1989 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 34th 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)

MONDAY, JULY 10, 1989

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

8313 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Wildlife Amendment Act, 1989 (Bill 70). Hon. Mr. Strachan

Introduction and first reading –– 8313

Family and Child Service Amendment Act, 1989 (Bill 76). Hon. Mr. Richmond

Introduction and first reading –– 8313

Indian Land Tax Cooperation Act (Bill 77). Hon. Mr. Weisgerber

Introduction and first reading –– 8314

Mineral Tax Act (Bill 73). Hon. Mr. Davis

Introduction and first reading –– 8314

Income Tax Amendment Act (No –– 2), 1989 (Bill 79). Hon. Mr. Couvelier

Introduction and first reading –– 8314

Oral Questions

Lorax Forestry Ltd. Mr. Clark –– 8314

Elk Valley forestry policy. Ms. Edwards –– 8315

AIDS prevention video. Mr. Perry –– 8315

Passenger rail service. Mr. Lovick –– 8315

Pricing of pulp logs. Mr. Miller –– 8316

Presenting reports –– 8317

Committee of Supply: Ministry of State for Cariboo, Responsible for Environment estimates. (Hon. Mr. Strachan)

On vote 57: Cariboo development region –– 8317

Ms. Edwards

Mr. Rose

Hon. Mr. Vant

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Advanced Education and

Job Training estimates. (Hon. S. Hagen)

On vote 5: minister's office –– 8319

Hon. S. Hagen

Mr. Jones

Mr. R. Fraser

Mr. Perry

Mr. Rose

Ms. A. Hagen

The House met at 2:06 p.m.

Prayers.

HON. MR. RICHMOND :

I have the honour today to introduce three good friends from the city

of Kamloops. First of all, Mr. Gordon and Ida Piva are here from

Kamloops, and they represent the small lumber manufacturer in this

province. They have been longtime friends and good supporters of mine.

In the gallery is Mr. Dev Dley, a lawyer from Kamloops, who is also the

vice-president of the Social Credit Party. Would the House make them

all very welcome.

HON. MR. DAVIS : On the North Shore

my party stalwarts call him Coach. Those who know him best call him

Ernie. I would like the House to welcome Ernie Sarsfield from North

Vancouver and his grandson, Kirk Gilchrist, who is celebrating his

eleventh birthday today.

MS. PULLINGER : Today in the

members' gallery is a constituent and friend, an elementary teacher

from Nanaimo, Delores Mason, and with her is my mother Diana Pullinger.

Would the House please help me make them welcome.

MR. SERWA :

Visiting with us today in the House is a teacher from my constituency,

Mr. Sandy Dore. Mr. Dore has the honour of representing Springvalley

Secondary School, School District 23 and the province on a trip

involving the Pacific Rim initiative. He will be going to Hong Kong and

Thailand. Would the House please make him welcome.

MR. PERRY :

It's a rare pleasure to introduce to the House some constituents from

my riding: Prof. Jim Johnson, whom I'd like to introduce to the

government benches as the individual who probably did the most to

persuade me to enter electoral politics recently; his wife Pat Johnson;

and their daughter Emily, who is a very fine baby-sitter. I'd like the

House to make them welcome, please.

MR. R. FRASER : Mr. Speaker, in your gallery today are two young ladies

whom I'd like to introduce to the House. As many of you know, I'm in

the habit of introducing nieces, but I'm one of the very lucky guys who

has a lot of nieces to introduce to the House today: my nieces Sahara and Dorothy,

visiting the Legislative Assembly with their father, my brother Peter.

Introduction of Bills

WILDLIFE AMENDMENT ACT, 1989

Hon. Mr. Strachan presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a

bill intituled Wildlife Amendment Act, 1989.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Mr. Speaker, in moving that the bill be introduced and read a first

time now, I would like to point out that, as the title indicates, this

is an amendment act, and it has a variety of purposes.

There's

a long, new list of

definitions. We cover off the occupation

regulations regarding angling guides and angling licences. There are

some references to CITES, which is the convention on international

trade in endangered species; some sections dealing with nest and egg

protection of endangered species; some group trapline regulations,

which in the

section are essentially colour-blind but are going to have

a very positive impact on some of our native populations who are

trapping; and also some amendments dealing with the disposal of a

trapline.

It's a long, involved amendment act and long

overdue. I understand that some of the provisions have to be passed or

I go to jail, so there is some urgency to do it between now and New

Year's Eve.

Bill 70 introduced, read a first time and

ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the

next sitting of the House after today.

FAMILY AND CHILD SERVICE

AMENDMENT ACT, 1989

Hon. Mr. Richmond presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a

bill intituled Family and Child Service Amendment Act, 1989.

HON. MR. RICHMOND :

Mr. Speaker, the bill before you is an exposure bill or White Paper

relating to the Family and Child Service Act. The bill addresses

recommendation No. 26 of the justice Reform Committee. The committee

was concerned that parents whose children are apprehended for child

protection reasons may not always have enough details about the case to

prepare adequately for court.

To resolve this issue, the

bill would require the superintendent of family and child service to

provide details of her protection concerns about a child when a parent

requested it. This would ensure that parents have sufficient advance

notice of the particulars of the case. The bill also provides that a

parent who is not satisfied with the information provided can apply to

the court for an order for further particulars.

It is our

view that this bill represents an extremely effective solution to the

issue identified by the justice Reform Committee. However, because of

the gravity of these cases, we wanted to give interested persons and

groups a chance to review the bill and make submissions before final

legislation is passed. That is why we are introducing this in the form

of an exposure bill. Those who are interested in making submissions

should forward them to our superintendent of family and child service

before the end of September, and they will be reviewed by the ministry.

Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to recommend this bill to the Legislative Assembly.

[ Page 8314 ]

Bill

76 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of

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

INDIAN LAND TAX COOPERATION ACT

Hon. Mr. Weisgerber presented a message from His Honour the Administrator:

a bill intituled Indian Land Tax Cooperation Act.

HON. MR. WEISGERBER :

Bill 77 introduces certain provisions to complement changes to the

federal Indian Act which gave the power to Indian bands to levy

property taxes on reserve lands. In order that Indian taxation may

proceed in a manner which meshes smoothly with existing provincial or

local property taxation on the same lands, the bill makes it possible

for an Indian band, through its tax bylaw, to adopt existing provincial

assessment and assessment appeal systems and to make use of existing

provincial or municipal tax levy and collection services. In addition,

where it is clear that the band is providing services of a municipal

nature and funding them through its own property tax levy, the bill

permits the province or municipality to set a lower tax rate on

property on the reserve than applies to similar property off the

reserve.

Bill 77 introduced, read a first time and ordered

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

sitting of the House after today.

MINERAL TAX ACT

Hon. Mr. Davis presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill

intituled Mineral Tax Act.

HON. MR. DAVIS :

The purpose of the Mineral Tax Act is to establish a single streamlined

tax system for coal and other minerals. The act replaces the mineral

resource tax, which now applies to metallic and most industrial

minerals, and the coal royalty, the mineral land tax and the mining

tax, which applies to coal. The new system will relate coal and mineral

taxes to true profitability.

The bill will also remove

disincentives to new investment in the industry and prevent premature

mine closures. At the same time, it will ensure that mines pay tax in

every year and eliminate revenue leakages.

[2:15]

Bill

73 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of

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

INCOME TAX AMENDMENT

ACT (No. 2), 1989

Hon. Mr. Couvelier presented a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor:

a bill intituled Income Tax Amendment Act (No. 2), 1989.

HON. MR. COUVELIER :

Each year the federal government sends to this province a series of

amendments to the Income Tax Act. These amendments, when adopted,

provide for uniformity between the federal and provincial taxing

statutes, and ease the burden on our taxpayers by ensuring that they

have to deal with a single taxing authority.

The amendments

contained in this bill have all been requested by the federal

government. The amendments arise because of changes to the Canadian

Income Tax Act. In addition, certain other proposed changes repeal

provisions of the provincial Income Tax Act and incorporate the

corresponding sections of the federal act by direct

section reference.

In this manner the government is hoping that the early need for

extensive legislative changes to the provincial Income Tax Act will be

reduced.

Bill 79 introduced, read a first time and ordered

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

sitting of the House after today.

Oral Questions

LORAX FORESTRY LTD.

MR. CLARK :

A question for the Minister of Forests. Lorax Forestry is the company

that took over the B.C. Forest Service training school in 1984. It was

one of the first privatized government ventures in British Columbia.

Can the minister inform the House whether Lorax Forestry has been given

any government grants or subsidies by his ministry?

HON. MR. PARKER : I cannot recall. I'll take that question as notice and return with an answer.

MR. CLARK :

Will the minister confirm that the rent paid by Lorax to the ministry

for the use of land, buildings, equipment and facilities is only

$30,000 per year, while the cost to the ministry is $45,000 per year.?

In other words, Lorax is subsidized by the government to the tune of

$15,000 per year.

HON. MR. PARKER : As with the previous question, I'll take this one as notice.

MR. CLARK :

Can the minister confirm that three years ago his ministry gave Lorax a

$5,000 grant and rent forgiveness of $20,000 — in other words, a

further subsidy of $25,000?

MR. SPEAKER : Order,

please. I remind the member that the minister has taken a question on

notice with regard to grants to that corporation. If he has a new

question, he can ask that of the minister.

MR. CLARK :

Last year Lorax Forestry went bankrupt, and 23 employees are owed over

$16,000 for wages. The owner's wife apparently purchased the company

for $1. Can the minister explain why his ministry continues to give

special treatment and

[ Page 8315 ]

contracts to this company while employees are left without a job and owed money?

HON. MR. PARKER :

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite referred to Lorax Forestry, which is

different than the outfit that provides an educational program. But the

substance of the question I'll have to take as notice.

MR. CLARK :

A question to the Minister of Government Management Services. In the

debate on privatization in this Legislature last year, the Minister of

Finance (Hon. Mr. Couvelier) said: "Ask the people at Lorax Forestry

what they think of privatization." Now the answer is very clear:

they're out of work and out of money.

The question is this:

in view of this company's unbelievable track record, their bankruptcy

and their reliance on government subsidies, can the minister explain

why in November 1987 Lorax Forestry was given a contract by your

ministry to teach nursery employees how to run a business?

HON. MR. MICHAEL :

The member is well aware that the question has been taken as notice. A

full review will be done of this privatization initiative and a report

brought back to the assembly.

ELK VALLEY FORESTRY POLICY

MS. EDWARDS :

Crestbrook Forest Industries is planning to clearcut a large part — up

to a third — of the scenic Elk Valley forest near Fernie. Is the

Minister of Forests taking steps to ensure that their plans do not

damage the unique scenic attributes of the area?

HON. MR. PARKER :

The issue in the Elk Valley is one of substantial pine bark beetle

infestation. A substantial number of stands have been killed, and

there's a major salvage program and a major reforestation program

necessary. Our staff are talking to municipal and regional district

people about mitigation of the impact of the salvage program. I was

with our chief forester this morning in Vernon, and he's on his way to

Cranbrook for further discussions.

MS. EDWARDS : A

supplementary question to the Minister of State for Thompson-Okanagan.

