and get them into this House for us tomorrow?

Hon. W. Oppal: Regrettably, we don't know the answers.

That's why we're having a trial. That's why we have a trial. That's why we have

a judge. That's why we have witnesses who testify under oath, where wild

allegations are not made. In an objective environment of the courtroom, the

facts will come out. We'll wait for the facts to come out.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: If we want the facts, presumably they're easy

to get. The Attorney General could ask the Premier what happened in that

discussion. That's what we could do.

The Premier has continually talked about being open and

transparent and wanting this trial to proceed that way. Let's have a little

openness. Let's have a little transparency. Demand of the Premier that he tell

the people of British Columbia the makings of that discussion with Mr. Reichert.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: Let me see if I've got this right. There's a

trial going on in Vancouver alleging serious criminal allegations. So right in

the middle of the trial we should call the Premier and put him under oath. To do

what? You know, this is how….

[1405]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: You know, it's amazing to me how little they

understand of the judicial process, how little they understand the….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[ Page 8002 ]

Just take your seat, Attorney.

Continue.

Hon. W. Oppal: There are very serious allegations that are

being made in a courtroom. You know, there's another side to it. We call that

fairness. If there are allegations being made by Crown witnesses, they may be

refuted by defence witnesses.

At the end of the day, the judge and/or jury will make up their

minds. That's how the system works. It doesn't help the system to make wild

allegations, make findings of fact without hearing any of the cross-examination

or any of that. To do that in this House — it serves no useful purpose.

R. Fleming: You know, this government is content,

apparently, to keep the public in the dark for something that happened in 2003,

and there are disturbing allegations coming out about political interference.

Again, to the Attorney General: does he not feel…?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

R. Fleming: Does the Attorney General not feel that he

needs to revisit his colleague's hollow assertions about political interference

in light of discussions revealed by Mr. Reichert?

Will he ask the Premier if he acted inappropriately toward the

investigation?

Hon. W. Oppal: I have the same answer. It's not appropriate

to comment on allegations, anything that goes on in a courtroom. I'm not going

to do it.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

R. Fleming: The president of the B.C. Liberal Party asked

the RCMP, on tape and off tape, if the B.C. Liberal Party's involvement in

organized, dirty political tricks…. If they could be spared that embarrassment

by steering the investigation away from charges that might bring that into

evidence…. That is an outstanding finding.

The Attorney General — to him again. Conversations are alleged to

have happened between the party….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Just take your seat, Member.

Continue.

R. Fleming: Mr. Reichert informed the Premier about the

investigation. Does the Attorney General not feel it is appropriate to ask the

Premier about what his involvement in this investigation has been?

Hon. W. Oppal: You know, when the House adjourns today,

I'll be quite prepared to tell the member outside the difference between a

finding and an allegation. There's a special prosecutor that's appointed. The

reason a special prosecutor is appointed is in order to avoid any suggestion of

any political interference or any political influence.

G. Robertson: This is about the public, the people of B.C.,

confidence in the integrity of the Premier and the Attorney General. Will the

Attorney General commit in this House to asking the Premier to fully disclose

his role in this political interference to the people of B.C.?

Hon. W. Oppal: No, this is about preserving the integrity

of an independent system.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[1410]

G. Robertson: The Premier's first duty, again, is to uphold

the laws of B.C. Hon. Speaker, the Attorney General's job is to make sure that

happens.

Will the Attorney General condemn the actions of this Premier and

his party for the cover-up of their dirty tricks campaign?

Hon. W. Oppal: I'm quite content to have Madam Justice

Elizabeth Bennett make the decision as opposed to some ill-informed MLA.

D. Chudnovsky: The Attorney General has the opportunity in

this House today, in this House of the people today, to clarify for the people

whether he can assure the people of British Columbia that this government has

not been involved in dirty tricks. He can do that. He can assure the people of

the province today that the Liberal Party has not been involved in dirty tricks.

He can assure the people of the province today that the Liberal Party and this

government have not been involved in cover-up. He can choose to do that today.

Will he choose to reassure the people of the province today?

Hon. W. Oppal: No, my job is to protect the integrity of

the system. That's what my job is.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Chudnovsky: I would suggest to the hon. Attorney General

that it's the job of the Premier to protect the integrity of the province. So I

ask the Attorney General: will he request of the Premier today that the Premier

reassure the people of the province that the government wasn't involved in dirty

tricks, that the Liberal Party wasn't involved in dirty tricks, and that the

Liberal Party and the government were not involved in a cover-up?

It's the Premier's job to protect the integrity of the province.

The Attorney General can choose today to suggest to and ask the Premier that he

do that. Will the Attorney General make such a request?

Hon. W. Oppal: One of the cherished principles in our

democracy that operates under the rule of law is

[ Page 8003 ]

the independence of the courts. The courts operate independently of the

Legislature, and it's a good thing they do, because this is a perfect example of

why we ought to retain independence of the courts — listening to some of the

irresponsible comments that have been made in this chamber here today.

B. Simpson: The Attorney General has just indicated that

his job is to protect the integrity of the system. The Attorney General's job is

an interesting and unique job because, on the one hand, the Attorney General has

a political role to play in cabinet, and he has a role to play as the top law

enforcement officer in the province.

So far the Attorney General has chosen to act as a political

operative and to protect the Liberal Party in this case and to protect the

Office of the Premier.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

B. Simpson: My question is to the Attorney General. Will he

take a step back and act as the top law enforcement officer of this province,

maintain the integrity of the system and answer this question: what is it that

the Attorney General is going to do, based on the allegations of interference

from the Premier's office? What will he do as the top law enforcement officer to

examine those allegations?

[1415]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: This Attorney General is a learned member

of the bar. This Attorney General was a member of the bench for years and years

and earned the respect of British Columbians. He does not need….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: This Attorney General does not need to be

lectured to by an individual member who so clearly doesn't understand the role

of the Attorney General and so clearly doesn't understand the importance of an

independent judiciary in British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat, Member. We're not

continuing.

Continue.

B. Simpson: It's nice that the minister of defence rose

again in the House today. I recall yesterday…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

B. Simpson: …that the minister of defence rose in this

House to impugn the reputation of a member on this side with all of the

self-righteousness that he's showing today.

My question is very clear, and the role of the Attorney General is

also very clear. The Attorney General has a political function in cabinet and a

function as the chief enforcement officer. We're asking him to act as the chief

law enforcement officer and act on the allegations that the Premier's office is

involved in this case.

Will he step back from his political role and act as the law

enforcement officer that he is supposed to be and investigate the Premier's

office and the allegations that have been made today?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: I shudder to think what would be the

result if, God forbid, there were a day when a member with the attitude,

approach and disregard for an independent judiciary, which this member clearly

has, were ever in a position to be sitting on this side of the House. I shudder

to think what would become of one of the most sacred principles that guides our

democracy, and that is an independent judiciary. This Attorney General

understands that principle…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: …and the members on the opposite side of

the House clearly don't. Thank God we have an Attorney General who does

understand the principle.

J. Horgan: It's good to see the House Leader on his feet

giving aid and comfort to the Attorney General. Maybe I'll pose my question to

the House Leader, because he was here in 2003 when the police came into this

building and took out documents that led to the events that we're seeing before

the courts today.

But the Attorney General wasn't here for Steve Vander Wal. He

wasn't here for Prem Vinning. Dirty tricks — known, committed, done, happening

again. We have evidence before court today. We have public comment today about

the integrity of the government of British Columbia and the Premier's office.

I'm asking the House Leader: will he stand in this place and put

the public interest ahead of the interests of the Liberal Party?

[1420]

Hon. W. Oppal: That's the difference, you see. The member

apparently didn't understand what I said earlier. Evidence doesn't become

factual unless a judge says it's factual, so you don't rely on evidence. You

[ Page 8004 ]

don't rely on evidence; you rely on the facts that come from that evidence.

Sorry to lecture.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

J. Horgan: Well, certainly the Attorney General can

separate himself from this place if he chooses. But the Premier, the head of the

executive council for the province of British Columbia, has an obligation to

speak for the public interest — not for his partisan interests, not for the B.C.

Liberal Party, but for the public interest.

Will the House Leader today commit to get a response from the

Premier to these allegations of dirty tricks and corruption inside the Premier's

office? Will he commit to that today?

Hon. M. de Jong: This Premier, this Attorney General and

each member of this government, I'm happy to say, understand the fundamental

importance of protecting the independence of judiciary. We will do that duty….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat for a second.

If I see people making signs again in this House, they will be

thrown out. Understood?

Continue.

Hon. M. de Jong: We will do that duty, Mr. Speaker, because

we understand it. Sadly, members opposite apparently do not.

