2002 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 37th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 2002

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 6, Number 3

CONTENTS

Routine

Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Securities Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 29)

Hon. R. Thorpe

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

PathNet lab results system

P. Sahota

Northern British Columbians role in Battle of Vimy Ridge

B. Belsey

Kiwanis House

S. Orr

Oral Questions

Performance of Attorney General

J. MacPhail

Hon. G. Campbell

Powers of municipal governments

J. Kwan

Hon. T. Nebbeling

Hon. G. Campbell

U.S. softwood lumber negotiations

B. Penner

Hon. G. Campbell

Autism services

S. Brice

Hon. L. Reid

Global warming

J. Kwan

Hon. G. Campbell

Water pollution and protection

R. Lee

Hon. J. Murray

Petitions

S. Orr

Committee of the Whole House

Sustainable Resource Management Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 22)

J. MacPhail

Hon. S. Hagen

Tabling Documents

Hon. S. Hagen

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Sustainable Resource Management Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 22)

Committee of the Whole House

Transportation Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 25)

J. MacPhail

Hon. J. Reid

B. Suffredine

D. MacKay

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Transportation Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 25)

Committee of the Whole House

Criminal Injury Compensation Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 24)

J. MacPhail

Hon. R. Coleman

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Criminal Injury Compensation Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 24)

Committee of the Whole House

Health Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 18)

Hon. C. Hansen

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Health Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 18)

Committee of the Whole House

Health Planning Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 19)

J. MacPhail

Hon. S. Hawkins

Hon. K. Whittred

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Health Planning Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 19)

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development

(continued)

Hon. G. Hogg

J. MacPhail

S. Orr

V. Anderson

J. Bray

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection

(continued)

Hon. J. Murray

J. Kwan

B. Kerr

[ Page 2715 ]

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 2002

The House

met at 2:03 p.m.

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. G.

Halsey-Brandt: Today in the members' gallery I would like to acknowledge a

special visitor from France. Please join me in welcoming His Excellency Philippe

Guelluy, the newly appointed Ambassador of France to Canada. This is the

ambassador's first official visit to British Columbia, and I am pleased he has

travelled to British Columbia to discover the many opportunities our beautiful

province presents. He is accompanied by Michel Dejaegher, consul general of

France at Vancouver. Would the House please make them feel welcome.

[1405]

Hon. L.

Reid: In the precincts today is an incredibly dedicated soul, Dr. Gene

Krupa. Gene leads the health promotion and prevention in the interior health

authority. He has been innovative in a particular program. The acronym is CATCH,

and it stands for the Community Action Toward Children's Health. I would ask the

House to please make him very welcome.

P. Bell:

We have five very special guests joining us in the House today from the

beautiful community of McLeod Lake, B.C. Joining us are Debbie Prince, Gary

Gurnsey, Guy Jolly, Joe Bowers and Chief Alec Chingee of the McLeod Lake Indian

band. Would the House please make them feel very, very welcome.

Sahota: On behalf of my colleague the member for North Island, I would like

to welcome a group of grades 7 and 8 students from Linnea middle school on

Cortes Island and their teacher, Ms. Donna Bracewell, and assistant, Jake Mazri.

Would the House please make them welcome.

Hon. G.

Abbott: Again, along with the member for North Island, I'd like to introduce

a distinguished guest from the municipal realm who's in the gallery today.

Councillor Mary Ashley from Campbell River was elected as a councillor in 1999,

after previously serving as mayor of Campbell River from 1990 to '93. She was

elected to the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities executive

in 2000, was elected as president of the AVICC in 2001 and re-elected as

president in 2002. I'd like the House to join in making Mary very welcome.

Sultan: I rise to introduce a B.C. original, a leading citizen of the

metropolis of Big Creek, Mr. Tim Hollick-Kenyon, a.k.a. Chilcotin Charlie. Would

the House please make him welcome.

S. Orr:

I have a number of guests in the gallery today. Jean, one of the

Sergeant-at-Arms staff, has two guests here from Turkey, Erkan Gun and Gunesh

Yeltekin. Gunesh is working on her MBA at UVic.

I also have

two members here from our local Kiwanis Club, Keith Myers and Bill Beveridge.