Because tourism is such a major part of the economy of the area, what

steps is your ministry taking to ensure that the value to the tourist

business of the landscape is not lost?

HON. MR. DIRKS :

I believe the Minister of Forests simply told the member opposite, just

a few moments ago, that he was working on that problem right now.

AIDS PREVENTION VIDEO

MR. PERRY :

A question for the Minister of Health. It's beginning to sound like an

old song. On Friday I obtained a copy of the Health ministry's AIDS

video and showed it to a number of members and staff of this

Legislature. Sunday's Vancouver Province

reported on a showing to its independent panel, which generally felt

that the video was appropriate for its intended audience. Can the

minister tell this House whether he has chosen his hand-picked

committee to view the video, and has he set a date for them to view it?

HON. MR. DUECK :

That is future policy. I have to inform the House that protocols, lists

and dates will be developed. At this point I cannot give him that

information.

MR. PERRY : I asked my question in the

past tense. I'll repeat the question: can the minister tell this House

whether he has chosen — that's past tense — his own hand-picked

committee to view the video and whether he has — that's past tense —

set a date for them to view it?

HON. MR. DUECK : Mr.

Speaker, whether that's past or present tense, I did tell him that I

had not yet developed protocols or dates. So he can take it past,

current or future, whichever way he wishes.

MR. PERRY :

A new question for the Minister of Health. Has the minister — or the

Premier, for that matter — decided whether he will release the video

for screening if the screening is funded by the B.C. Medical

Association, the doctors of the province, the federal government, the

Canadian Public Health Association, the general public of B.C., the

Vancouver Province or whoever else feels that adolescents in this

province who are sexually active are entitled to have the necessary

information to protect themselves?

HON. MR. DUECK : I

cannot give the second member for Vancouver-Point Grey an answer at

this time, because it has not yet been developed. He's asking about

something that may or may not occur, and I cannot give that answer at

this time. Furthermore, I don't make my policy by his suggestions of

what he thinks is appropriate at any given time.

PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE

MR. LOVICK :

A question to the Minister of Transportation and Highways. The minister

has been aware for some time, as indeed has every sentient person in

the province, of the proposed federal cutbacks to passenger rail

service, including the possible elimination of the E&N on Vancouver

Island and the transcontinental route. Can the minister tell this House

what losses in employment and impact on economic activity those

cutbacks would cause if they were indeed implemented?

HON. MR. VANT :

It's certainly of concern to this government, because no less than

45,000 passengers per year utilize the Esquimalt and Nanaimo Railway.

At present I don't have the exact employment figures

[ Page 8316 ]

before

me. But I can assure you that we are considering various options

subsequent to my letter, which I sent near the end of May, to the Hon.

Benoit Bouchard. As I understand it, we won't hear the federal

government's reaction to the Via Rail report until the end of August.

Meanwhile, I can assure you we're looking at every avenue possible to

maintain all the Via Rail passenger services that are currently offered

in the province.

MR. LOVICK : Mr. Speaker, that isn't

very comforting, because it is substantially the same answer we got

three or four weeks ago. When you wrote to Mr. Bouchard, you asked him

to do nothing until he had consulted with you. Obviously your

intercessions haven't had much success thus far.

A new

question, Mr. Speaker. We know already what some of the impacts The

rail union has estimated the loss of 510 workers. We also know that a

study in Alberta suggested that in Alberta alone, there would be a job

loss of 1,000. My question to the minister is very straightforward and

specific: can he tell us whether his ministry has yet undertaken any

study of the employment and economic losses in this province?

HON. MR. VANT :

It seems rather strange that the member opposite seems so thirsty for

facts. Yet he gets up to ask a question, and it seems that we wait and

wait for the question.

I can assure you that we are not

into studying the situation; we are into a very strong position that

until the final report is released by the federal minister, we are

putting on all the pressure we can to maintain the services. Until we

get that final report, we cannot state a position without getting into

future policy. I can assure you that we are considering several options

to ensure that the Via Rail passenger service does continue — one way

or the other.

MR. LOVICK : Well, it's passing

strange, Mr. Minister, that you're waiting to hear from the federal

government about how bad the impact has been on B.C. instead of doing

your own studies on the impact on B.C.

[2:30]

Will you give this House your assurance, please, that you will

undertake some studies and communicate to the federal government that

the impact of the cutbacks in B.C. is unacceptable and will be rejected

and resisted by this government?

HON. MR. VANT : In

my communications with the federal minister, we have certainly

indicated the financial impact, especially on tourism, because a lot of

the rail service is used seasonally. The information we have so far is

that the daylight Rocky Mountain run will not only be continued but

will indeed expand. So there's a glimmer of good news in all of this

speculation that I hear opposite.

I'm aware, of course,

that the hon. member is the first member for Nanaimo, and his primary

concern is the E&N. It's very seasonal. As I said earlier, it

carries about 45,000 passengers per year. Actually, it is declining

somewhat; it peaked at 58,000 back in 1979. 1 can speculate, of course,

that its decline is because the Budd cars are not properly maintained,

and they could improve the quality of their service. We're going to

make sure that the federal government continues to subsidize that run.

Or perhaps — and I'm just speculating here — they will offer the

passenger service once again to the Canadian Pacific Railway which owns

the rail line. Our research tells us that they charge very high rent

for the use of the track. Perhaps if there was some adjustment there it

could be made more viable. Right now it's very heavily subsidized, and

it does appear that use is actually declining from the 1979 peak.

PRICING OF PULP LOGS

MR. MILLER :

To the Minister of Forests, who is finally moving on the question of

waste: what concurrent steps has the minister taken on the whole

question of the pricing of pulp logs? As the minister well knows, the

difficulty that market loggers have is that they're selling to a rigged

game, if you like, in that the markets are controlled by the major

corporations. Currently it costs them more to take those logs out of

the bush than they receive from the companies. What concurrent steps

which logically should follow with this policy are being taken by your

ministry to ensure that decent prices can be obtained by the market

loggers?

HON. MR. PARKER : We don't have a timber board such as they had in socialist Saskatchewan at one time, and we have no intention of starting one.

MR. MILLER :

A supplemental. That kind of oversimplification is typical of this

minister, who, I think, has been introducing policies geared more to

heading off questions in his estimates than to actually making some

changes in this province.

The fact is that the Nilsson

report and others have identified the low pricing in pulpwood as one of

the major problems that have contributed to waste in the forests of

British Columbia. Does the minister feel that the market loggers will

be able to live with the zero tolerance now being imposed on them

because of this pricing problem?

HON. MR. PARKER :

Mr. Speaker, the resources of British Columbia are not to be exploited.

They are to be used in a rational manner, and that's what these

policies do.

MR. SPEAKER : The second member for Vancouver Centre seeks leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

MR. BARNES :

Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased that I ran into a former employee of

mine, along with her son and daughter. When I had Emery's Pub, a

nightclub at Harrison Hot Springs some 20 years ago,

[ Page 8317 ]

she was one of my waitresses. I'd like the House to make her and her family welcome. Her name is Monica Corry.

MR. SPEAKER : Hon. members, I have a letter to read to the House:

I submit to you this report on my examination of the severance

settlement with Mr. David Poole. This report is issued in accordance with

section

12 of the Auditor General Act, RSBC 1979.

George L. Morfitt, FCA

Auditor-General

Orders of the Day

HON. MR. RICHMOND : Mr. Speaker, I call Committee of Supply.

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Pelton in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF STATE FOR

CARIBOO, RESPONSIBLE FOR ENVIRONMENT

On vote 57: Cariboo development region, $714,693.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Briefly, Mr. Chairman, we've spent a bit of time in my estimates in the

past two weeks discussing the Cariboo economic development region,

which is one of the responsibilities of my portfolio. As I indicated to

the committee, the most significant single issue to us in terms of

economic development is quality of life, and we have agreed as a

committee and as people representing the citizens of the Cariboo that

probably the single best instrument of economic development that could

happen in the Cariboo economic development region will be the

establishment of an autonomous university. That is a unanimous decision.

should point out that the university society has 15,000 names on a

petition that one had to pay $5 to sign, so this wasn't just your

normal shopping-centre petition but one, in fact, in which you had to

invest before your signature went on the line. There is some

considerable interest there. I think that really characterizes the mood

of the people of the Cariboo. We really do have all the sawmills, pulp

mills and regular B.C.-type industries that we need, but what we want

to do is promote investor attractiveness, and we certainly want to

promote the better lifestyle for those citizens who live in the Cariboo.

will briefly relate an incident that comes to mind, and I think this

will sort of explain my philosophy and the philosophy of the Cariboo to

all of you. Some years ago I had the good fortune, as Deputy Speaker of

the Legislative Assembly, to take four members with me, including the

current member for Rossland Trail (Mr. Darcy), Don Lockstead, I think

the current Minister of Tourism (Hon. Mr. Reid) and another government

MLA. We went to New Orleans and visited as guests of the state

legislators' conference. It was very good: we ate some great food; we

listened to some superb music; we also listened to some superb speakers.

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : Oh, great music. You betcha. Pete Fountain, Al Hirt, and they all play like that.

One

of the speakers was T. Boone Pickens, who in those years was known for

the green rating and his takeover of companies — hostile and yet

sometimes friendly takeovers. Of course, the state governors and the

state legislatures were on him because when he mounted these takeovers,

he would quite often resite the industry that he had taken over. So he

responded to them, and he first of all gave us the business case as to

why he bought the company.

Then he started to talk about

siting, and he said: "When I consider siting of an industry in any part

of the United States, I consider the technical infrastructure that must

be in place for that industry." Those are, of course, the obvious

things that we all know of as we think about industry in our

communities: such things as railroad access, airplane access, road

access, solid labour force, natural gas, hydro, the labour

infrastructure, secondary industry that can support the primary

industry and all the normal things. He said: "That's only 50 percent of

my decision. The other 50 percent is an evaluation of the social side

of that community. Are there churches there? Is there post-secondary

education? Is there a lifestyle that is going to allow me to attract

the best workers to that industry and the best managers? That's the

other 50 percent of that decision. I weigh the industrial

infrastructure equally with the social infrastructure."

That

made a large impression on me because here we had one of the most

interesting, and by no means small, players in the industrial world in

the U.S. telling us how much value he put on social infrastructure when

he considered siting industry and when he considered economic

development in a particular region.

I have sort of, as an

MLA and latterly as a minister of state for a development region, held

that foremost in my mind, and I find out that most of the people I meet

in the Cariboo agree with me. As I said earlier, the board of directors

for the Cariboo development region are the seven mayors of the areas,

the two MLAs, those of us who have attended.... Of course, you will

appreciate that our former colleague Alex Fraser was quite ill during

the time of the formation of our board of directors, and the other

member did not wish to attend our meetings because of philosophical

reasons.

The Minister of Transportation and Highways (Hon.

Mr. Vant) and I have worked very closely with our board since 1987, and

if we have come to a consensus on one thing — and we have come to a

consensus on many things — it's that we must improve investor

attractiveness for our Cariboo development region, and the social side

is really what counts. We do have exceptional highways; we know

[ Page 8318 ]

that. We do have two rail lines; we do have natural gas; we do have hydro.