M. Karagianis: Well, the whole problem is not tainting the

evidence in this case. The problem is the fact that there is no prosecution

right now in the dirty tricks being played within this government. There is no

prosecution looking into why the Liberal Party interfered with the process to

determine whether prosecution should proceed.

Madam Justice Bennett cannot make any decisions based on that, and

frankly, the Attorney General can't have it both ways. He cannot invoke sub

judice on the one hand and then move to cover up political tricks and dirty

games at the same time.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

M. Karagianis: He cannot have it both ways.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

M. Karagianis: So today, again, we will ask in this House….

Mr. Speaker: Member, the comment that you just made was

unparliamentary.

M. Karagianis: I withdraw that remark.

Mr. Speaker: Okay, continue.

M. Karagianis: The Attorney General has an obligation to the

public of British Columbia and to this House to deliver to us in this House a

report on why the Premier interfered and to tell us in this House….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue.

M. Karagianis: The Attorney General has an obligation to

the public of British Columbia to come clean and explain why this government is

not rushing in to assure the public that these dirty tricks are not part of this

government's agenda.

Hon. W. Oppal: I think I've already answered the question

several times. You know, this is why we have a trial. The trial will….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: We have a trial. The trial will conclude. It

will come to a decision, one way or the other. Why don't we wait?

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call in this chamber committee stage

debate of Bill 21, Teaching Profession (Teacher Registration) Amendment Act,

2007, to be followed in due course by Bill 22, Education Statutes Amendment Act,

2007; and in Committee A, Committee of Supply — for the information of members,

the continued estimates of the Ministry of Economic Development.

[1425]

Committee of the Whole House

TEACHING PROFESSION (TEACHER

REGISTRATION) AMENDMENT ACT, 2007

(continued)

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 21; H.

Bloy in the chair.

The committee met at 2:29 p.m.

section 3 (continued) .

N. Macdonald: I'll finish off with one last comment. The

minister asked rhetorically, I think, at the end, what people who had asked for

legislation similar to this would say about what is being put forward here. I

think the clear answer to that is: the expectation is that when we put something

forward, we have it thoroughly thought through.

[ Page 8005 ]

I've had the opportunity — and I'm going to allow this to move on

now — to say very clearly that I think this part, removing the opportunity for

grievance, weakens this bill substantially and means that the proper process

which should be in place has been removed.

[1430]

I think I've been clear on that, and certainly the minister has

been clear that she has an opposing view. With that, I'll allow this to continue

unless my colleague has a question.

Section 3 approved.

section 4.

D. Cubberley: This being the last

section of the bill

proper before we go into related amendments, I want to raise a matter which

speaks to the issue of developing the on-line registry.

In particular, this bill will create two on-line registries — one

of those, and by far the larger one, for certificate teachers who are members of

the college. The other registry is much smaller but nonetheless of the same

design, based on what we understand from the bill, for a smaller group of

teachers who teach under permission established by the inspector of independent

schools.

There will of course be costs associated with the creation of

registries. In the one case, presumably because the inspector reports to the

minister, the costs belong to the minister. In the other case, the registry is

being mandated for the college.

The bill appears to be silent on the issue of costs for the

creation of the registry. I want to ask the minister if that's by intent or

oversight and what proposal there is, if any, around the financing of both the

registries.

Hon. S. Bond: We expect the College of Teachers to manage

the cost.

D. Cubberley: So we're doing this differently between the

independent school sector for non-certificate teachers and for certificate

teachers reporting to the college. Maybe the minister could give me the

rationale for that.

Hon. S. Bond: We expect the College of Teachers to manage

this within the resources that they have.

D. Cubberley: I'll ask the question again, because that

didn't respond directly to the question I asked. The question I asked was….

We have two categories of personnel who are captured by this

registry. One portion of them in both public and private is certificate teachers

reporting to the college. Another portion of them is permitted to teach under

permissions provided by the inspector of independent schools. Registries are

being mandated for both of them.

One of those is going to be provided for by the minister,

presumably — and the minister can comment on that — and funded for the inspector

of independent schools. The other is going to be required to be paid for by the

employees themselves through the College of Teachers.

Let's leave it there. I would like a rationale for why they're

being treated differently.

Hon. S. Bond: The College of Teachers is a self-regulating

body, and we believe they have resources available to manage the costs.

D. Cubberley: Again, there was a rationale about the

College of Teachers, but not one around the inspector of independent schools and

the on-line registry there.

Let me try it another way and see if we can get a little closer to

it. If the college is expected to pay for it through an assessment of its

members, are those who teach under letters of permission in independent schools

expected to pay to the inspector of independent schools an assessment to cover

the costs of the on-line registry? And if not, why not?

[1435]

Hon. S. Bond: The member opposite would know that the

College of Teachers is a self-regulating body. We believe that there is capacity

to manage these resources. While independent teachers do pay fees for

certification, they are not a self-regulating body.

D. Cubberley: I'm not sure what the connection is between

student safety and being or not being a self-regulating body. This is a matter

of providing resources that create a public registry for discipline. In the case

of one set of teachers who have the privilege of teaching in schools that are

endorsed and approved by the Minister of Education — from what I understand of

the minister — they will not be required to pay fees that will cover off the

costs of creating this registry. That is something that the minister appears to

be prepared to do for them.

On the other hand, in the case of teachers teaching in the public

schools, the minister feels that that's something that they can quite

comfortably afford to do for themselves. I would just like to understand the

difference in the standard being applied. As to the fact that the teachers are

in a college and that the others are not in a college and report to an

inspector, I'm not sure what that has to do with paying for an on-line registry.

Hon. S. Bond: We believe that the College of Teachers has

the capacity to manage the cost, and that's what the expectation will be.

D. Cubberley: To follow that, you believe that teachers

teaching in separate schools and independent schools don't have the resources to

pay the costs. Is that it?

Hon. S. Bond: The independent school teachers are not a

self-regulating body.

D. Cubberley: I'm not sure what that had to do with my

question. They may not be a self-regulating body, but the obligation is being

placed in the same

[ Page 8006 ]

way for the appearance of discipline pertaining to the same behaviour.

Both levels of schooling are endorsed by the same minister and

fall ultimately under her regulation. I'm simply trying to probe as to why the

minister is willing to pay the costs for one registry and mandating that the

costs be paid for by others in the case of another.

Hon. S. Bond: Hon. Chair, this question has been asked and

answered. We believe that the College of Teachers has the capacity to manage

these costs, and that will be the expectation.

D. Cubberley: I will move on, after concluding that that

question was asked, but not answered in the spirit in which it was asked — and

it was asked three times. I will take from that that the minister intends not to

answer that question, and move on to the next one.

Regarding the registry that will be created, given that this is

something that is going to have to report the same classes of discipline and

infraction between teachers teaching under a letter of permission and teachers

who are certificate teachers and that it will involve the creation of the same

kinds of software and hardware to make this available to the public, has the

minister considered mandating the sharing of the template so that there is a

consistent standard between the two registries?

Because she is committed to investing in the registry required by

the inspector of independent schools, would she consider sharing the template

with the college so that we don't have redundant investments in costs?

Hon. S. Bond: We would certainly consider all of those

kinds of discussions. We did not want to pre-empt that with not having the

legislation passed. We're in the very early stages, and as we formulate a plan,

we would be happy to have those kinds of discussions.

D. Cubberley: I appreciate that amount of openness. I think

I'm going to attempt to move an amendment that would mandate that the minister

reimburse the college and the inspector of independent schools for costs

reasonably incurred. I'll pass it to my learned colleague, who can tell me

whether it's in order or not, with a copy to the minister.

[1440]

The Chair: The motion is not in order. The amendment is not

in order. It involves the expenditure of public funds. Please continue, Member.

D. Cubberley: A bit of a catch-22 there, Mr. Chair, I'm

sure you'll agree.

I think I've made my comments. I would ask that when it does come

to implementation, olive branches be extended in this regard and that it not be

a continuation of the relationship that prior government has had with the

College of Teachers — and an opportunity, therefore, to build bridges rather

than to bomb them.

Section 4 approved.

section 5.

D. Cubberley: This takes us into the longest

section of the

bill by far, which has to do with amendments to the Independent School Act that

are more far-reaching in some respects, although they accomplish the same ends.

It appears to be replacing a very small amount of regulation with a much larger

amount in the case of independent schools.

I'm interested in the minister's characterization of the status

quo prior to this coming into force with regard to independent schools. I would

understand that the provisions in place would apply to certificate teachers.

They would be similar between independent schools and public schools.