Also in the

galleries we have, from SaveRail, Gerry Howell-Jones, Brendan Read, Paul Janke,

Ivy Riese, Jim London and Marjorie Rogers. Would the House please make them all

welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

SECURITIES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002

Hon. R.

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

Securities Amendment Act, 2002.

Hon. R.

Thorpe: I move that Bill 29 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. R.

Thorpe: I'm pleased to introduce the Securities Amendment Act, 2002. The

primary purpose of this bill is to introduce additional investor protection

measures to complement the easier access to capital and investment opportunities

made available under the security commission's new capital-raising exemption

rule.

This bill

also provides a framework to recognize competing security trading systems to

complement a market operations rule that was recently adopted by security

regulators across Canada. This bill will also increase fines and penalty

provisions and make other housekeeping amendments.

Mr.

Speaker, these amendments are part of our plan to improve the investment

environment in British Columbia. They will support efficient markets and

effective raising of capital without compromising investor protection.

I move that

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

sitting of the House after today.

Bill 29

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.

[1410]

Statements

(Standing Order 25

b) PATHNET LAB RESULTS SYSTEM

Sahota: Over the past number of weeks I've had the opportunity to get a

firsthand look at how our health care sector is embracing the technology sector,

in particular a technology called PathNet. Although I'd

[ Page 2716 ]

heard about PathNet, it wasn't until a local physician, Dr. Sangara, gave me

an informative insight into how he is going to make his office paperless.

PathNet is the electronic delivery of lab results, and these results would be

delivered directly to the laptop or desktop at home or in the office. Dr.

Sangara has signed up to be part of this pilot project.

Over 200

physicians today are using PathNet. PathNet has signed up an additional 1,000

physicians. The lab results get reported under a single personal file, ensuring

that the doctor has the most complete, up-to-date information available on the

patient. Dr. Sangara will be able to access his patients' records regardless of

where they were tested. He believes it will improve diagnostic reporting between

labs and physicians, and the use of PathNet will improve the delivery and access

of diagnostic reports by offering on-line test results and inquiry capabilities

such as historical databases.

This joint

pilot project was developed and launched by MDS Metro and B.C. Biomedical

Laboratories. On my recent meeting with Bob Breen, the president of MDS Metro, I

was informed that MDS Metro and B.C. Biomedical spent approximately nine months

building, testing and modifying PathNet.

One of my

questions to Mr. Breen and, of course, Dr. Sangara was on protection of

confidential patient medical records. They were both confident that PathNet has

taken significant steps to make sure that patient confidentiality isn't

violated. All data transmission uses highly secure encryption technology similar

to that used in the banking sector. I am advised that MDS Metro and B.C.

Biomedical have worked closely with the Ministry of Health's HealthNet/B.C.

initiative to develop provincial standards for diagnostic information

management, and PathNet fully complies with these standards.

government we have said…

Mr.

Speaker: Thank you, hon. member.

Sahota: …that we will do things better, and we'll find better solutions to

the health care sector.

NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIANS ROLE

IN BATTLE OF VIMY RIDGE

Belsey: As my colleague noted yesterday, April 9 marked the eighty-fifth

anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge and the crucial role British Columbia

soldiers played in that courageous battle. Many have cited this battle as the

moment that marked Canada's emergence as a nation. Today I wish to recognize the

men from northern British Columbia, in particular Prince Rupert, who helped to

make that possible.

The 102nd

Battalion was known as Warden's Warriors and recruited men from all over Canada,

yet the name of the battalion, North British Columbians, originated from the

large number of men that came from Prince Rupert and Prince George. As the

newspaper account says, the unit was the outcome of a wager between a Mr. H.

Clements, MP, from Comox-Atlin and one of his colleagues in the federal House,

the latter having joked, challenging him to produce a unit from his barren

constituency. Authority was issued to Lt. Col. John Weightman Warden, who set up

recruitment stations in Prince Rupert among other locations in northern British

Columbia.

When the

men from Prince Rupert and Prince George arrived at the station in Comox, they

were so numerous that they formed a company themselves, called Company B, which

became known as the rallying point of all hearty men from the district. The name

North British Columbians replaced the words "Comox-Atlin," and when

Capt. J.S. Matthews welcomed the men from Prince Rupert, they called for cheers:

"North British Columbians, three cheers for the men from Prince

Rupert." From that day forward the 102nd Battalion would be known as the

North British Columbians.