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : In general we have natural gas.

But

it's the university, the social side of life, that will really improve

what it is that we want to do. With that said, I see there is great

anticipation for other members to speak so I can further respond to

them. I will thank you, sir, and take my place and listen to further

considerations of the committee.

MS. EDWARDS : I have

a question for the minister, because it was reported several weeks ago

that the Premier made an announcement in Williams Lake about a wood

waste project that has been proposed for Williams Lake. As a matter of

fact, a number of people have made proposals on a wood waste project at

a mill at Williams Lake. As far as some of the folks who had great

interest in it were concerned, the decision had not been made on who

was going to do that project. Perhaps the minister could clarify for me

which project the Premier was announcing at that time in Williams Lake?

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Let me say that I've always admired the Premier's enthusiasm and

aggressiveness in discussing projects, but we have not arrived at a

final decision yet. The policy review at this point is with the B.C.

Hydro board of directors, because it involves a certain pricing for

electricity, but one of two is going to happen. The two are: an MDF

plant, which is sawdust-type plant that takes wood waste and compresses

it into a building product and also co-generates electricity; and the

other is straight co-generation of electricity. One of those two will

proceed, but as yet we do not have a final determination from Hydro,

nor a determination from the two proponents — because they may come

together. There may be an MDF plant, and also Washington Power may be

in on this co-generation; but either way, it's going to happen. I do

appreciate the Premier's enthusiasm, aggressiveness and ambition, but I

will say as kindly as I can that perhaps his evaluation was a bit

premature.

MS. EDWARDS : It certainly aroused — how

shall I put this — a very intense curiosity on my part and the part of

a number of others. It's very good to know that you have a plant that

maybe will go in one way or another, if everybody agrees and so on. As

an announcement, that's great.

I only have one other

comment. I have listened to this minister talk twice about universities

in the north without illustrating any particular universities or where

they should be located in the province. The minister said that if there

had not been a whole regional structure, there would be no university

in the north, and I would simply like to comment to the minister that

if that's what it takes to get a university in the north, it's a heck

of a lot of organizational pattern.

MR. ROSE : Last

week the minister very kindly offered to get me some information on a

particularly irksome matter in my own riding concerning Reichhold

Chemicals Inc. Also I included a suggestion that he said he could

consider about whether to employ an expert to monitor the nature of

this plant's fugitive gases.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : Emissions.

MR. ROSE :

Well, they're gases or else they wouldn't be fugitive. Nevertheless,

looking into this matter on our behalf, can he give us an update on

where it stands today?

[2:45]

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

No, I can't, hon. member, and I regret that I'm not prepared for that

today. I understood that we were going to be dealing with the economic

development region of the Cariboo only. However, you do have my

assurance that I will send to your office immediately whatever

information we have found since I spoke to you last week.

With

respect to the comment of the member for Kootenay, as I said last week,

had a university society come to a government or any portfolio of

government and said, "We need $100,600 for a good study for Prince

Rupert to North Peace to the southern Cariboo, " I think any portfolio

ministry would have been hard-pressed to find it. This economic

development region, joined with three others, was the instrument, and

this was a change in policy that worked well for us and gave us the

ability — such as this co-generation study that I've done as well — to

put some serious scholars in the field and have them develop a position

paper and do some serious legwork for us. I can't accept that the

establishment of our economic development regions wasn't without

benefit and wasn't, in fact, the best mechanism we could have in this

case to answer this question.

MR. ROSE : A final

question. With some considerable risk, the minister mentioned the

enthusiasm of the Premier over these various projects. I wanted to know

what the current status of the meat-packing plant in Vanderhoof is;

whether the chopstick factory is going ahead; and whether the

co-generation was examined in conjunction with community heating. Many

areas in Finland and the northern Scandinavian countries use community

heating as opposed to individual heating arrangements, and it would

seem to me that there's a large amount of waste products in terms of

fibre. I can't imagine this, but if there are, Prince George would be

an ideal place or maybe some of the smaller towns. I'll give you a very

good example of community heating: there's community heating in several

buildings — or there was — in downtown Vancouver right in the central

core, and the University of British Columbia is also heated that way.

[ Page 8319 ]

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

No, that wasn't done. I'll get to the two questions. First of all, the

meat-packing plant in Vanderhoof: I don't know where it is at this

point, but I don't think there's anything developing there for sure.

There

are two chopstick factories. The proponent of the one in the Prince

George area is a credible Korean company. They have the equipment and

the expertise, so to speak. They are looking at a licence now, and they

may or may not proceed, but it's in the preliminary point of view.

Getting

back to the Williams Lake wood-waste study, we did not consider central

heating or any other use of that type for the wood waste. We went to

the engineering textbooks and also some of the practices that we see

nowadays. The best we could find was Kettle Falls, Washington, where

co-generation of electricity was by far giving the most bang for the

buck from the wood waste. That is clearly it.

We don't

really have heating problems in the central interior, because we're all

on natural gas. As a matter of fact, my gas bill, living in Prince

George, which will have 40-below weather, would be less in a year than

the oil bill would be in Victoria. My gas bill this month is $3.26, so

as you can see....

MR. ROSE : This is July.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Yes, I know. Pardon me, that was for June. It is for hot water only.

Bxit natural gas is plentiful and most inexpensive, and that's our form

of heating, so wood waste would not be practical. But I do thank the

member for that question and that concern. Wood waste is most practical

for particle-board or for cogeneration of electricity. That's the best

possible use we can get out of the product.

HON. MR. VANT :

I just wanted to say one or two words about the fact that the Cariboo

development region, under the very able guidance of my hon colleague

here, very wisely implemented the wood waste study which enabled the

data to be gathered, so these proponents have shown up knowing exactly

how much wood waste is available in the Quesnel, Williams Lake and 100

Mile areas. Of course, for quite some time now, until my hon. colleague

the Minister of Environment tightened up the regulations for the

beehive burners, we had quite a fly-ash problem. But if these proposals

go ahead, for sure it will be a triple plus: it will be a 100 percent

solution to the fly-ash problem, it will create employment, and there

will be, with this medium-density fibreboard proposal, a marketable

product out of what is now currently just going up in smoke in the

various beehive burners.

Also, it seems that in the

southern part of the Cariboo development region most of the chips from

the sawmills flow north to the pulp mills either in Quesnel or in

Prince George. Of course, the trucks and the chip-cars on the railroad

would be heading back empty to pick up more chips. It makes a lot of

sense from a transportation point of view that the wood wastes could go

as the back-haul to what is currently an empty deadheading back. So it

all makes very much sense for the whole region.

Also, in

terms of the university of the north, we have always had problems

keeping professionals of many different disciplines in the north. We

are very confident that with the proper post-secondary educational

opportunities, the young people will stay where they've grown up if

they can get their training there, so we won't have the shortage of

health care personnel and so on that we are currently experiencing.

I'd

like to point out to this House, too, that the Prince George catchment

area, from a post-secondary education point of view, is the largest

area in all of North America; indeed, the catchment has over 300,000

people. It's the area of largest population in North America without a

university. So it's high time we had one in the central interior.

Vote 57 approved.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF ADVANCED

EDUCATION AND JOB TRAINING

On vote 5: minister's office, $265,076.

HON. S. HAGEN : I'm going to make a very short opening statement.

am honoured to present to this House and the citizens of the province

of British Columbia the main estimates of the Ministry of Advanced

Education and Job Training and ministry responsible for science and

technology. I am also the minister responsible for the women's

secretariat and the youth council.

In October of last year

I released the report of the provincial access committee, a report

which was the culmination of a highly consultative year-long process.

Today I will outline our strategy for increasing access for all to

post-secondary education.

The access strategy that we

announced on March 20, 1989, is a major step forward in our

post-secondary system. "Access for All, " as we call it, embodies our

philosophy for responsive, innovative and creative government meeting

the needs of British Columbians. "Access for All" will expand

institutional capacity and make university education available in a

larger number of locations around the province. But access is not just

about university level education. Access includes new alternatives for

technical and vocational training. Increased opportunities for

underrepresented groups focuses attention on literacy and adult basic

education and creates a system built on strength, with the flexibility

to adapt to the needs of the future.

The access strategy

increases post-secondary funding by some $35.3 million this year and

$690 million in total over the next six years. To accommodate a staged

increase of 15,000 new student spaces in university degree programs and

in both colleges and universities this September, 3,000 spaces will be

added. Some 1,640 are in universities and colleges in the lower

mainland; the remainder will be distributed across the province as

demand dictates. New

[ Page 8320 ]

initiatives

to serve career, technical, adult basic ed and vocational students have

also been approved. Some 30 new programs and 1,000 student spaces in

non-university level courses will be in place this September.

Because

trends indicate that the population will increase in the Fraser Valley

by 140,000 people by 1994, 1 have asked Simon Fraser University to work

with Fraser Valley, Douglas and Kwantlen Colleges to address issues

that will arise from this rapid growth. They are progressing well, and

I expect to have their report by the end of the year. On the issue of

literacy in adult basic education, last September I formed a literacy

advisory committee chaired by Dr. Paul Gallagher, and I have set aside

funds to respond to its recommendations. The committee will report

early next fall with recommendations dealing with development of a

provincial strategy on literacy.

On an

estimates-to-estimates basis, the budget for universities has increased

by $29.5 million, or approximately 9 percent, to a level of $371.26

million. This increase covers both salary and non-salary costs for

1989-90. By adding in the universities' share of access programs and

enrolment of $8.25 million, total operating contributions to the

universities have increased to $379.51 million. This represents an

overall increase of approximately 11 percent in the operating

contributions to universities for 1989-90.

This increase in

excess of the rate of inflation illustrates this government's

commitment to increasing educational opportunities for all British

Columbians. We recognize the long-term benefits of an educated

citizenry and are working with the educational community to increase

participation rates in the province.

In 1988-89, a special

warrant allocation of $10 million initiated the university matching

program. The $20 million budget for '89-90 represents a 100 percent

increase in the level of funding from 1988 to 1989. Over a six-year

period this program will provide up to $110 million to match private

sector donations to the three provincial universities. These funds are

over and above the general operating and capital grants allocated to

the universities. Matching programs help to strengthen valuable links

between industry and universities and provide an excellent source of

funding. In its first year the matching program enabled universities to

fund many longterm projects which will benefit students and contribute

to our goal of a strengthened post-secondary system.

On an

estimates-to-estimates basis, the budget for colleges and institutes

has increased by $26.48 million, or approximately 9 percent, to a level

of $317.66 million. This increase covers both salary and non-salary

costs for 1989-90. By adding the colleges' and institutes' share of

access programs and enrolment growth funding at $26.34 million, total

operating contributions will increase to $344 million. This represents

an overall increase of approximately 18 percent in operating

contributions to colleges and institutes for 1989-90.

Our

colleges and institutes are the cornerstone of our provincial

post-secondary system. They provide the closest links to the community

and are responsive to the needs of industry. With the addition of third

and fourth-year academic programming and the strengthening of first-

and second-year programs, colleges will expand their role in the

post-secondary system and serve British Columbians in a new way. This

18 percent increase in funding will also allow for additional

non-academic programs to meet the changing needs of industry.

an estimates-to-estimates basis, the budget for capital debt servicing

is increased by $5 million, or approximately 5.5 percent, to a level of

$97.08 million. This increase covers debt servicing and meets the

requirements of existing and anticipated capital projects for 1989-90.