For that group of teachers who are teaching under letters of

permission or some other method — they're authorized teachers, I believe, in the

act…. Is information kept on those teachers currently by the inspector of

independent schools? For example, is the discipline information about them kept

currently in the way that it's kept by the College of Teachers for certificate

teachers? What's the status of oversight and regulation of them at this moment?

Hon. S. Bond: If you are a certified teacher teaching in

the independent school system, your information is with the College of Teachers

because that's who certifies you. The point in this additional

section is to

bring the independent school process into alignment with the expectations of the

public school system.

D. Cubberley: That was my surmise, and the minister will

forgive me if I wasn't entirely clear about that. I'm not talking about the

certificate teachers in particular. I'm talking about the group of teachers

within independent schools who are authorized teachers, who are reporting to the

inspector of independent schools and not to the college.

My question is: what are the policies and procedures in place to

date? Does the inspector of independent schools maintain a discipline registry

of some kind? Does the inspector of independent schools notify, in some public

way, independent schools around disciplines that are filed currently? What is

the practice currently?

Hon. S. Bond: No. I tried to make that clear in my answer,

and I obviously didn't. That provision is not in place currently. The whole

point of these provisions is actually to bring that into place, and these

changes will now mirror the public school circumstance.

D. Cubberley: That was the reason for the question, really

— to get at the fact that there is a group within independent schools who are

not under any kind of regulation at the present time that would parallel the

regulation that's applied currently to certificate teachers.

[1445]

I think it's important, because when we talk about schools and

teachers, people think most readily of the public school system. Really, all the

talk in this

[ Page 8007 ]

chamber has been about the public school system. Here we have a very

substantial change to an unregulated sector within independent schools that is

very important and hasn't been canvassed at all.

I have a couple of questions. One is: what percentage of the

teaching cadre in independent schools is authorized teachers — just in

percentage terms, rough terms? What percentage of people teaching in independent

schools would this capture? And is there history that we are aware of, with

disciplines within this group of teachers who are directly under the purview of

the inspector, that has not come to light publicly — where there have been

problems?

Hon. S. Bond: We don't have the statistical breakdown of

that particular group of individuals, but we'll work to get that information to

the member.

D. Cubberley: So part of the answer there is that we don't

actually know what's going on.

Interjection.

D. Cubberley: I did ask, as well, whether there was any

history within a group that's unregulated currently — about the kinds of

practices occurring where people are hired on or retained in employment who have

committed significant offences and where those offences are not being

transmitted in some fashion to other employers or to the inspector of

independent schools because there isn't a system of regulation in place at the

present time. I'm asking whether that has occurred.

We have a tremendous concern for kids' safety here. I'm looking at

an unregulated sector, currently, which is directly under an officer of the

ministry. It's very important that we have some sense of what's going on in that

sector.

Hon. S. Bond: The answer that I gave in terms of not having

the data was that we don't have the data in front of us, but there is a process

for teachers who are teaching with a teacher's certificate. And there is an

independent teacher's certification process, so a teacher can be decertified.

The answer I provided was simply that I don't have the data in

terms of the numerical breakdown of how many teachers are certified through the

College of Teachers or through the teacher's certificate program.

D. Cubberley: Perhaps we can, as we roll along through

this, get an estimate of the number of people who teach in independent schools

and then the percentages, certificate and non-certificate. I heard a number from

somebody — that it's between a third and 40 percent who may be authorized

teachers at independent schools. I don't know how large the teaching body is in

total for independent schools, so I don't know how many individuals that may

cover.

It's interesting, actually, just to reflect on the fact that in

all of the talking that has been done about the need to improve visibility

around discipline and give the public a better sense of what's happening in

these schools, there hasn't really been any explicit mention of the fact that

this sector is currently not under the same kind of regulation that certificate

teachers are and that there may not be a formalization of the kinds of practices

of making public discipline that the college has in place.

If that is true, then we certainly have to welcome regulation of

the sector, because there certainly is the possibility for kids' safety to be

badly compromised in circumstances where there is less transparency and

accountability than there is in the public school sector, or for certificate

teachers teaching in the independent school sector as well. That's to be

welcomed.

This being a very long section, I want to raise some other

questions about this, but I think I can probably do it in the "Online registry"

section. Unless there are others who wish to ask questions, we can roll through

some text.

[1450]

Sections 5 and 6 approved.

D. Cubberley: Are we anywhere near 7.5? Could we come back

to it, please?

The Chair:

Section 5,

section 7.5, is what you wanted.

section 5.

D. Cubberley: I just wanted to continue along the line of

questioning.

In this

section we break out the record of disciplinary action,

which I believe is what will appear in the on-line registry. The three

significant areas of abuse, which are featured in the on-line registry for

certificate teachers reporting to the college, are broken out here. But the

subclause which governs all other infringements of code of conduct doesn't

appear in this section. I'd just like a comment on that.

I believe I understand why that is, but I want to raise another

question about it. The Roman numeral clause that requires the reporting that,

after being explicit about three areas that must be reported, says all areas

must be reported…. That's not present in this section. Could the minister

comment on it?

Hon. S. Bond: In fact, the expectations are similar. But as

the member opposite knows after our discussion this morning, that is a reference

directly to the College of Teachers. You can't transfer one body's set of

expectations directly to the other group, but in fact, the expectations are

similar.

D. Cubberley: I think this is an important point, because

in the case of the college, which is a self-regulating body and has a

well-developed code of conduct for teachers, there's a supervening requirement

that all disciplines deemed to be an infringement of that code of conduct be

reported on an on-line registry.

[ Page 8008 ]

In the case of this registry, which is applying to people who are

not a self-regulating professional body but are entirely under an authorization

flowing from the inspector of independent schools, there is no requirement for

disciplines outside of these three areas to appear in the on-line registry.

There are a couple of questions here. One of the questions here is

the absence of a code of conduct for people who are operating in schools

approved by the Minister of Education under the administration of her officer

and who have exactly the same exposure to children as people who are certificate

teachers but who have a lesser obligation, if you like, to come to a uniform

code of conduct placed on them by the design of this thing.

I think one of the responses I might hear is that there is no code

of conduct for these people. But that creates in my mind a problem, and it's a

question that I would like to explore a little bit because the public interest

enters into this.

[1455]

Hon. S. Bond: The member opposite is somewhat correct in

the fact that there are two separate groups of individuals being involved. But

the expectations are the same. The management tool is different.

There is the College of Teachers, which works with teachers who

are certified through the college. For authorized teachers, there is another

factor at play. That's the inspector of independent schools, who works with the

independent teachers certification process to actually look at the criteria.

There is not a comparable mechanism in terms of reference to that

issue, but the expectations are the same. For the first time in the province

this will align the two systems. It currently does not exist for the teachers

that the member opposite has brought to the floor today.

D. Cubberley: I'm fully supportive of making that happen,

and I believe it's very important because there is the same exposure to children

and there will be the same problems over time — perhaps to a lesser degree

because it's a smaller group of people. But these are people, and this is a

classroom, so the same dynamics are at play.

The challenge that I have here in taking the minister's response

at face value is that I should have faith in the inspector of independent

schools to apply a similar standard. But there isn't really anywhere in the act

where we have left that discretion to the college, for example, to determine

whether it is or isn't in the public interest.

Here the bill is simply silent. It's not placing an obligation on

the inspector of independent schools to operate in a particular manner, to

disclose discipline of a particular order outside these three categories.

I think that is a bit of a flaw, if you will, in the way the bill

is crafted. I have no doubt that the inspector has the best intentions in the

world, but there isn't really any guidance given here other than what the

minister has said, which is that we would have the same expectations. But the

bill doesn't say that we have the same expectations, so I think that is a bit of

a challenge.

There probably should be something created for those who are given

an authorization to teach by the inspector, something analogous to the code of

conduct that is placed on a certificate teacher. It's for the very simple reason

of creating a level playing field and making it not arbitrary on the part of an

individual occupying the job of inspector to determine what should and shouldn't

show up in an on-line discipline registry.

I would urge that government consider that, because this is a

sector that's off a little bit in the shadows, if you will, that we see as not

as regulated. We're bringing it into regulation.

I think it's very important for the public comfort that it be

dealt with in the same way. But it's also very important from a practical

standpoint that if we believe that every form of discipline that breaches the

teachers' code of conduct for certificate teachers must show up on an on-line

registry…. There's an element of fairness. If we truly believe that all of those

things need to be there for certificate teachers, then they need to be there for

non-certificate teachers as well.

Sections 5 to 8 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

Hon. S. Bond: I move the committee rise and report the bill

complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 3 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

TEACHING PROFESSION (TEACHER

REGISTRATION) AMENDMENT ACT, 2007

Bill 21, Teaching Profession (Teacher Registration) Amendment Act,

2007, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. C. Richmond: I call committee on Bill 22, Education

Statutes Amendment Act, 2007.