On the

morning of April 9, 1917, the North British Columbians captured their three

objectives within a mere hour and a half, which helped to ensure the overall

triumph of Vimy Ridge. Today an individual memorial stands on Vimy Ridge in

memory of the officers and the men of the 102nd Battalion who fell during the

assault and capture of Vimy Ridge on April 9, 1917.

KIWANIS HOUSE

S. Orr:

I rise today to tell you about a very special project that has just been

completed in my community of Victoria-Hillside called Kiwanis House. Kiwanis

House was built by the Kiwanis Club of Victoria. As always, this organization

reaches out and addresses the needs of the communities they serve in. This time

they have just completed a project that reflects the program priority of Kiwanis

International called Young Children: Priority One.

[1415]

Kiwanis

House will provide a support system for single moms with one child. It consists

of eight self-contained units. This complex will provide not only very

comfortable shelter but a place where life skills will be taught through

programs provided by the YWCA. Kiwanis House will enable the young moms to get a

kick-start on their lives, enabling them to better provide for their children.

A project

like this happens because the Kiwanis Club understands the needs, as they have

for all other projects they have built in our communities. One person, amongst

many others, who is passionate about this project is a man called Keith Myers, a

well-respected business person in our community that nobody would dare say no

to. Because of that determination, Kiwanis House has been built, and it has been

built without any funding from government at all.

This

project is a model of success. Kiwanis House is caring for our most vulnerable

moms and children and will move them forward into a better future. We can learn

a lot from them.

Mr.

Speaker: That concludes members' statements.

[ Page 2717 ]

Oral Questions

PERFORMANCE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL

MacPhail: We see that the Attorney General has already had a pretty tough

week with his tour of the province as the yes-side campaign manager for this

province's ill-conceived referendum. While he's on the road, his legal

colleagues are making his life even more miserable back at home. Lawyers are

taking the Attorney General to court over cuts to legal aid, and now we see that

the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court of B.C. has stated that the court no

longer has confidence in the Attorney General.

To the

Premier: how can he and British Columbians have any confidence in his Attorney

General when the judges do not? Does the Premier just say that the judges are

another special interest group that he can ignore?

Hon. G.

Campbell: I think one of the most important appointments you can make as

Premier is the MLA that you appoint to the office of Attorney General. I looked

for a person with integrity, a person with principle, a person of experience. I

looked for a person who had a passion about public law, who would stand up for

the integrity of the courts. I looked for a person who would be willing to be

innovative as we provided better and stronger access to the courts for British

Columbians.

I can tell

the member opposite that I have complete, absolute and utter confidence in the

Attorney General of the province. [Applause.]

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

The Leader

of the Opposition has a supplementary question.

MacPhail: That's interesting, because earlier on the Attorney General said

that there was no need to have any campaigning around the referendum. Now he's

designated himself as the yes-side campaign manager.

That's

because the Attorney General knows that the referendum is wrong and that it's a

futile exercise. He knows there are far more important matters that he should be

dealing with at home, rather than a travelling road show to prop up the flawed

and meaningless public opinion poll that this referendum is. He knows that on

Friday the Law Society of British Columbia is to consider for the first time a

motion of censure against an Attorney General for the budget cuts.

The actions

of the Attorney General and of this government have thrown the justice system

into chaos.

To the

Premier: why? If he has such faith in this Attorney General, why is he so intent

on destroying the career of the Attorney General?

Hon. G.

Campbell: One of the great things about being the leader of this government

and this party is that we actually attract people of talent and ability, so they

have careers.

The

Attorney General has been very clear. The referendum is an opportunity for

British Columbians to actually participate in one of the most important social

issues we face as a province, for the first time in the history of the province.

The Attorney General believes he has a responsibility to inform people about how

the referendum works and why they should be including themselves.

[1420]

The

Attorney General has a responsibility to explain the law. For example, the

referendum in no way whatsoever could ever undermine minority rights, because

they are protected by this government and the Canadian constitution.