The

1989-90 estimates for student financial assistance of $50.65 million

represents a 16.5 percent increase over actual 1988-89 expenditures.

The budget adequately reflects anticipated requirements for the 1989-90

academic year. This year is the third year of a three-year phase-in for

the province's new student financial assistance program. Over the last

two years the budget for student financial assistance has increased by

approximately 40 percent, from $36.45 million in '87-88 to $50.65

million in '89-90.

[3:00]

In addition, we have increased maximum allowances for students to

$200 per week for students without dependents and $300 per week for

students with dependents. This translates into increases ranging from

10 percent to 67 percent, depending on the length of program. In

1988-89, the program experienced a 5 percent increase in the number of

students receiving loans. For 1989-90, it is anticipated that the

program will experience a 10 percent increase in the provision of loans

to students.

On an estimates-to-estimates basis, the budget

for science and technology programs has increased by $7.5 million or

approximately 40.5 percent to a level of $26.09 million. This increase

includes $5 million provided to enhance the science and technology

development fund. This will ensure the growing base of science and

technology in British Columbia continues to expand.

addition, $3.5 million has been approved to fund the kaon

preconstruction study: $2.5 million is provided through a budget

increase, and $1 million has been made available due to the phase-out

of the natural gas vehicle conversion program.

This

government recognizes that our future economic prosperity depends to a

large degree on the development of a strong targeted advance technology

sector. We are working with industry and the educational community to

develop strategies and programs to encourage innovation. On an

estimates-to-estimates basis, the budget for women's programs has

increased by $109,000 or approximately 17 percent to a level of

$753,000. This increase covers the establishment of an advertising and

publications budget, salary and benefit adjustments and an increase in

grants for 1989-90.

[ Page 8321 ]

This

government recognizes the importance of enhancing the economic and

social status of women, and these funding increases reflect our

commitment to achieving these goals. These funds do not represent our

total commitment to women's programs. A large number of women receive

benefits through other ministry programs such as student financial

assistance and job training and apprenticeship.

In the past

year, this ministry has taken a leadership role in ensuring that

training and apprenticeship programs are in place, so that we have the

skilled workers necessary to continue to take advantage of our strong

economy. We recognized that our stronger economy meant that employers

no longer required as significant a number of wage subsidy programs to

encourage training. We recognize that technological changes are

impacting the workplace at such a rate that training has to become a

fact of life at work.

We recognize that the stronger

economy brings the need for more journeymen. To lead the changes

required, we recently restructured the ministry executive and appointed

an assistant deputy minister responsible for job training,

apprenticeship and labour market policy.

To put a structure

in place throughout the province that would strengthen our training

partnership with the business community, I announced the training and

enterprise centre network. These centres are in the business of

promoting and facilitating human resource development. This is a unique

concept; it's the first of its kind in Canada, and we are the leaders.

We are working with our colleagues in the Ministry of Regional

Development, as well as a variety of regional and local colleagues, to

provide a coordinated initiative to encourage economic development and

the required training of the most important resource our province has,

and that is our people.

The business community, in general,

has long been aware of their responsibility in training. This is true

whether one considers their apprenticeship indentures, informal on-site

training or sponsorship of formal training. However, the changes

affecting the worksite are ever increasing, and so is the need for

training. To assist the business community to respond to escalating

needs for the development of human resources, programs such as the

training investment program and the training opportunities program were

established. These programs assist employers to implement long-range

training strategies within their organizations, and they underscore my

ministry's commitment to the establishment of a strong training culture

throughout British Columbia.

Businesses are not only facing

rapid worksite change; they are also competing for skilled labour

Training and retraining internally is the most effective way for B.C.

companies to ensure that they have appropriately skilled employees. I

mentioned that the stronger economy has increased the demand for

apprentices. Last year my ministry recognized that federal funding for

this critical form of training was insufficient. Last year there was a

9 percent growth in the number of apprentices in the system — from

10,410 to 11,748. These increases in numbers are thanks to solid

employment increases in many of our construction trades. No potential

apprenticeships were turned away. We will continue to fund the training

requirements for apprenticeships beyond the funding provided by the

federal government.

In 1989-90, the initiatives that we put

in place last year will be continued. In addition, as was announced in

the speech from the throne, we are establishing a task force on

employment and training. It would be a task force of British Columbians

who know and understand the challenges we face in training our

workforce for now and the future. They will be recommending strategies

to ensure that the workforce can meet the changing realities of the

workplace. This, I believe, clearly outlines my ministry's and this

government's commitment to a strong and competitive British Columbia

workforce.

MR. JONES : I thank the minister for his

opening remarks. When my caucus colleagues asked me when the Advanced

Education estimates were coming up, I kept saying: "Well, they're

saving the best to last." I think we got close, and I'm sure the

minister shares with me the importance of this area to the future of

the province and the well-being of its people.

I speak for

my first time in the Advanced Education and Job Training estimates.

It's the minister's third such occasion, and this could be our last

go-round before our next provincial election. I hope the members and

the minister will forgive me, but rather than the short statement the

minister made, I'd like to make a little more comprehensive kind of

statement.

Let me begin by sharing one of my observations

about the area. Like the Education ministry itself, it seems that the

area of advanced education and job training attracts some very good

people. I even include the minister in that. The ministry staff, the

administration in the colleges, institutes and universities, the

students, the faculty and the support staff have all been groups and

individuals that have impressed me greatly and groups that I know are

out there doing their very best. I'm sure the minister shares with me

my wish for their continued success in the future.

I have

watched this ministry and this minister for the last two and a half —

almost three — years, and I'd like to begin my remarks by giving the

minister his due. Very clearly the assessment of this minister, both on

a personal and professional level, I think is.... On many occasions he

has received strong support from the post-secondary education

community, and I want to let him know that I recognize that it's

greatly appreciated by the members that make up the post-secondary

education community, and certainly I recognize the importance of

creating the kind of positive image the minister has created.

politics perception is everything, and the perception that's been

created by the minister is one of a hard-working, dedicated, committed

minister.

MR. ROSE : That's enough.

[ Page 8322 ]

MR. JONES : We've got the next two days to add balance.

Probably

the most significant measure in the field is the ability of the

minister to attract dollars to his ministry, and although there have

certainly been some glitches in this, overall the perception in the

post-secondary education community is that this minister has been

successful. I want to add my commendation and give full credit to the

minister for his efforts on behalf of post-secondary education.

But

as my colleague the member for Coquitlam Moody points out, my job here

is not to praise the minister, and it's not to bury him either. It's to

point out what I see as the difference between that perception and

another reality, another side of the coin. Our job here in opposition

is to point out the shortcomings of government. As government

watchdogs, it's so important to our democratic system that that

minister be allowed to operate with the power of government only under

the watchful eye of the media, the opposition and the people in the

field. I know the minister appreciates that. So although my remarks for

the remaining part of these estimates probably won't be flattering, I

know the minister appreciates that they are not particularly personal

remarks but comments on his role and function as the Minister of

Advanced Education and Job Training.

First of all, the

situation we've left in this province — and the minister came in at a

most propitious time — is one where we've gone beyond the black days of

the past, and so to balance those accolades I have to say that it was

an easy act to follow. The predecessors, Dr. McGeer and the first

member for Vancouver South (Hon. R. Fraser), shared the blackest days

of post-secondary education in this province, an anti-intellectual,

anti-education approach adopted by this government which I don't think

the government even particularly hid.

The record in

education and post-secondary education was a marvellous record in how

bad it was. We were the only province in Canada to slash student aid

almost to zero; one of the few provinces, if not the only province, to

experience an enrolment decline during that period. We had the lowest

completion rates, and the minister has indicated his response to that.

In fact, we had an unwritten policy on the part of the government of

importing trained and talented people from outside this province,

rather than using the human resources that the minister spoke of a

minute ago.

In taking the skills and talent we have and

applying one of the things we do well — education and training — we

develop those talents in order to have those people take their place in

this society at the highest echelons. We had a policy of being net

importers of skilled and talented people. I'm hoping the minister is

sincere in his promises to end that, and that we will see the

completion rates, the participation rates and the funding record go

from where it was under the previous ministers — the lowest in Canada —

to if not the best, certainly above average. That was an abysmal

record. We were a laughing stock in Canada. We had record debt loads.

In terms of spending the federal EPF transfer payment, we had the

lowest record there. In fact, I was convinced that the government would

change in 1986, primarily because of that abysmal record in

post-secondary education, which dashed the hopes of so many young

people.

MR. R. FRASER : That's ridiculous.

MR. JONES :

The first member for Vancouver South knows that well. That's the member

who as Minister of Post-Secondary Education made his famous Marie

Antoinette statement that if they can't afford to take out a loan, then

maybe they should postpone their education.

While the

minister has been appreciated for his contributions, I suggest that it

was an easy act to follow, and the member for Vancouver South knows

that well.

On assuming his portfolio, the minister was

given two major responsibilities by the Premier: one was to review the

student assistance program by January 31, 1987; and the second was to

find ways to increase access to post-secondary education and job

training. While I think the minister certainly did an adequate job of

responding to those two particular — and critically important — areas

that were assigned to him, I have to ask the minister if he did not see

other very serious areas that needed addressing. I have to conclude

that there has been a lack of vision, a lack of clarifying the goals

and directions and a lack of leadership on the part of that minister.

For

example, did the minister consider it possible or desirable to conduct

a comprehensive review of post-secondary education in this province, to

look at the needs into the next decade, or even to assess the damage

done during the so-called restraint years by the minister's

predecessors?

[3:15]

The minister talks about access to post-secondary education, and I

have to ask the minister then: do we accept the concept of universal

people with skills and talent who can profit from a post-secondary

education experience have the fundamental right to attend a

post-secondary institution in the province of British Columbia, or are

we moving away from that direction as those that can profit from having

that fundamental right?

There are other questions. As we

increase access, do we also address the question of quality — improving

the quality of post-secondary education in this province? Or are those

two mutually exclusive?

There are many questions, and one

is: what's the best way to answer some of these questions? Do we need

an ongoing forum for discussion of issues in post-secondary education

to deal with these questions and others, and also to do an important

job that the Minister of Education has addressed in his portfolio, and

that is: helping to bring together what I consider the divided house of

higher learning in the province of British Columbia to move towards a

[ Page 8323 ]

more cooperative system of post-secondary education, which right now I see as very competitive?

Clearly

the institutions in post-secondary education in this province have been

strapped, have had their backs to the wall, and have come out fighting

when there's been a bit more money available. So we have a very

competitive system. I think there needs to be a forum that could assist

the cohesiveness and cooperation of the institutions in this province.