Committee of the Whole House

EDUCATION STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2007

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 22; H.

Bloy in the chair.

The committee met at 3:04 p.m.

[ Page 8009 ]

section 1.

D. Cubberley: This is a bill with a lot of things in it, so

there are a number of different levels of discussion that we'd like to get into.

The initial change proposed in here under

section 2 — "the British Columbia

certificate or diploma" change — essentially, as we read it, takes the power to

issue diplomas back into the minister's fold. I'm interested just in hearing the

minister's rationale for repatriating fully the power to issue diplomas.

Hon. S. Bond: This is housekeeping. This is the practice.

It has always been the case. This is just to make that perfectly clear. It is

practice, and it has been the case.

[1505]

D. Cubberley: I have to acknowledge some ignorance in this

area, just because you can't know everything about everything. I had the

impression there were some arrangements and some circumstances currently where

others were enabled to issue a Dogwood. There may even be connections through

corporations operating offshore where Dogwoods are part of the business that

they transact.

So I'm interested in knowing a little more about that. Are there

circumstances currently where others have the right to issue a Dogwood? What

experience has led to this change, if that is in any way connected to it?

Hon. S. Bond: There certainly is a

section of the bill that

deals with business corporations, but only the minister can issue the graduation

certificate. That has always been the case, and this is simply to clarify what

current practice is. It is a housekeeping amendment.

D. Cubberley: Well, I just have to go a little further than

that. I appreciate what the minister has said, that it's a housekeeping

amendment, but it's interesting that we're clarifying the practice. I'm curious

to know what led to any doubt about it. Was it simply an assumption within the

existing legislation that only the minister had the right to issue a diploma? Or

does this clarification offset something that is ambiguous in existing

legislation? Why is there a need this late in the game to construct an exclusive

right in legislation?

Hon. S. Bond: This is a housekeeping amendment. This is

practice. Part of what we do when we review legislation and, also, practice is

simply to clarify, once and finally, that the only person that can issue a

graduation certificate is the minister — whoever it is in this office.

So in fact, there's no new practice here, and it wasn't a major

issue. It is a housekeeping amendment made to clarify current practice in

legislation, and that's done all the time on numerous issues.

D. Cubberley: The minister must forgive me, but it's my

naturally suspicious mind. When you read stories about corporations operating

offshore who have some ability to ultimately lead someone to a graduation

certificate from a B.C. public school, one wants to have the sense of how that

gets done. Like how the minister accomplishes what is being constructed as an

exclusive right to issue here….

Where there are entities operating in another country that are

enabled to provide lessons and courses that ultimately lead to graduation in

circumstances that may be remote from the public school system in British

Columbia or even from British Columbia itself — operating in another country —

how is the right, which this is simply clarifying, currently given effect? How

does the minister approve those diplomas currently? How is that done, and how is

that regulated?

Hon. S. Bond: Only the minister can issue graduation

certificates, and it must be based on the requirements that are laid out in

legislation to meet those. This simply clarifies that information, and this is a

housekeeping amendment.

D. Cubberley: At the risk of taxing patience…

Interjection.

D. Cubberley: Taxing patients. Sorry, I've drifted into

health care. I didn't mean to. That would be double-billing.

Mr. Chairman, if the minister would be patient with me and just

elaborate a little bit for me how, in the case of a school operating remote from

British Columbia, for example…. My assumption would be that the minister does

not approve, in the literal sense, all diplomas in the province because she

would be terribly busy if she were doing that. There would be a spike in

activity that would be especially incomprehensible as to how one person could

ever do it. So there must be some operation through agents.

[1510]

I'm interested to know, in a remote sense, if there is a

corporation that is a school operating offshore, how does the minister issue the

certificate and how is the quality guaranteed?

Hon. S. Bond: There are clear criteria outlined as to how a

person meets a graduation requirement. That particular body provides information

to the ministry. The ministry and the minister then move forward with a

graduation certificate. Only the minister can actually issue a graduation

certificate.

Section 1 approved.

section 2.

D. Cubberley: I want to talk a little bit about the

reimbursement of expenses for designated educational activities.

I would like the minister to explain in her view what this

section

is actually about. When one reads it,

[ Page 8010 ]

it appears to potentially enable an extremely broad range of activities. When

members on this side of the House look at legislation, we always try to imagine

what it could be used for and what could be constructed using the power that's

being conferred on government. So I would like to hear from the minister and go

from there.

Hon. S. Bond: This is the extension of something that

already exists in public education, and that's the ability to receive credit for

a course that's outside of the public education system. A really good example of

this is a child's opportunity to learn Punjabi, and that's only one of a myriad

of examples. There may be no opportunity in some particular school settings for

a child to take Punjabi at the level they would like to in order to get a

language credit.

Currently in public education that's permissible, and they receive

credit. What this allows is the opportunity for those courses that are

accredited and approved…. So in terms of the scope that the member refers to, in

fact, there will be very clear criteria about when and how this reimbursement

might take place. But this is to ensure that our students have the opportunities

they want and in some cases they are unable to get within public education.

D. Cubberley: Well, I'd be very interested in hearing what

those criteria would be. I have to say that because of the potential potency of

this — without any brackets being placed around it, without any fence being

placed around it — I am very interested to know what the criteria would be and

how hard and fast they would be. And if they're hard and fast, why are they not

actually in the bill?

Hon. S. Bond: What this is about is looking at choice for

students and how we make sure they get the kinds of choice they want. What's

created here is the opportunity for there to be some modest degree of

reimbursement for parents who find that the options their child needs are not

necessarily available within the system.

[1515]

Again, I use language because as I have travelled across now

almost 50 school districts, one of the largest concerns that has been expressed

is an ability for students to receive language training in courses that don't

exist within their schools, and there are reasons for that.

I think the key message here is that this is not about replacing;

this is about enhancing. All of the details in terms of how the process is set

up will be determined in regulation, and that will be done after consultation

with our partner groups.

But let's be clear. There are already courses that are accredited

and accepted in terms of credit granted to students when they go and take those

courses. This extends the possibility of some modest reimbursement for those

types of courses.

D. Cubberley: I appreciate the minister's comments. Her

imagery around what might qualify is certainly innocent enough, but one has to

look at the sweep of the language and what it might enable. The fact is that

without actually seeing a set of regulations…. Of course, the regulations could

be changed very easily at any point in time even if they placed a tight fence,

but without a tight fence, this is potentially a very broad-ranging change.

I don't think it would be too far-fetched to suggest that if

someone wanted to, they could construct a voucher system out of this language.

This could carry us into the realm of school vouchers. I happen to be of the

opinion — and I think many British Columbians would be as well — that if we were

going to go down the path of opening up a change that broad, we would want to

have some discussion of that publicly before doing it.

It's very concerning to think that something that is as

controversial as vouchers — that can have the kinds of impacts on public school

systems that vouchers have had where they have been introduced — would be

introduced with a sense of: "Trust me, because the regulations will tighten it

up." I don't really think that's where we want to be at this point in British

Columbia.

If we were going to have the discussion in advance of legislation

coming in, which is what we should do — the idea should be put out that it's

being considered, and there should be opportunity for people to say yea or nay

and look at the implications of it in advance — that would be one thing. But for

it to come in, in an omnibus bill of this kind, innocently enough in the way

that it was prefaced by the minister but, I would suggest, anything but innocent

in the scope of what would be permitted potentially under this.

This could have a major impact if interpreted in one way or

another by a minister, and for that reason we have serious reservations about

going down this path.

Hon. S. Bond: As I have travelled across this province and

met with students and parents…. We can talk about consultation, but parents and

students have said clearly that there is room for more choice and options.

This is not about a voucher system. This is about allowing

students to have choice, like language opportunities that currently they can't

access. Already these courses are granted credit when a child takes them. They

come back to school, and they get credit. We're simply saying that this allows

the opportunity for us to consider how there may be some reimbursement.

If the member opposite continues through

section 2 and if we look

at the guidelines that will be used, there will be ministerial orders that

clearly outline types of educational activities or categories and the maximum

amount that might be paid — establishing a limit so that a child simply can't do

their entire graduation portfolio in that way. There are very clear expectations

here.

This is about enhancing a student's opportunity. Credit already

exists. We're simply saying that this allows us to assist parents in providing

more options and choice for their students, and I've certainly heard that

message loudly and clearly across the province.

[ Page 8011 ]

C. Trevena: It's an issue of the argument about choice. It

comes down to taking choice out of the public schools and putting it into more

of a private sector.