There

are many other questions that such a body could deal with. Should we as

a province be focusing on specific centres of excellence to achieve

world-class status, as we often hear about from UBC, or should we be

trying to provide the best all-around education to all those in this

province who can profit from a post-secondary education experience?

know the question of the aging faculty has been raised before, but I

think it's a serious and ongoing one, and I don't think the minister

has answered it adequately. In his opening remarks the minister alluded

to addressing concerns about the role of women in post-secondary

education in this province; that is a serious and ongoing problem. I

have a friend who describes post-secondary education, and in particular

the universities, as the place of 80 percent: they are 80 percent male

— 80 percent of the budgets or salaries; 80 percent of those

individuals are tenured; and 80 percent of those individuals are over

40. Those are serious problems, and I don't see serious responses

coming from the Minister of Advanced Education.

Another

question that I don't see the minister addressing in terms of providing

leadership and vision is the role of the colleges. We see universities

limiting enrolment, and we've even seen colleges limiting enrolment in

the past. Should we be making greater use of our colleges, in terms of

providing university transfer? Should those colleges have closer ties

with the secondary schools in their communities? What is the role of

the private sector in post-secondary education research? What

post-secondary education services should be provided by the private

sector, and how can quality be assured for those services that are

already provided? I've raised that in question period with the minister

several times. Is our system of governance of colleges, universities

and institutes really appropriate in a free and democratic society,

when we see the order-in-council appointments that make up those boards?

Although

the questions of improved student financial aid and improved access

were very important to post-secondary education in this province, it

seems that those two were moved upon while others were not addressed —

or not in a serious enough way, in my view. In order to address them,

did the minister push to be included in the Royal Commission on

Education?

I've complimented the Minister of Education

(Hon. Mr. Brummet) on his very democratic role in choosing a process

that did have wide involvement and tremendous input from individuals,

communities and the stakeholder groups in education around the

province. That royal commission traveled the province, held public

hearings, received thousands of written submissions and hundreds of

oral submissions, and I think everybody agrees that all who were

interested had a chance to participate in that very important process.

think that this minister, in showing leadership and vision, would have

pushed to have post-secondary education included in that wide-ranging

public involvement process. That process produced a mandate statement,

and although it's not perfect, I think it's one that has a

comprehensive set of system-wide goals and that has built into the

process the potential for ongoing resolution of problems in the K-to-12

education system. I see that kind of democratic approach, vision and

risk-taking, really, on the part of government, in trusting the people

of the province to bring forward the kinds of principles, ideas and

plans that can be implemented by a government and produce progress for

education in this province....

Rather than showing the

vision and leadership that the Minister of Education showed in

risk-taking, working with all of those groups and being democratic, the

Minister of Advanced Education chose to pursue his two assigned tasks,

with some degree of access.... The minister will argue that the access

process had over 5,000 representations from over 800 groups and

individuals in 95 communities. From all that I can ascertain — I don't

know where the minister gets those numbers — the access process

compared to the royal commission process pales in comparison. Anybody

who follows education in this province has to conclude that the access

process by comparison was a closed process rather than an open one.

What

I am suggesting is that the minister has not shown the kind of

leadership, except in those two areas, that has moved advanced

education forward and that is going to prepare us for the next ten or

20 years; that he did not see the need for involvement in the royal

commission process, even though the representatives of the university

and college system — even one of the university presidents — urged that

post-secondary education be included in that process.

Rather

than an open, liberal-minded approach that would have matched the

promise of 1986, when the election was, at least to a large degree,

fought on the concept of open government.... I do not see that as being

followed through in this ministry. I see much more of a closed and

centralizing approach, an approach very clearly aimed at stifling

criticism and dissent.

When the minister was first assigned

the portfolio, he was asked by a Sun reporter if he saw part of the

role of university faculty to be critics of society. The minister's

response was revealing as to the approach he would take. He said: "I

don't know if we need any more critics of society. I say this

sincerely. I think the media does a pretty fair job of that." In my

view, that's not symptomatic of an apostle of free speech. It was from

the Sun of January 10, 1987. It wasn't taken out of the context of that

report. I hope it was a fair comment, that that is what the minister

suggested.

[ Page 8324 ]

few months later in this House, when debating with my colleague, now

the first member for Vancouver-Point Grey (Ms. Marzari), in a debate on

whether community college boards should be more representative of their

communities as is the case with school boards.... The situation that we

see in this province is with the minister making order-in-council

appointments. I think it has to be concluded that those boards, rather

than representing their communities, are there to represent the

political philosophy of the government of the day. In response to a

question from that member, the minister suggested: "I would be

disappointed if we saw the same sort of political positioning take

place that we see on school boards from time to time."

The

minister is saying that those areas that have democracy in place and

have local elections to elect local people to serve on school boards

and represent their communities, ensuring the best kind of education

for that community... The minister didn't want to see that for college

boards. I am surprised, because I understand that he was on the school

board in Courtenay and served his community there well. But he doesn't

see that same principle applying to college boards. Clearly the

minister likes it when members of college boards or boards of governors

are all of the same political persuasion and the decisions are made

behind closed doors, and doesn't like it when individuals may hold

different views than he and those concerns are out in the open. Clearly

the communities that comprise college catchment regions are not 100

percent Social Credit supporters. They are probably not even 50

percent. If the polls are correct, it's more like 30 percent.

MR. CHAIRMAN :

I would just remind the member about relevancy. It is somewhat

difficult, but we are dealing with the Ministry of Advanced Education,

as opposed to the Ministry of Education itself. I think perhaps the

comments that have been offered with the best of intentions by the

member over the last four or five minutes might not be considered

particularly relevant.

MR. JONES : Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. I appreciate that, and I will wind up those comments and

summarize by saying I think the estimates of this minister have been

geared towards a ministry that is interested in stifling dissent, that

is interested in centralizing power and authority in Victoria — an

approach that I think is totally inconsistent with what we saw 20 years

ago during the genesis of community colleges as educational

institutions that were there to represent the communities.

Now

that the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Brummet) has put the "u" back

in education, I am hoping the Minister of Advanced Education will put

the community back in community colleges.

[3:30]

Let me give you another illustration of what I see as a problem in

stifling dissent and centralizing power and authority, and it pertains

directly to the estimates of the Minister of Advanced Education and

Job

Training and his budget. The first budget from this ministry that I had

a look at was about two years ago. At that time there were some 26 line

items in the — at that time — half-a-billion dollar budget. There were

26 line items to communicate to the Legislature and the public in

British Columbia how that money was to be spent. We had 26 line items

which were not as informative as we'd like to see. What we've seen with

this minister is a reduction in the number of line items; in this

budget there are but 12 line items.

If we are here to

provide accountability, to provide scrutiny of the government through

the opposition for those they represent, to be a watchdog of government

and to make sure that the people's money is being well spent, we've

gone from a budget of some 26 line items to one of 12 line items.

The

minister and I have both dealt with school board budgets. We know that

at the school board level, where far fewer dollars are being spent,

there are good public access and good accountability in trying to

explain through the budget how those moneys are being spent. It seems

to me that in a budget that's gone from 26 line items to 12 line items,

the attempt is to hide how that money is being spent. If that's an

unfair characterization, I would ask the minister if he would be

willing to table a full budget for the Ministry of Advanced Education

and job Training which fully explains the expenditures and the revenues

that the ministry receives. Very clearly, if the intent is not to hide,

then the minister, I hope, will be willing to table such a budget so

that the opposition and the Legislature can have a full and accurate

accounting of the money, rather than having $1 billion in 12 line items.

Perhaps

I'll stop there. I've gone on at length, and I'm sure the minister has

a number of responses to some of the — what I guess has to be

characterized as — charges that I have made.

HON. S. HAGEN :

I appreciate the comments made by the member for Burnaby North; I

wouldn't want to insinuate that he has had to dig a great deal to find

something to complain about. Before I start answering — and I'm not

sure that I can answer all the items on the long list, but I will do my

best — I would like to introduce to the House Mr. Gary Mullins, Deputy

Minister of Advanced Education and Job Training.

certainly want to agree wholeheartedly with the opening comments of the

member for Burnaby North: that is, his comments about the staff and

administration in the college, university and institute system — as a

matter of fact, in all of the areas that I'm responsible for. I want to

say yes, the Social Credit government was very influential and did

start the community college system in this province that has grown to

be the best in this country. Yes, the government and previous ministers

can take a great deal of credit for that, but at the same time, a great

deal of the credit must go to the hard-working staff and administration

in all the institutions who deal day to day with the students. After

all, the students

[ Page 8325 ]

are the reason that we're all stakeholders in this system.

[Mr. Rabbitt in the chair.]

The

member for Burnaby North made some comments on retention and completion

rates and quality of education, and insinuated that somehow the quality

of education in the system is directly involved with the number of

dollars being poured into the system. This is one area that I would

disagree with the member on. Yes, the system requires money to make it

work, but I don't think you improve the system simply by pouring money

into it.

With regard to the quality of the system, this was

one of the key components and prerequisites that the access committee

was asked to look at in determining how we could increase participation

rates and increase opportunities to people who live outside the lower

mainland and Vancouver Island in this province, who also have a right

to good quality education and access to the post-secondary system.

Let's

talk a bit about that process, because the member for Burnaby North did

make some comments about why didn't I go with a royal commission or go

with the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Brummet) in his royal

commission. Let me say at the outset that I personally think the

Minister of Education has done a great job in his portfolio,

particularly in how he has carried out the results of the Royal

Commission on Education. I think all of us would agree — particularly,

I guess, even the opposition has to agree — with that, seeing as both

of the acts that came out of that royal commission were passed last

week.

I might remind the member that it was not a closed

process that we undertook with access. In fact, If it had been a closed

process, we would not have received 5,000 to 6,000 submissions from all

over the province, and the committee would not have visited over 90

communities and would not have received submissions from over 800

groups, from all of the stakeholders in the post-secondary system. Not

only that, after the access report was printed, that same committee

then went back to the public, back to visit the communities in the

province of British Columbia to get public feedback on the access

committee report.

So I must disagree with the member for

Burnaby North, who has accused me somewhat of having a closed look at

the post-secondary system. As a matter of fact, one of my critics who

writes in one of the lower mainland tabloids made that same criticism

of me, and when I spoke to him and told him how much public input there

had been, he was quite shocked. He had no idea that there had been so

much public input and agreed with me that the process was in fact just

as effective as a royal commission on education.

The member

for Burnaby North talked about the lack of cooperation between the

universities and colleges and about the competition in the system. Yes,

there is competition in the system, and I don't think anybody should be

afraid of competition in the system. But let me remind the member for

Burnaby North that in fact the cooperation is there as well. The three

universities now sit down together and agree on how the university

portion of the budget is to be split up. They never used to do that

before, but they do that now. The cooperation that exists between the

universities and colleges: does the member for Burnaby North think for

one minute that a university would sign a 10-year agreement with the

colleges in the Cariboo or the Okanagan to deal with the third and

fourth-year programs and university degrees if there wasn't cooperation

and a willingness to sit down and discuss?

He talks about

centres of excellence versus all-around quality. Yes, I know that this

is an academic argument that people can sit for a long time and talk

about. I feel that we have centres of excellence in the province, that

they are network centres of excellence. There may be two or three

professors at one university and two or three at the other two who then

network together to become a centre of excellence. I don't think

centres of excellence require brick-and mortar buildings to operate.