I have a couple of questions for the minister on this section. She

talks about this enabling parents to have that choice so their children can do

certain courses that are not available in the public school system. This is

obviously going to cost the school boards to provide the fees in the private

sector.

[1520]

I would like to ask the minister why that money, instead of going

to the parents, isn't going to the schools themselves so that they can provide

the courses and the parents then have the choice of keeping their children in

the school to do the course.

Hon. S. Bond: Certainly, as a member representing what is a

very challenging area of the province to provide choice and opportunity within

public education, one would hope that as we look at choice…. This isn't about

private versus public. This is about what students in the province actually need

in order to be successful. There are schools which are too small, with the

number of students they have in them, to offer a variety of programs. In fact,

this process exists today. Students can actually go, get credit, come back and

have that credit as part of their graduation.

This is simply saying that we want to validate that parent's and

family's right to find a way to provide some of those enhanced opportunities.

This isn't about taking away from what's available in public education. It's

about supporting parents in providing additional choice for their students. We

have hopes of increasing all kinds of choice within public education. I've seen

fabulous examples of it. This isn't about public or private. This is about how

we make sure that our students get every opportunity possible.

C. Trevena: I think the minister and I are agreed that we

want to make sure that our students do get every possibility that there is and

that they have the best education possible.

I'd like to ask the minister how this system would benefit a

student at, let's say, Zeballos high school that has a limited choice. They're

at the end of a logging road. How would they benefit from a system that would

provide payment for them to go to another class for one certain course? Can the

minister explain how this is going to help them — rather than money going into

the school board to provide this for all the children?

Hon. S. Bond: There are places not only in rural but in urban

British Columbia where the demand simply does not allow for courses to be

offered. I met with a large group of Indo-Canadian families, for example, who

cannot get Punjabi in the secondary school where their children attend. It's not

because it's a money issue; it's because there aren't enough children to offer

that.

I've been given a great example by a member. A particular math

course was not available in the school where his daughter needed it to graduate.

That allowed her to go to a college, take the course that was required, come

back and receive credit for that. It isn't about why we aren't putting more

money into the system. We're doing that as well. This is about that not being

available to the student.

The parents had the choice of actually taking her to the college,

filling in that gap which was not available, and then receiving credit for that.

This simply says that we should, in a modest way, consider supporting parents

who are put in the position of doing that for their children to take those

courses.

C. Trevena: The minister in her answer from the preceding

question had referred to the constituency I represented as being "challenging."

She's quite right. It's a large, rural constituency with isolated schools and

students who are trying to get equality of education and teachers who are trying

to provide that. The minister at that stage said that this would help those

students. Then in a second, subsequent answer she talked about an urban

environment.

I would like the minister to explain how this non-voucher system

that is being set up will help those students who are in small, struggling rural

schools to get the equality of education that isn't at the moment available, no

matter how hard the school trustees and the teachers work to provide it.

Hon. S. Bond: First of all, there are great things

happening in every part of the province. Teachers and boards are working

extraordinarily hard, but there are also challenges, whether you're rural or

urban. I happen to live in a rural-urban area of the province with a combination

of schools.

We're trying to find as many ways as possible to actually expand

choice and opportunity for students. The fact simply is that in some

circumstances it is impossible for students, as in the case of the young student

that I mentioned before, to get a course that they need or they want for

graduation.

[1525]

We're simply validating a process that exists today. Students

today can go, wherever they live in the province, and take a course, whether

it's a language course, a music class or a math class, in this student's case.

They can come back to school and be granted credit for it. It already happens.

All we're saying is that we should provide an opportunity for

parents to receive some modest reimbursement for those choices because the

system, despite the best circumstances we could hope for — we are facing

declining enrolment — can't offer a particular course. To me, that's not only

practical, but it makes really good sense for students who need those choices in

the system.

C. Trevena: I'd like a bit of an explanation. Let's again

use the Zeballos example because it's isolated, or Tahsis, where we've got a

class from Captain Meares graduating on May 26.

Assuming there was a student at one of these two schools who

wanted to take a specialty math class that

[ Page 8012 ]

isn't available because they are in an isolated community. How would this

system, which will benefit a student possibly in Campbell River, where they

could go to North Island College or Nanaimo, where they could go to Malaspina or

any other urban environment…? How will this system of paying parents to take the

children out of the public system help those children in rural communities

compared to those in urban communities?

Hon. S. Bond: I'll try one more time. This is not about

taking children out of public education. This is about children who cannot

receive a particular program within public education.

Let me give the member opposite another example. We are aware of a

student, for example, who lives in 100 Mile House, for whom music is not an

option at this point in time in terms of the type of music program he or she

wants. In fact, we know that parent and family have made a choice to take Royal

Conservatory piano lessons in order to get a music credit. They don't get that

in 100 Mile either. They drive to Kamloops to do that.

I want to be perfectly clear about this. This isn't about taking

students out of public education. This process exists today. Students today can

go, take a course and get credit. We're simply saying that if that is a choice

the parents have made to have children actually finish those opportunities,

there should be a built-in provision for some modest reimbursement.

C. Trevena: To go back to the urban example, the minister

mentioned that there are a number of parents who wanted their children to move

on with Punjabi. I wondered why the minister or her staff would not be working

with the school board to make sure this was being provided within the schools.

Hon. S. Bond: Maybe the member opposite should spend some

time in some of those districts. The challenge would be that sometimes there are

three or five students in a school. Together in a community there might be a

hundred, but they don't all go to the same school. There are physical

limitations of how many classes one can offer in a school, and school boards

make tough choices about how they allocate their dollars.

In fact, in the case of Punjabi, many of those children can

receive Punjabi in their elementary school programming. A program does not exist

for them in secondary school. We're saying they should have the opportunity to

study, for example, Punjabi or another language of their choice and receive some

way of supporting that decision.

C. Trevena: I do understand what she's saying. It's clearly

a system that is running, and she wants to give parents, as she says, choice. I

would like to know from the minister how much is actually budgeted for this. Is

this being divided on a per-school-district basis, or is this coming from the

ministry directly to the parents?

Hon. S. Bond: Legislation is about bringing forward the

ideas of change. We have consultation to do. We have to create minister's orders

in terms of how this rolls out. We don't have a budget line set aside for this.

We're going to look at the consultation and discussion. We think

this is a great opportunity for parents and families in British Columbia, and we

will work through the regulatory process to sort out exactly how this rolls out.

I'll be very interested to see how supported it is by families.

[1530]

C. Trevena: My colleague from Saanich South mentioned

earlier on that there was still some concern that despite the minister saying

that it's all set out, that it is quite prescribed where it will be used, the

ideas and the details are still very much there in the ether, and they haven't

been drawn up on how this is actually going to work.

Hon. S. Bond: If the member opposite follows through

section 2, there's actually a complete list of what needs to be considered. So

we're not presenting a done deal here; we're presenting a legislative framework

that allows us to build on what is an exciting concept for families in this

province.

The practice of external accreditation exists today, so that's not

new, and I'm a bit surprised by the reaction to this piece. This already exists,

in fact, and we're simply saying that because it does, we believe that we should

consider supporting parents who put their children into those opportunities

which already receive credit.

J. Brar: The minister made a comment about Punjabi a couple

of times, so I would like to clarify with a few questions. The government of

British Columbia made a commitment to provide Punjabi classes through the school

system. Those classes are at this point in time available to students, but there

are, of course, certain conditions and requirements which apply to those

classes.

My question to the minister is: how is this new process going to

impact the commitment of the government to provide Punjabi language classes

through the school system?

Hon. S. Bond: We continue to have an aggressive strategy

for adding languages in the province. In fact, we are contemplating and will be

adding Korean. We are seeing increased attendance in Mandarin language courses,

in grade 10 in particular. We're going to continue to add courses wherever it's

feasibly possible within the public education system. That's our commitment, and

we're really excited about adding those courses as well.

This is for those very difficult circumstances where there is

simply not the number of children necessary for a school district to make that

choice. So we're looking at adding courses within public education. We're

looking at on-line language opportunities. I've been really impressed with some

work that can be done in terms of distributed learning in language areas. This

provides a third option for families.

J. Brar: I would like to kind of emphasize the question I

asked the minister, and I would like to ask the

[ Page 8013 ]

minister to provide a direct response to that. My question is: will this new

system impact in any way, or a negative way, the commitment of the government to

provide Punjabi classes through the school system — yes or no?

Hon. S. Bond: The answer was clear. We are going to

continue with that commitment. We're not only going to add Punjabi, but we're

adding Korean, and we're looking at additional Mandarin and Japanese languages

as well. The answer is: we will continue to add classes as they fit within

school districts, and school boards make those choices as well.

This is an additional opportunity, and I would think that the

member opposite would embrace additional opportunities for language learning

when it is impossible for some school districts to offer those courses. This

isn't about taking away from opportunity; it's about adding to it.

J. Brar: If there's no impact, the answer is pretty simple

for the minister to say that there will be no impact on the existing Punjabi

classes. I didn't hear that answer, though.

Let me ask the question this way. If, in an area where we have

Punjabi classes going on, there are ten students in a class and three of the

parents decide to go and get these classes through this system, the new system,

through a private provider…. The requirement of that school is that there have

to be ten students in a class, but three students have been taken under this new

system, and therefore, there may not be any class in the system. How is the

minister going to respond to that kind of situation?

[1535]

Hon. S. Bond: The question has been asked and answered, and

I simply highlight the point by saying that this process already exists in

public education. Students can already do this.

J. Brar: Again, I didn't get a clear answer from the

minister that if in a school where we have a class going on of ten students and

three of the students chose to go this route through the private provider,

whether that class will still exist or not. I didn't hear the commitment from

the minister that that class would still exist. In my opinion, as for the

requirement and the rules of the school, that class will not exist because the

number of students will go down as per the minimum number required for that

class.

The minister mentioned that she had consultation with the

Indo-Canadian community. I would like to ask: where was that, and when did that

take place?

Hon. S. Bond: I don't have the exact details or dates of

that. It was an informal conversation with people who had requested to meet with

me about Punjabi language. We'd be happy, I'm sure, to share that information. I

don't have that with me at this point in time.

J. Brar: When we make substantive changes to the existing

system, we certainly consult with the community and with the right type of

people. There are a number of people who in my opinion should be consulted,

particularly when making this kind of change.

As the minister mentioned, the minister has met with a number of

Indo-Canadian families or individuals. I would appreciate — if the minister is

really serious to consult the community — to consult the right kind of people….

The right people must be part of the consultation process to make it more

inclusive.

I will leave with that comment, and my colleague will continue the

questions on this particular

section of the act.

N. Macdonald: Just questions, then. The minister had said

that much of this is going to come with regulation, but I'm sure the minister

has thought through the issue of how this is going to be paid for. If the

minister could just run through how the courses are going to be paid for. Are

they going to come through the district, or are they going to be grants that go

directly from the province? Are they going to be grants that come through the

province and then are deducted in some way from the district's grant? Could you

explain the thinking that has gone into this around budgeting?

Hon. S. Bond: This is the legislative framework, and if the

member opposite would look at subsection 3, there's much work to be done. We

have made no decisions about how it's going to be paid in terms of the process.

We're simply putting in place a legislative framework to allow us to continue

the consultation and the implementation of a program that would respect a

parent's right to make those choices for their children.

N. Macdonald: There are implications as to whether this is

a supportable

section or not. There are implications upon how it's going to be

set up. It depends very much on how it's going to be set up. One of the

complications around this voucher system is that there are implications for the

school district and for other participants in the system.

I think that the scenario that my colleague from Surrey–Panorama

Ridge laid out is one that will possibly exist around the size of classes. If

you then remove certain people by giving them different opportunities, you

create complications. You also create complications around the funding that is

available for schools and for a board if you have a system in place that would

remove part of that funding. There are complications around planning. There are

complications around the type of courses that you can offer.

The question is: before putting this forward, why would that not

have been thought through by the minister? Why would you not consider how you're

going to fund it and how you're going to have school boards plan for this?

Hon. S. Bond: We're putting in place the legislative

framework to allow us to have this discussion. This has not been finalized in

terms of how to work it through. We want to talk to the B.C. School Trustees

Association, for example.

[1540]

[ Page 8014 ]

Let's be clear. Parents across this province are already making

this choice. They have to in some circumstances. This is not about a voucher

system. Children today, and the member opposite would know this, go and take

courses elsewhere because they require them, and they receive credit for those

courses. That exists today. This simply puts a legislative framework in place

that allows us to have discussion with our partners about how we might implement

this. Those decisions have not been made.

N. Simons: Did the minister refer earlier to the Royal

Conservatory of Music as an example to illustrate this particular section?

Hon. S. Bond: Yes.

N. Simons: If I understand correctly, it's possible that

the ministry might be in a position where they'll be reimbursing for courses,

including those under the Royal Conservatory of Music?

Hon. S. Bond: I'm concerned that I mentioned the Royal

Conservatory of Music. The fact of the matter is that the principle of this bill

is that students do that already today. They go and take lessons because they

can't get the programs that they need, and they receive credit for it. This

simply verifies that principle.

N. Simons: So this has nothing to do with the cost

associated with that — in the minister's example regarding the Royal

Conservatory of Music?

Hon. S. Bond: No. In fact, what this says is that this

builds a framework that allows us to provide, potentially, some form of modest

reimbursement for those courses that students receive credit for that are

accredited and actually approved by the ministry.

N. Simons: I'm well aware of the credit one can get for

studying music in the high school system, and I think that's good. I do happen

to know that it's a very costly endeavour to attain any degree from the Royal

Conservatory of Music. It involves, probably, a lot of personal instruction from

music teachers on a one-to-one basis.

I'm just wondering if that was the right example to use when

discussing the merits of this particular

section and whether or not it will in

fact allow parents to be reimbursed for private music lessons. I'm just

wondering how that all fits in. I'm not sure. Maybe the example was

inappropriate.

Hon. S. Bond: The scope and the categories and all of the

definitions around what would be supported are yet to be determined. They would

obviously be accredited.

If the member opposite looks at the subsections listed, very

clearly it says that there would be a maximum amount that would be paid. This is

not about funding a child's entire Royal Conservatory program. I had a daughter

that actually danced ballet, and I can imagine what those costs might be. It's

not at all about funding an opportunity like that.

Also, in subsection (3)(

d) it talks about setting different

amounts and different limits for different educational activities. So in fact,

it's not about funding a child's musical career. It's about: is there a credit

course that the student needs to complete their graduation requirements? If

that's the case, this builds a framework that allows us to consider that.

D. Cubberley: I just have to say, in summarizing on this

section, that the minister has attempted to give us comfort that this will be

about a very limited range of activities with very modest costs and the like,

but I'm afraid that the language as written is absolutely wide open. Anything

could be driven through here the way that this is constructed.

[S. Hawkins in the chair.]

The message I'm getting from the government is: "You should trust

us on this kind of thing." I'm afraid the track record doesn't lend itself to

trust in this case.

If this was going to be done, it should be framed around a public

discussion first. Then the parameters, the fences, that would contain this so

that it might be acceptable and we would have a clear idea of what it would be

and the comfort which needs to be embedded in it that this isn't some kind of

new monster that would allow the minister to designate activities that school

districts would then be required to pay for out of existing budgets….

I think that all of that is rather too much trust, and I'm afraid

we think that this should not be in the bill in this way at this time. We don't

want to see a voucher system introduced by the back door or by sleight of hand

into British Columbia. We think that if that is what's contemplated, it should

be discussed openly.

[1545]

Hon. J. Les: There's a bogeyman.

D. Cubberley: The member suggests that it's a bogeyman, but

the bogeyman lives very close to us here, and we know how persuaded you are by

the bogeyman. So there may be a degree of paranoia, but it's based on reality —

doesn't mean it won't happen.

For those reasons, we are going to have to differ with the

government on this item in this bill, and it may actually not be the last one.

[1550]

Section 2 approved on the following division:

YEAS — 43

Falcon

Reid

Coell

Ilich

Chong

Christensen

Les

Richmond

Bell

Krueger

van Dongen

Roddick

Hayer

Lee

Jarvis

[ Page 8015 ]

Nuraney

Whittred

Horning

Cantelon

Thorpe

Hagen

Oppal

de Jong

Campbell

Taylor

Bond

Hansen

Abbott

Neufeld

Coleman

Hogg

Sultan

Bennett

Lekstrom

Mayencourt

Polak

Hawes

Yap

Bloy

MacKay

Black

McIntyre

Rustad

NAYS — 31

Brar

S. Simpson

Fleming

Farnworth

James

Kwan

B. Simpson

Cubberley

Hammell

Coons

Thorne

Simons

Puchmayr

Gentner

Routley

Fraser

Horgan

Lali

Dix

Trevena

Bains

Robertson

Karagianis

Evans

Austin

Chudnovsky

Chouhan

Wyse

Sather

Macdonald

Conroy

The Chair: I'll give the members a few minutes to clear the

chamber.

section 3.

S. Fraser: My question is on

section 3(c), third down:

"'first nation' means a 'band', as defined under the Indian Act (Canada),

located in British Columbia."