When

the member talked about a sort of autocratic system, I think he has

forgotten the number of committees that this minister has struck to

deal with particular issues. The first one was the committee struck to

deal with student financial assistance, and represented on this

committee were people from all aspects of the system, including, I

might add, the Canadian Federation of Students, faculty members, people

who deal on a daily basis with student financial assistance in the

institutions, people from the business community and people from all

aspects of the community. Another major committee that was struck was

the access committee, which again represented all areas of the system.

The

implementation planning group dealt with the issue of the

degree-granting facility in the north. The native education advisory

committee was formed to advise the minister on issues involving native

education; the reduction in funding from the federal government; how we

can best address the needs of the native students. And the literacy

committee is advising the minister on how to deal with the literacy

question.

Let me remind the member for Burnaby North, even

though he made several complaints about the tough times that the system

went through under restraint, that yes, there were some tough times,

but the system came through it with flying colours. Certainly one

example of coming through with flying colours is that British Columbia

has the lowest illiteracy rate in the country. British Columbia

students continue to win prize after prize — hardly an example of a

system that is inadequate.

Another committee that I have

struck, which is reporting to me on a regular basis, is the committee

involving Simon Fraser University and the three colleges in the Fraser

Valley — Douglas, Kwantlen and Fraser Valley — to assess the population

growth in the Fraser Valley and how the post-secondary

[ Page 8326 ]

needs of that population growth can best be addressed.

Again,

I would have to disagree with my hon. friend the member for Burnaby

North, who says that I am running a closed system, or not receiving

public input.

With regard to the quality of the system,

again let me remind the member for Burnaby North that all three of our

universities are in the top ten in Canada for receiving federal

research dollars. Federal research dollars do not go to university

buildings or are not given on the size of the university; they are

given on the quality of the people at those institutions. Again, the

fact that we are in the top ten with all three of our universities is a

good indication to me that the system is a strong system, that we have

the best people in that system, and I can tell you that it is the

intention of this government to maintain that and to maintain that

leadership in this country.

With regard to the argument

about 26 line items versus 12 line items, my only comment is that the

budget has been tabled, the blue book is printed, and you will have to

go your best lick.

[3:45]

MR. JONES :

In response to the minister, I did raise a number of concerns that I

think were ongoing and long range concerns, such as cooperation between

the institutions, such as a clear defining of roles and functions of

the colleges, the universities and the institutes. I think they were

pointing out very clearly that there was not the kind of long-range

planning, there was not the kind of leadership, there was not the kind

of focus that I think would assist. Except in those two areas of access

and student financial aim there were shortcomings.

Those

were serious questions that I think need some thought. They are not

questions the minister can answer glibly off the top of his head, or

even establish small task forces and committees to look at various

parts of the system. It seems to me that it needs the kind of focus in

education that the Sullivan royal commission brought to that process. I

very strongly complimented the minister for his process and his role in

that during his estimates and during the bills.

The

reference of the government of the day having to be a Social Credit

government to bring about community colleges in the days when there was

community in community colleges I think is a little misleading. It was

the communities themselves, and it was largely as a result of the

report done by the president of UBC of the day, John Barfoot Macdonald,

that caused those needs to be addressed by a community college system

being established in this province. Very clearly the government was

brought kicking and screaming to bring about the establishment of those

colleges that we all appreciate in this province, and it's the

direction of those colleges that I think is the question of the day. I

don't think it's appropriate for government of any particular stripe to

take credit for all the good work that the communities did in setting

up that important system of education in this province.

Where

I complimented the minister very strongly in my opening remarks, I was

passing on to him the perception in the field of him being a highly

respected Minister of Advanced Education. At the same time, when I was

talking about the closed nature of the system, in particular the closed

nature of the access process, I was again passing on perceptions. In

politics we live and die by perceptions, and that is the perception

that is out there, and I substantiate that perception myself.

From

having read the regional access reports and had a look at their

process, in region 1, Vancouver Island — the minister's own region —

there were no public meetings. That regional access committee received

23 letters from institutions and other personal letters. In region 3,

the Okanagan, there were four public meetings with 40 formal and

informal briefs. In region 4, the Kootenays, there were ten public

meetings; the attendance was poor at those meetings, and there were 110

questionnaires. In region 5, the Cariboo, there was a small number of

public meetings, which were poorly attended, and there was a poor

response to the letters. In region 6, North Coast, there were no public

forums, and there were about a dozen replies to a letter sent out. In

region 7, Nechako, there were no public forums. In region 8, Peace

River, there were no public forums and very little public input.

terms of the access report, very clearly the perception out there,

particularly as it relates to the regional process that took

part in

the access to post-secondary education in this province and the

minister's initiatives.... In the regions it was not felt.

The

Minister of Health (Hon. Mr. Dueck) has a task force on seniors that I

think is getting a very good response. The meeting I attended was very

well received, very well attended and very professionally handled. I

think the minister is to be commended for that — also the Minister of

Education (Hon. Mr. Brummet) in the Sullivan royal commission.

However,

in the access report I sense a top-down approach that has not listened

to the people in the regions. In four or five of the eight regions

there were no meetings, and the majority of those that were held were

poorly attended. I don't feel the minister can suggest at this time

that there was a strong public response to the question of access.

Although it is an important area, I think it would have been better

handled had it gone through the royal commission or had been given the

kind of focus and attention received by the Minister of Health's

"Toward a Better Age" or the Minister of Education's royal commission.

was pointing out in my opening remarks that the minister did show good

initiative in response to the directions given by the Premier in

student financial aid. I think the committee that was set up was a good

one and did a lot of good work in the area of access. I think the

product there is a worthwhile one, although very slow in coming. So the

minister did show initiative in those two areas, but in a number of the

[ Page 8327 ]

other long-range directions for post-secondary education in this province, I think it has been severely lacking.

However,

I reiterate why I don't think I'm struggling or searching. This is my

first time through the estimates, and I wanted to go back right to the

beginning of this minister's tenure as Minister of Advanced Education

and have a look at the things he did, the approach he brought and the

focus to his ministry.

I find a theme of centralizing, of

control and of focus in the province and not one that reaches out to

the people of the province. One of the first initiatives this minister

took to underline that concept is that he rescinded the appointments of

all the current community college board members, and secondly, he fired

the Universities Council.

I understand that with the

community college boards, it was to change their term of office and to

institute probationary appointments and specific terms. I suggest that

process gave the minister an opportunity for greater control over who

those appointments would be, and should there be an individual the

minister disagrees with, it would be easier to get rid of that board

member. So I'm again suggesting a centralist approach, and I'm saying

that there is political interference in this process, and with these

term appointments it's easier than ever.

With respect to

the Universities Council, we all recognize that the Universities

Council — as with all bodies: the government, the opposition, the

institutions in post-secondary — was not a perfect body. But I think it

was recognized that it did perform an important function that's carried

out in most provinces in Canada and most states in the United States: a

consultation process, an opportunity for cooperation and for

depoliticizing the process of post-secondary education. The minister

states that there are vehicles in place to allow for the kind of

cooperation that's so necessary in post-secondary education, yet I was

quite shocked to see in the March 29 edition of UBC Reports

an indication of this province really moving towards a two-tiered

system of universities. In that issue, UBC indicated that funding would

be provided for 81 percent of the new graduate spaces under the access

report. It seems to me that if the minister is making those kinds of

decisions, I think to the disadvantage of the other two universities in

the province, then those decisions are being made in a vacuum. I can't

say that they're thoughtless, but they're certainly not well thought

out in the open, consultative atmosphere that those kinds of serious,

important decisions should be made in.

To have that amount

of graduate space allocated to one of the universities, while leaving

the remaining 19 percent of funding for new graduate spaces to be

fought for by the other two universities, very clearly indicates to me

that we are embarking on a two tiered system of university education in

this province. UBC will be the centre of excellence that Dr. Strangway

so often talks about; the other two universities will be left for

certain kinds of training but will not be the major research centres

that can attract the kind of funds that the minister alluded to a few

minutes ago. I'm suggesting that the absence of bodies like the

Universities Council, and leaving things up to the minister and the

Ministry of Advanced Education, can result in decisions that are not in

the best interests of British Columbia — or at least they're not

explained in such a way that we can accept those decisions.

did see the changing of appointments of community college board

members; we did see the firing of the Universities Council. I think we

see this as symptomatic of the centralist approach of this minister. He

loves making appointments; he loves setting up these committees. To

replace the Universities Council he has set up an advisory board. I

don't know if it's representative of the community or the academic

community, or whether it's representative of anything at all. I've

heard nothing from it, and so I'll leave the minister with some

questions about that advisory body. How is it going? What work has this

body done? What sort of advice on serious questions facing

post-secondary education or universities have they provided to the

minister? Have they met lately? Who's on the board now? Are there any

practising academics on the board? If not, how do you expect complex

decisions on academic questions to be dealt with by such a body?

HON. S. HAGEN :

I had to stifle a chuckle when I was listening to the member for

Burnaby North and his comments about the closed process and what

happened with access. I would challenge him to go into Kamloops,

Kelowna, Nanaimo or Prince George and make those comments. I suggest

that he check with his insurance man before he does that, though.

With

regard to long-range planning, I have to ask my critic what he would

see as more important as a long-range issue than university degrees

made available in twice the number of places around the province, We

now have a process in place that will allow people who live in the

Okanagan, the Cariboo and central Vancouver Island to obtain quality

university degrees from existing universities. I would challenge him to

speak to the people that I've spoken to, who have come up to me and

have thanked the government for making those changes so that they can

now have access to quality degrees without having to pack up and move

to the lower mainland.

He mentioned that I fired the

Universities Council. That's right. I disbanded the Universities

Council, which had a budget of $650,000 a year, and of which all the

university presidents asked me what the purpose was. They saw no

purpose in it; it was not serving any purpose.

[4:00]

Yes, we changed the terms of the college board members, because they

were appointed two and a half years ago for an unspecified period of

time. They were doing a good job, but there were members who had been

on there for a long time. There was no opting out. We've now changed

that to a term of three years, with a renewable term of three years,

and it's operating extremely well. Of course, a lot of

[ Page 8328 ]

the credit for the good system goes to the college board members as well.

The

charge of political interference I find amusing to say the least. The

people who serve on those boards, I can tell you, serve because they're

very interested in the post-secondary system. They are community-minded

citizens who are prepared to give of their time, to spend many hours

debating many issues for the good of the students in those institutions.

With

regard to the member's research from the UBC paper, I find that

somewhat incredible, and possibly he should have phoned me to check out

the facts. The fact is that the opposition is in error — again. On the

funding for those grad students, 81 percent is not going to UBC. That

article — I haven't seen it — is in error. The breakdown of the grad

students for this year is 65 percent going to UBC, 20 percent to SFU

and 15 to UVic. It's the historic breakdown of funding. We are having

consultations now with the three university presidents with regard to

future breakdowns, but no decision has been made.

MR. JONES :

I fully accept the minister's breakdown on percentages as they exist

today, but suggest that on March 29 they were different, as reported in

UBC Reports .

The

minister implied, with respect to the University Advisory Council

replacing the Universities Council, that there was an annual saving of

some $650,000. 1 would suggest that a good deal of that expenditure is

now expended by the ministry itself, so there is nowhere near that

degree of saving. I would also suggest to the minister that if he

thinks there was unanimous support for the abolition of the

Universities Council by the presidents of the universities in this

province, he's sadly mistaken on that as well.

The minister asked what was more important than access. I've certainly

recognized its importance. It's widely recognized. I'd like to read

a quote to the minister: "...the province should aim at improving our participation

rate from the present level of the worst in Canada to at least the national

average, over five years...and remove barriers for the participation of rural

students seeking post-secondary education by developing a comprehensive strategy

of decentralization...." That statement was not made by the minister, nor by my

predecessor, the first member for Vancouver-Point Grey (Ms. Marzari), nor by

myself

That was a statement made by Lorne Nicolson, the former member for Nelson-Creston, and he made that statement on March 18, 1985.

I've

recognized the importance of that issue, and I'm pleased that the

government and the ministry recognize the importance of that issue. Had

the government and the ministry recognized the importance of that issue

on March 18, 1985, we would pretty well be at the national average now.

Instead, we're still talking about it and struggling to set up the

access proposals.

I guess the moral of the story here for

the minister is that the minister should pay more attention to the

opposition. Clearly Lorne Nicolson was right in 1985, and the minister

is right today. Had the minister of the day listened to Lorne Nicolson

in 1985, we'd have the problem solved. We could be dealing with these

other important questions that I suggest the minister has neglected

while he was focusing on student financial aid and access.

AN HON. MEMBER : Where's Lorne now?

MR. JONES : He's playing golf up in Nelson.

The

minister answered a number of questions that I asked, and I appreciate

that. However, when it came to the replacement body for the

Universities Council, the minister's University Advisory Council, I'm

not sure whether I heard the answers to those questions or not. Let me

just repeat some of those questions.

This body has been set

up. It did replace the Universities Council. I've not really heard the

workings or the makeup. I knew who was on the original board, but I

don't know who's there now. I know that they are there to replace the

Universities Council and should be providing information to the

minister. I think that body has potential, as the Universities Council

had potential. I think for it to fulfil its potential it needs

practising academics on it, so I am wondering if there are any

practising academics on it, and if not, why not?

HON. S. HAGEN :

I have just sent out for a list of the people currently serving on that

committee, but I can tell the member opposite that while there are no

practising academics on it, there are three people from each of the

universities serving on the committee; also one person representing the

colleges, I think one person representing BCIT and one representing

Open Learning. I will be pleased to provide the names of the

individuals as soon as they arrive.

MR. R. FRASER : I

enter this debate with great delight. The first thing I want to say to

that member over there is, if you are going to quote me, quote me

right. You misquote me. Don't do that anymore. Look it up and find out

what was actually said.

I just can't believe this talk

about elected boards everywhere. No, no, no. We don't need another

level of government. I can see that he'd probably give them taxing

authority. Good heavens no! I think appointments will be just fine,

thank you very much. They have worked for a long time. They involve

members of the community with a determined and decided interest in

education, which is a good idea. Let's pick people who can make a nice,

positive contribution without getting into the taxing role, which we

don't have to do.

In talking to this minister down here

about student aid.... I was involved in a little of that at one point,

and he has been able to manage marvellous things for student aid. We

have money out there now that the students can hardly even apply for,

it's such a huge fund. The economy has changed quite a bit

[ Page 8329 ]

since

the old days of the little recession we had in '81-84. The government

has responded to our newfound state of economic health and given

students a great and wonderful opportunity to go to school, and I

commend the government for that. I am proud of it and proud to be part

of it.

MR. MOWAT : What about the leadership that made the change?

MR. R. FRASER :

That's right. The leadership that made a change is this government, Mr.

Member from Little Mountain; thank you very much. It was this

government that got the colleges going. That party over there knew it

was so good they kept it up when they had their short period in office.

If they'd done more of the things that we had been doing, they might

still be there. But they can't do it, because they are wrong-headed.

The

member talks about two tiers of university. Why not three? Why not

four? Do they all have to be identical? Do they all have to be

mechanical? Is there no way we could inspire those people over there to

think big just one time? It seems to be impossible. The University of

British Columbia came along the other day and said: "We want to raise

our education centres even higher than they are now. We just heard from

the government that all universities here in B.C. are in the top ten,

and we want to go even higher." The member worries about a two-tier

system. I think we should push our students academically as hard as we

can push them, give them as much material as we can give them, make

them work harder. Why not? Upscale the whole system. We've got three

universities; surely we can concentrate on one being a little higher

than the other two. I see no harm in that.

Access for

students through all the colleges out there. What a wonderful

opportunity, to get a university degree at home. I haven't heard one

word from that other side over there about the distance education. I

can assure you that it was a very proud day for me to represent this

government when the first person ever received a degree in distance

education — from the minister's riding, as it turns out. What a day

that was. We both met her one day. Right at home, using modern

technology.

The NDP can't seem to get a grip on anything

but bricks and mortar. Thinking is where we want it. Let's use some

high-tech stuff. Let's use more of that distance education. Why not?

agree with the government. If the colleges occasionally have a little

competition between themselves, why not? Doesn't it excite their

imaginations? Doesn't it make them strive a little harder and say:

"Come to our school because of this"?

"Oh no, we can't have it, " says the opposition. "We've

got to trudge along in a little row." No way; let them compete. Let them

struggle. It will be good for the students, and that's what we want. Now

the universities are going out fund-raising. They've done such a good sales

job, they are out fund-raising and getting terrific support from the community.

What a good idea that is.

Interjection.

MR. R. FRASER :

You bet. Fully paid for. Biggest campaigns in history, well organized —

we are so fortunate in this province to have the system we've got. I

must say, I can't envy the member opposite for his job as critic,

because there is not much to criticize. We can give to the students of

British Columbia virtually everything they want in terms of education,

from K to 12 and onward. We have a fabulous system in this province,

done by the Social Credit Party of British Columbia, in office for so

long because we do things so well. Keep it up, Mr. Minister.

MR. PERRY :

I couldn't resist. As I listened to the hon. member, it took me back to

my halcyon days when I listened to chants from the massed red-coated

hordes chanting: "We are, we are, we are the engineers." I'll leave the

next line for the hon. member to repeat; I can't remember how the song

goes after that first line. But I thought, listening to the hon.

member, that he must have been living back in his heyday from those

glory days when he attended UBC back in the nineteenth century. I guess

things have changed a little since those glory days.

MR. R. FRASER : A little insult there. Withdraw! Resign!

MR. PERRY :

I'll withdraw the remark if it offends the member. It wasn't the

nineteenth century. It certainly wasn't the eighteenth century, the age

of enlightenment; it might have been the sixteenth or fifteenth century.

MR. R. FRASER : You've got to be funnier than that.

MR. PERRY :

I'm not, as the Attorney-General (Hon. S.D. Smith) frequently says,

perfect, but I'll think hard about a funnier line and try to come up

with one before I finish.

I felt that it was time to bring

things back to reality a bit and talk about the state of the

universities as they are. I wanted to tell the House about the

conditions in the university where I work — UBC — and ask the minister

to comment on some problems that I've witnessed firsthand in the last

couple of years in that university.

[4:15]

Let

me begin on a pretty serious note. Tragically, about two weeks ago, Dr.

Don Hill, the chief pediatrician at the B.C. Children's Hospital, was

killed in a sailing accident. Dr. Hill was also chairman of the

University of B.C. academic department of pediatrics. I want to tell

the House some things that he told me a few months before his death,

things that I had hoped to discuss privately with Dr. Hill and the

minister and perhaps the Minister of Health, but time did not permit

before his untimely death. In recognition of Dr. Hill, I would like to

record some of them officially now so that as part of his memorial, I

hope, some of his goals will be realized.

[ Page 8330 ]

visited the B.C. Children's Hospital shortly after my election and was

given a brief tour of some of the hospital facilities by Dr. Hill. I

sat with him for an hour and a half discussing some of the funding

problems that the academic department faced. I realize that these are

not directly within the minister's control and that some of them, in

various ways, relate to Ministry of Health programs, but I'd like to

raise them for his consideration and ultimately learn his thinking on

these issues.

Dr. Hill pointed out to me some inadequacies

in the physical plant in the academic parts of the Children's Hospital:

for example, the fact that it is the only children's hospital in the

country and perhaps in North America — maybe the only one in the world,

at least in the modern, technologically advanced parts of the world —

which doesn't have an auditorium for teaching. There is no room within

that hospital where the pediatric staff and their students, nurses,

allied health professionals, fellows and residents can meet. The small

teaching-rooms are physically not large enough to accommodate the

department for their weekly conferences. Therefore they have to meet in

the adjoining hospital a considerable distance away and put the sickest

children at risk, because those who look after them have to be five to

ten minutes removed from where they can help the children. And even

those facilities are not very adequate.

Let me just remind

you how this relates to the Advanced Education ministry rather than

Health. I am talking largely about people in postgraduate training or

even medical students in training. When these young physicians work at

night in the intensive neonatal nurseries, there is no place for them

to sleep, except by converting the secretaries' offices. In the

daytime, the secretaries put their books onto the bed where the doctors

sleep, and at nighttime the doctors have to thread their way into these

windowless rooms between the desks and clear the paperwork off the bed

so that they can crawl into it for their one or two hours of sleep per

night. So much for the physical aspects.

Let me explain

part of the problems that Dr. Hill spoke of in describing the

inadequacy of academic funding. He described to me his meeting with

officials from government ministries — I no longer recall whether it

was the Ministry of Health or Advanced Education officials as well —

seeking funding for junior faculty members to work in research and in

academic pediatrics in the areas of rheumatology, infectious disease

and special neonatal care, areas which by their very nature are not

highly remunerative. He showed me some of the figures he had presented

to government officials, and I questioned him on them in some detail.

For example, he showed me a table showing that the workload for the

infectious disease consulting service had increased from perhaps 300

patient-visits to 500 over the last several years.

[Mr. Rogers in the chair.]

1 could see why ministry officials might not understand that that

was a significant workload for a physician in infectious disease; that

one case might require an entire day's work for one doctor or even for

a team of three doctors, for example. That was one of the reasons I had

hoped to arrange a joint meeting with Dr. Hill and some of the

ministers involved. But the point I'm trying to make is that ultimately

what Dr. Hill's request came down to was $450,000 for three new

faculty. Some of that was for their salaries; some was for support.

Even if he were to obtain it, he pointed out that there was no office

he could offer them. We're not talking about grand and glorious offices

like the minister's here in these buildings; we're talking about a

small cubicle to work in, some place where you can put your medical

books, write up your charts and do your research work, or write up your

research work. For this paltry $450,000 a year, not only were health

services not being delivered but the potential development of an

academic department serving the largest pediatric population of any

children's hospital in North America was being significantly hamstrung.

The reason I raise that, Mr.