What's the justification for that being included in

section 3,

please?

[1555]

Hon. S. Bond: I'll just answer it this way, and if the

member opposite isn't satisfied, we'll try it again.

This is a relatively standard definition that's been added. It's

been added so that if a first nation requests the use of personal education

numbers, we can actually assign them. But it's only at the request of the first

nation. This is here so that it gives us the ability to respond to the first

nation's request, and as I've been advised, that is a common definition that's

used in other areas. This is so there's an opportunity that if asked by a first

nation, we can assign a PEN number to their children.

S. Fraser: Thanks to the minister for that. For

clarification, the amendment…. What brought that on? Was there a request? Were

there requests from first nations, from aboriginal peoples in B.C.? Why the

change now?

Hon. S. Bond: We are putting this in place so that it would

allow first nations, at their request, to actually track the achievement of

their children. That's how you do that. It's with a PEN number.

We currently have no ability to do that. So we've had discussions

with the First Nations Education Steering Committee and others, who've suggested

that there may be particular bands who want to have a PEN number for their

children, as their children move through the system or through band schools into

public schools. We use PEN numbers with children in public education. This

simply allows that same opportunity for first nations children.

Section 3 approved.

section 4.

D. Cubberley: This is an important

section of the bill,

much larger than the small amount of text that's provided for here. There's been

a very long history of lobbying to try to get government to pay attention to the

fact that existing voluntary regulations within schools have created a very

uneven landscape across B.C.; that there are significant instances of bullying,

which take very specific forms, and affect various subpopulations within the

school and across B.C.; and that there is a need for much more uniform

application of codes of conduct.

There's been a lot of discussion — much of which preceded my time

in this chamber, but which I was aware of — around specific forms of conduct

that require some regulation. One of those, one of the most obvious ones, is

around bullying on the grounds of homophobia, which is a very common thing that

is encountered in schools across B.C.

The question that I want to lead off in asking is that once again,

in bringing this in, it enables a code of conduct for students, but it doesn't

provide an outline of mandatory content of that code. I'm interested for the

minister to tell the House why it reads that way, rather than being more

specific — why that choice was made — especially given the very lively and

concerned discussion about this that led up to the introduction of the bill.

Hon. S. Bond: It's a simple answer. We want to have a

discussion with our partners, and certainly the members opposite are always

encouraging us to consult.

We expect, first of all, to take this to the Education Advisory

Council, which meets and provides advice to the minister. So in fact, there will

be the creation of provincial standards. We did not do that in advance of the

consultation. We expect to talk to our partners about how this should be

defined.

D. Cubberley: Interestingly on this, there were some

processes of consultation that preceded the legislation. In fact, there were

some initiatives originating on the government side which proposed a very

specific set of contents for a code of conduct.

[1600]

There has been much engagement of partners, and there have been

many reform efforts in individual school districts across British Columbia to

try to both

[ Page 8016 ]

raise the profile of specific forms of bullying and to put in place programs

that would counter them effectively.

While I am the first among a group of people who are given to

recommend consultation and would always be in favour of it, there had been

considerable consultation. I doubt very much that there will be anything new by

way of identifying the specific forms of activity for which the code of conduct

should be responsible and should bear specifically on.

Again, there was a long history to this. I'm just interested to

know why the process appears to be at square one when in fact the process is

relatively well advanced, I think.

Hon. S. Bond: I would hardly think that making school codes

of conduct mandatory is at square one. That's a huge step, and it recognizes the

work that's been done. In fact, the work that has been done will be reflected in

this discussion. We simply will be meeting to work through what the provincial

standards will look like, but certainly the previous consultation will inform

that discussion.

This is a huge step forward. It will recognize the extraordinary

work that was done in particular by a government member on this side of the

House. We're very pleased about moving this forward. This is about how we

implement.

N. Simons: If I may, just for the record, state the

correction was from a private member. I believe that the private member had put

forth a private member's bill which would have identified and specifically

recognized the need to protect sexual-minority youth and children. This is a

blatant oversight from this government. This is what has happened.

This is unfortunate in the extreme. It might be a big step in the

minister's shoes, but unfortunately, for the gay and lesbian community of this

province it's a sad day. It's a sad day that the most bullied, the most

victimized group and the most obviously bullied and victimized group in our

school system has been left out. It was in, and it has been removed. A reference

to gay and lesbian and sexual-minority youth — queer youth — has been

eliminated, and they are in need of protection.

They are in need of this protection, this overt and specific

protection. I will say why. It is because without that explicit mention, the

codes of conduct can continue to be applied in an uneven fashion. They can be

applied by people who do not agree with the particular lifestyle, as it's

referred to by many, and who may not have the same interest in enforcing these

regulations or enforcing a code of conduct that includes the protection of gay

and lesbian children and youth.

I think the government needs to answer that specific question. Why

was that eliminated from the private member's bill when it was put into this

act?

Hon. S. Bond: The bill on the floor of the Legislature

today respects the value of honesty and integrity and protecting all children in

public education. It is a significant step forward to recognize that there was

inconsistency in codes of conduct across school districts. This bill makes

certain that there will be codes of conduct in place.

As I pointed out earlier to the members opposite, there will be

discussion about how the provincial standards are created and how they're

implemented.

N. Simons: Let me quote from the McCreary Centre study.

"All young people, regardless of sexual orientation, deserve the opportunity to

grow and thrive in their communities and their families, reaching the promise of

a healthy and productive adult life. Understanding risks and protective factors

in their lives can help guide strategies for creating those opportunities."

I would submit that a protective factor includes the specific

reference to them. They will feel included, they will know that they are

protected, and they'll know they'll have rights. The answer that they need to go

through court in order to have their rights protected is a failure — a

legislative and regulatory failure.

This is doing nothing for the little queer youth of B.C. This is

doing nothing to protect them from the perceived discrimination, from perceived

harassment and from actual harassment.

[1605]

Victimization in school. Sexual-minority teens were generally more

likely to report having experiences, and 50 percent in this very large

longitudinal study in British Columbia felt they had been harassed, excluded or

even assaulted in school. Madam Chair, I think when you look at statistics like

that, it's almost like what isn't being said is so loud, and it is so clearly

missing from this legislation.

If you ask any queer adult in British Columbia, they will

understand. They will understand the need to protect young people before they

have self-identified. I think that one protective factor would be the actual

stated position of government that they are interested in at least protecting

these young people.

I give full credit to the private member representing Vancouver-Burrard

for knowing that this was an important inclusion in

an act. Its omission is

very, very obvious. It's an omission that is unfortunate.

The suicide rate…. Madam Chair, you look at all of the health

indicators for queer youth in our schools, and they're higher in terms of

negative outcomes than for any other group. How could they be so systematically

ignored in

an act that purports to protect children and youth in our school

system? How could the biggest group of the most victimized population be

specifically ignored? I find that troubling; I find that problematic.

I don't think that the minister's explanation is satisfactory.

Whether you're a young child in Vancouver-Burrard or a young child in a rural

part of Peace River or anywhere else, you should feel, you should know that

there is a standard in this province to which we must all strive, not one to

pick and choose if the principal, the PAC, or the group of teachers or parents

who happen to get together on that particular subject understand the need to

protect children who are in those vulnerable categories.

[ Page 8017 ]

I think this is an omission that needs to be corrected — don't you

think?

D. Cubberley: Madam Chair, I don't know if there are other

members in the House who wish to speak to this or not, but if there are no other

members who want to speak at this time….

N. Simons: I'll speak some more. That was a question.

D. Cubberley: I wish to give you an opportunity to, Member.

I would like to move an amendment to this section, so I will submit that to the

Clerk and see if that's in order.

[to amend

Section 4 by adding the following section:

4 (

c) a board's codes of conduct must explicitly protect students

from homophobic bullying. ]

The Chair: Continue while we look at it, Member.

D. Cubberley: Madam Chair, this is an amendment that would

specifically identify that a board's code of conduct must explicitly protect

students from homophobic bullying. The intent of this would be to…. This is not

exhaustive, but it is illustrative, and I think my colleague has indicated why.

This is the most prevalent form of bullying, with often….

The Chair: The amendment is in order, so continue.

On the amendment.

D. Cubberley: It's the most prevalent form of bullying,

with typically the absolutely most devastating of consequences in people's

lives. It's very important that this issue be addressed in an even-handed manner

across schools in British Columbia. If we are attempting to create a tolerant

and pluralistic society, which I believe our education act gives us a visionary

commitment to, then it is essential this form of behaviour be addressed. This

was very much a part of the discussion which preceded this bill coming into the

House, which was a broader public discussion than the one we're having in this

chamber today.