Minister, is not only that, tragically, Dr. Hill cannot raise those

issues himself any longer, it is because they are symbolic of other

problems within the universities. Let me give you a few more examples

from areas that are very familiar to me because of my professional

background — not because they are the only important ones, but simply

because I'm more familiar with them, and I can describe them in detail.

the University of British Columbia faculty of medicine, most of the

young, ambitious faculty members who attempt to fulfil at least part of

points 2 and 3 of the British Columbia science and technology policy

announced by the minister on August 16, 1988, narrow-minded as that

policy may be — to "encourage the use of science and technology to

optimize the quality of life for British Columbians"; or to "recognize

the importance of basic research" — generally have to come to the

universities on so-called "soft money." That means money from grants,

foundations or so-called scholarships from the B.C. Health Care

Research Foundation, the Medical Research Council of Canada or similar

non-government funding bodies.

These so-called scholarships

must not be confused with the scholarships given to students in

universities to finance their basic education. They are financing for

research at the highest level by fully qualified people, who may have

spent up to 15 or 20 years in post-high-school education before they

receive a scholarship. The amounts of money are modest; they're not

large rewards compared to other rewards in society. They might range in

the order of $40,000, for example, for a specialist physician with a

PhD. Yet they're soft; they can be taken away virtually without notice.

their expiry, the universities, which formerly had a commitment to the

granting bodies to assume the salaries of these young faculty members,

now no longer provide funding. A young medical scientist,

[ Page 8331 ]

for

example, might achieve a brilliant record in one of our universities

such as the University of British Columbia, spend five years working

intensely to establish that record and find at the end of that time

that there's no funding to support him or her. Therefore they'll either

return to the private practice of medicine, charging the taxpayer a far

larger sum than he or she would cost the taxpayer if they remained in

academic medicine, while not necessarily providing any greater service;

or they'll leave for another jurisdiction which values their services

more highly.

In my view, Mr. Minister, this situation has

become so chronic that some of the administrators in the system no

longer resist or fight against it. One of Dr. Hill's great attributes

was that he was always someone who lived life to the fullest and fought

very vigorously for things that he knew were right. I think we've

accepted a situation which is appalling and pathetic. I would like to

ask the minister where he stands on the development of science within

our universities, and specifically on funding for young faculty members

where the universities now have no money to replace them.

could give you more and more examples from my own department, where

there has been no faculty member replaced for five or ten years — at

least five years — and where there's no money to do that, even though

older members are retiring. The department is one which, according to

the Ministry of Health policy, would have an extremely important role

in reducing health care costs in the future through education on

drug-prescribing habits, and yet that one, for example, has no funds to

recruit new members. Where do you stand on this, Mr. Minister?

HON. S. HAGEN :

I'm really sorry that the second member for Vancouver-Point Grey didn't

raise these questions where they would more appropriately be raised,

and that's with the budget of the Minister of Health (Hon. Mr. Dueck).

That's where the funding comes for those programs, even to the extent

of rental accommodations.

With regard to providing research

moneys, I'm sure the member is well aware that the research dollars for

universities come out of the federal government. I've been able to make

some changes to some areas, one being the health research foundation,

where we have more than doubled the amount of money that has gone into

health research. We were able to convince the Ministry of Finance to

allow them to flow through the $3 million a year that comes from the

Patent Act, which is going into health research.

I'm sure

you're aware also that the $380 million a year that goes into funding

the university system in this province, which is a substantial amount

of money, goes to the universities on an unallocated basis. The

universities determine the priorities and allocate those moneys,

whether it be faculty increases or whatever. UBC's portion of that

allocation I think is somewhere around $220 million a year. I should

note also that the total I've been able to reallocate into health care

research this last year is $8.9 million, including the Patent Act

moneys.

If the second member for Vancouver-Point Grey has

specific points he wants to make, I'm sure he's aware that he can make

those points to the president of the university.

MR. PERRY :

Mr. Minister, it's not up to politicians — either you or me — to

intervene in the administration of universities at that level. It would

be seen as gross interference. My role in that regard ended when I was

elected. Let it not be construed that the examples I've given represent

interference; I'll give you some examples from other departments simply

to make the point.

[4:30]

I think the issue is that you can argue the budget increase in

different ways. The document before me shows three different scenarios

for calculating the recent increase in university budgets, according to

which the real increase this year could vary anywhere from 6.85 percent

to 12.12 percent. The real issue, though, is: are we adequately funding

universities to keep up to the goals that the government so frequently

enunciates in its programs? I think you have to look at some of the

details to know this question; then you have to make a decision, I

suppose, whether or not as a minister you have confidence in the

university boards of governors or administrators to have allocated the

funds responsibly.

I think it's important for you to know

some of the details, and that's one of the reasons I'm saying them. I

think it's important for the public to understand them, which is the

reason I say them here in the Legislature. Usually when the

universities say this, it's seen as self-serving, and it's not widely

reported.

Consider, for example, special education in the

faculty of education at UBC — and again I give you UBC examples purely

because I'm more familiar with them from my past experience. The member

for Burnaby North (Mr. Jones) would, I'm sure, be much more familiar

than I with the provincial situation and has or will deal with other

examples as necessary. At UBC, Professor Poutt in the faculty of

education retired after many years of service and has not been

replaced. The diploma program in mental retardation has been suspended

as a consequence. During 1989 and '90, any student who wishes to

specialize in mental retardation has to go to the province of Alberta.

If that is progress or a healthy university system in British

Columbia....

HON. S. HAGEN : They chose the priorities.

MR. PERRY :

I'm simply making the examples for the reasons I stated before, hoping

that the minister and the government will recognize that some of the

choices forced upon the university relate to chronic short funding. A

simple 10 percent — if that is the true figure — increase in one year

does not remedy so many years of underfunding.

The French department at UBC — French is an area in which there is an intense interest by students

[ Page 8332 ]

because

of federal government hiring policies and the bilingual nature of the

country — advertised in the spring of 1989 for three tenure-track

positions. One of these was withdrawn from the department for reasons

of cutback, even though three good candidates had been found. Only two

people were hired. On a net basis, the department has suffered

attrition regularly, even though it services more and more students

every year.

Let me give you a couple of other mundane

examples but ones which bring home the point. I have lectured recently

in a geography building at UBC where the curtains are in tatters and

you can't darken the room to project slides. In a department which

depends tremendously on audiovisual aids in its teaching, you can't

darken the room because the curtains are in tatters. I said that while

campaigning for election, and the former academic planner at UBC, Dr.

Robbie Clark, telephoned me to challenge me on that. He said: "You're

exaggerating." He said he made notes at one of my speeches and he

wanted to raise five or seven points which he thought were wrong. I

pointed out to him: "You know, Dr. Clark, from the heyday of the

universities back in the sixties and seventies, things really have

deteriorated. If you don't believe me, go to that large room in the

northwest corner of the geography building on the second floor and

you'll find those curtains in tatters."

Let me give you

another example. The department of anthropology and sociology at the

University of B.C. has had a world reputation in the postwar period as

one of the greatest anthropology and sociology departments in the

world. It benefited from a number of great American scholars who were

no longer welcome in their country after World War II We got off with a

leap and a bound ahead of the rest of the world. Now that department

has been reduced to the point that its entire budget for special

seminars by visiting academics is $500 per year. Imagine that, Mr.

Minister. What could you do with $500 per year for an academic budget

for special seminars? Could you bring one visiting academic from Comox

down to UBC for that, or maybe from Calgary or Seattle, for an entire

year? In one of the most important departments in the arts faculty in a

university, it's pathetic.

I think you should just be aware

of these things, because they're not widely mooted in the press. When

faculty members raise them, they are often accused of carping or

exaggerating. Those are the facts. I know it, because I attempted to

get that department to co-sponsor a seminar that I was involved with,

and the department head's response was: "It would be wonderful, but we

don't have any money to bring in visiting speakers." How can you run a

proper university without some cross-fertilization of ideas? Dare I

mention the word in this assembly in the absence of the first member

for Vancouver South (Mr. R. Fraser): how can you have intellectual

intercourse when you've got no money to fund it?

This is in

a province where we see our government.... Every night I see the

smiling face of the minister opposite, a very friendly, handsome face

smiling at me — beaming, in fact — as he prepares for the next election

and I wonder to myself, how many thousands of dollars went into that

advertisement to tell me what a wonderful job is being done for this

province? How many thousands of dollars have gone Into all the other

advertisements we see? I see the Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr. Vant)

looking a little bit more sour now than he does in the advertisements.

He looks genuinely friendly. Now it's coming out; I can begin to see

the smile spreading over his face as he thinks of the compliments he

must have had about those advertisements. But they're costly; oh,

they're costly! We're talking big money there, not $500 a year for an

important academic department in the university. I think the minister

should be ashamed of that. I think that's something where the public

expects better leadership in this province.

Let me just

raise a couple of other issues quite briefly. I think my colleague has

already addressed the issue of the student fee increases at

universities. If not, then I'll simply take the chance to state the

case for the students. Here I would like to recognize the minister for

having spoken out on behalf of the students when the University of

British Columbia raised its fees so precipitously. I am prepared to

give credit where credit is due, and the minister, although he did not

provide the university the means to avoid a steep fee increase, did

criticize them when they implemented it. I think that the second part

of his action, at least, was sound.

This really is posing a

barrier to some students; maybe not to the more well-heeled students

whose parents live in my riding, or at least some of whose parents live

in my riding, but there are significant numbers of students who must go

deeply into debt to finance their education. Another 10 percent on a

very high fee does impose a significant burden for them, and I think

symbolically it has also had the effect of discouraging students from

pursuing higher education just at a time when what we desperately need

in this province are the best educated students we can possibly find.

Paradoxically,

I think an even more serious problem for them is one they are just

beginning to think about: their housing problem. I had a call recently

from students in Vancouver concerned about student housing problems at

the university. The main reason is that rental rates are going up so

precipitously in the city of Vancouver, and secondary suites are being

closed down through the demolition of houses with the older secondary

suites, where perhaps the minister or his friends may have lived if

they studied at the University of B.C.

Many of us in this

assembly had friends who lived in those so-called illegal suites. Those

are being lost, and the city is attempting to close down some of them.

At the same time, no significant amount of student housing has been

built on the campus for years. There have been modest developments —

but really very modest.

Now we see the university developing so-called empty-nesters' housing for the wealthiest people in

[ Page 8333 ]

the

city to live on the endowment lands in an area that I thought the

government had included in the new Pacific Spirit Park. But we don't

see any significant plans for new student housing. Every time I fly

back and forth from Victoria to Vancouver to my riding, I fly very

close to or over those enormous parking lots at the University of B.C.

Some of the most valuable land in the province is committed night and

day — 24 hours a day and 365 days a year — to asphalt and the private

automobile.

I would like to ask the minister if he — or the

government — has any vision to provide new housing for students or

faculty, whom it is difficult to attract to Vancouver now because of

the absurd housing prices. On those parking lots, perhaps we could

extend the vision not so far as to remove the asphalt, plant some trees

again and restore it somewhat toward the natural environment that was

there before, but to use that land for a higher purpose than simply the

private automobile.

The logic is compelling, in my view.

More people who spend their days at UBC could live on or near the

campus and could reduce the transportation needs of the lower mainland,

reduce the air pollution In the lower mainland and reduce our

provincial expenses in building that transportation infrastructure. To

use that wonderful phrase from the Minister of Transportation and

Highways, they might even have the freedom to move — perhaps on foot,

on bicycle or swimming through the other parking lots in the winter to