But as my colleague from Powell River–Sunshine Coast indicated,

this is something which has disappeared from view. It is a disappearance that we

think should not have occurred. Therefore, we're moving an amendment that we

hope the House will support. We are certain that the broader public supports

this, and we feel very strongly that it should have been part of this bill.

[1610]

N. Simons: Yes, I think that it's important to identify not

only the safety factors associated with queer youth…. I use the word "queer"

because it's the common parlance now, and it encompasses a variety of sexual

minorities.

I believe that more important perhaps to the minister is the

attachment to school and the success in school. I would submit that any child

who feels safe in their school system and who feels wanted and respected and

actually feels acknowledged on the basic level of acknowledgment…. If a child or

youth feels acknowledged in their school, their chances of feeling successful or

being successful in that school system are much greater.

The McCreary study indicates that queer youth are less likely to

find school enjoyable. It probably will have an impact on their outcomes, and I

understand that to be of primary concern right now.

School operates as a protective factor. In my growing up and that

of the colleagues surrounding me, we had parents, we had teachers, we had

community, and we had religion. We had various forms of protective services. We

cannot count on every child having those same supportive structures around them.

Just as much for the young child in the lower mainland or in the

interior or wherever they happen to be, they need to know that it's explicitly

stated that they will be recognized, acknowledged and protected. That's why I

believe, in part — for many reasons, in fact — that we need to specifically

mention…. I believe it's the specific mention that is necessary to make this

have the breadth of fairness we would like it to have.

With that, Madam Chair, I believe there are other members who'd

like to speak to this amendment.

C. Wyse: I, too, rise to speak in favour of the amendment.

I wish to share with the House my experience of being in the classroom for a

very long period of time. Assuredly, one of the items that is brought to

challenge in a school situation is sexual identity. One of the biggest putdowns

is sexual orientation. Assuredly, removing any doubt about a school being a safe

place for all students requires this particular item to be itemized here in this

legislation.

This aspect of challenging a student and challenging their

security rests around this particular area. This aspect can't be left to what

happens around the province with the various groups. This is a responsibility

that assuredly rests here in this legislation — to send out the message loudly

and clearly throughout all of British Columbia that the school will be a safe

environment for all students, regardless of their sexual orientation.

I encourage the House to vote in favour of this particular

amendment.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

L. Mayencourt: This is an issue that has been the focus of

a lot of my work over the last several years, and it's something that I feel

quite passionate about.

As most people know, I'm a gay man. I grew up in Surrey; I went to

school there. I was subjected to bullying. I witnessed people being bullied. I

at times tried to avoid being in contact with people that were being bullied,

because I didn't want to give them the support. If I gave them the support, that

would mean I was one of them, and I would become the target.

As a young person I grew up with a fair bit of fear in my school

life. The effect of that was that I chose not

[ Page 8018 ]

to become fully engaged in a lot of activities. I decided that I would

protect my sexual orientation, my identity, from my classmates. It took me

several years after graduating from high school before I was able to recognize

and talk to my friends and my family about the fact that I was gay.

[1615]

A young man by the name of Hamed Nastoh grew up in Surrey. He was

14 years old, and he was taunted regularly for being gay. According to Hamed, he

was not, and I accept that. According to his mother, he was not. I accept that.

Nonetheless, he was targeted, and people made fun of him. One

night he sat down and wrote a note to his mother and said to her what had

happened. Then he walked over to the Pattullo Bridge and jumped into the Fraser

River.

I cannot express the sadness that I feel or the connection that I

feel with Hamed — partly because we grew up in the same neighbourhood, partly

because we were both struggling with people that might want to make us a target

of bullying. So I have always….

I can remember the morning that Hamed died. I was with Christy

Clark. We were in opposition at that point, and I said to her: "You know, there

is something wrong with our school system that it doesn't protect kids from that

kind of harassment." We made a pact on that day that, given the opportunity in

government, we would do our very best to address that issue.

I remember a young lady by the name of Dawn-Marie Wesley, who was

taunted by a bunch of girls because they just didn't think she was cool and hip.

They told her that they were going to kill her. She went home one night and

wrote a letter to her mom, told her what happened, and then she went downstairs

and took a dog leash, wrapped it around a pipe and hung herself.

I cannot stand what happened to her. I cannot express my sorrow

adequately as to what occurred to her and her life and what her mother lives

with every day.

I had the pleasure of meeting a young man by the name of Azmi

Jubran. I think Azmi is about 20 now. He went to school in North Vancouver, and

for four years in the hallways of his school he was taunted for being gay. He

wasn't gay, but he was taunted for it. They beat him up. They set fire to his

shirt. They threw him into lockers.

I met a young man in Prince George who was taunted for being gay.

He was gay. He was fairly comfortable with it, so he was pretty open about it in

school. One day in the midst of being taunted, someone threw an open bottle of

urine on him.

[1620]

I met a young girl, Emily-Anne Galbraith, who was in grade 3 and

being taunted because she had a hyphenated name: Emily-Anne. She was too sick to

go to school because of it, and it was a terrible experience for her. One day

when she was wearing white pants to school, someone put a chocolate doughnut on

her seat. She sat down on it, and you can imagine what it looked like. Her

teacher would not allow her to go home and change out of her white pants with

the brown stain.

I met a young girl, who would not want me to tell her name, who

was in a school in Whistler. She was accused by another girl of trying to come

on to the other girl's boyfriend. She was beaten quite severely by six or seven

girls. It's my recollection that is incomplete there — but by a number of young

ladies from that school. They tormented her. They threatened to kill her. They

went through an extraordinary period of time where the family tried to keep this

young lady in the school. Eventually they moved her to Squamish, and she never

wanted to see Whistler ever again. She has made out all right.

I have met many thousands of students in British Columbia over the

course of the last six years. I have been to assemblies where there are hundreds

of kids. I have been to small groups where it's just a group of little kids that

are talking about effective behaviour support or some program that they've

developed. I've got to tell you that I'm deeply touched and moved by the kinds

of efforts they make.

I know the efforts that they make, make a difference, but I am

always struck by the fact that when I ask people to stand up if they've ever

been bullied, if they've ever seen anybody bullied or if they've ever bullied

someone themselves, almost without exception 90 percent of the students stand

up. All of the students are joined by almost all of the teachers.

I have spent a long time trying to look at this, and one of the

flaws in our system has always been that the province has never required that

school districts put in a code of conduct. That's the key. That's the key,

because the flaw in the legislation is that a school district may develop a

school code of conduct.

I've spent a lot of time, and I've produced a couple of bills that

I've put forward in this House. I have made it very clear in the Safe Schools

Task Force report and in the legislation that I've put forward that I think it's

important — as important as the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast said it

was — to specifically name homophobia or discrimination on the basis of sexual

orientation.

I have always believed it should include those who are considered

to have a gender identity in question. I also believe that we have in the Human

Rights Code a document that is extremely important, which talks about the ways

in which adults can be discriminated against in our society. All British

Columbians have embraced our Human Rights Code, which says it's wrong.

I've always wanted to be able to say that the Safe Schools Act or

this piece of legislation would say that the Human Rights Code needs to be

observed in the school codes of conduct in British Columbia. I've always

believed that. The amendment that's moved is a really…. I know it's heartfelt. I

would like very much to see it pass, along with 16 or 17 other items that are

listed in the B.C. Human Rights Code.

[1625]

I have fought this battle for six years. I've given everything I

possibly could to make this thing pass. I've given everything. I've talked to

everyone. I've talked to the Minister of Education about it and the

[ Page 8019 ]

Premier and others in my caucus. They know where I stand, and they know what

I believe, and they support me. I know they do, or I wouldn't sit on this side

of the House. I wouldn't sit in the House here. I know that they are trying the

very best that they can.

This one little move, changing it from "may" to "should" is huge.

It's huge. There is no way around it. It's huge. It is important to me to see

that it gets passed, because I see it as the first step of many that we will

have to take.

The minister has taken a lot of heat for putting one word in

there, and I know how much heat that is, because I've experienced it, too, as

I've travelled around the province — from school districts that say, "We don't

have a problem," to parents that say, "It's not a good idea to do it," and all

that sort of stuff. I've seen that around this province, so I know how huge that

is.

The amendment talks to homophobia. It's not enough. It isn't just

homophobia. There is racism; there is sexism; there are religionisms; and there

is ageism. Every kind of "ism" you can think of under the sun is there. So I

can't support that particular amendment.

What I can do is offer up everything that I know about this to

members here in the House, to the Minister of Education and to the people of

British Columbia that happen to be listening today. That is that this is a fine

first step. We need to get to a point where school districts are obliged,

legally, to have a code of conduct. That code of conduct has to be based