Let me say

this: the Attorney General, like all the rest of the members of this government,

inherited a total mess from the previous government, a government that was

unsustainable. The fact of the matter is that the Attorney General is working

very hard with members of the legal profession and with the judiciary to make

sure that in British Columbia, we have a legal system that is second to none.

POWERS OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS

J. Kwan:

Will the Minister of State for Community Charter please stand up and tell

British Columbians what powers he plans on granting municipalities?

Hon. T.

Nebbeling: For the member's information, we will be introducing a White

Paper in the very near future explaining all the powers.

J. Kwan:

Question 6 of the treaty referendum seeks a mandate to limit aboriginal

self-government rights to those of a municipality, but because the government

refuses to tell British Columbians what powers it plans on granting

municipalities, British Columbians have no way of knowing what a yes vote or a

no vote might mean.

To the

Premier: how can he in good conscience spend thousands of dollars on a tour

pleading with British Columbians to vote yes to a question when no one, except

maybe those in the Premier's office, has any idea what powers municipalities

will soon have? Obviously, the minister himself doesn't know.

Hon. G.

Campbell: I'm surprised the members opposite don't understand what municipal

government is and how delegated authorities work from the federal government and

provincial government.

The fact of

the matter is that it wasn't this government; it was their government that spent

$8 million trying to convince British Columbians that the Nisga'a government was

a municipal style of government.

We believe

in aboriginal self-government.

Interjection.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

[ Page 2718 ]

Hon. G.

Campbell: We believe that aboriginal self-government should be modelled on a

municipal style of government, with delegated authorities from the federal and

the provincial levels of government. We are doing something that the previous

government never deigned to do. We're asking British Columbians if they agree

with us and if that is a principle we should take to the treaty table.

U.S. SOFTWOOD LUMBER NEGOTIATIONS

Penner: Many forest-dependent communities across British Columbia have been

hard-hit by the crippling U.S. duty imposed on B.C. softwood lumber exports.

Some of my constituents are taking hope that the Premier may have made some

progress earlier this week during talks with our federal counterparts, perhaps

looking for some help for our workers and families who have been hurt by this

unfair duty.

Can the

Premier tell us what progress he made in Ottawa earlier this week?

Hon. G.

Campbell: I am pleased to say that during my meetings with a number of

federal ministers, it was clear that Ottawa and British Columbia are going to

work together to make sure that working families in the forest industry in this

province have a great and bright future in forestry.

There were

a number of issues that we discussed, including extension of employment

benefits, research and development that will allow us to increase the

productivity of our industry, expanding our marketplaces and dealing with

customers in the United States so that they understand the impact of this

onerous and punitive duty that's been placed on our products and the cost it

will put to them both in terms of buying homes and in terms of lost jobs in the

construction industry.

We will

continue to fight for our forest workers. On April 29 there will be a B.C.

forest softwood summit, and we hope to be able to outline some concrete,

detailed frameworks for action in the future.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Chilliwack-Kent has a supplementary question.

[1425]

Penner: As you know, lumber barons in the United States continue to claim

that B.C. subsidizes its softwood lumber industry; yet these allegations have

been proven untrue time after time. Not even all U.S. politicians agree that we

are unfairly subsidizing our lumber, and not all U.S. politicians agree with the

duty. Can the Premier update us on our government's efforts to build support for

B.C.'s position in the United States?

Hon. G.

Campbell: I would ask all Members of the Legislative Assembly to join in the

endeavour to make sure that people in the United States understand the impacts

of that punitive duty on their lives, on their communities, on their economies.

I am very pleased to say that as a result of the connections that we've made in

working with the PNWER conference, the House majority leader from Alaska, Rep.

Jeannette James, has actually written to the President of the United States

saying that the policy makes no sense, that it hurts them in Alaska, that it's

time for us to open our borders to provide open access and to make sure that not

just in British Columbia but in Alaska, in Washington, in Oregon and Idaho

everyone has the benefits of free and open trade.

AUTISM SERVICES

Brice: My question is to the Minister of State for Early Childhood

Development. B.C. families with children suffering from autism have had to cope,

often without government support, to meet the challenges. I'd like to ask the

minister of state what her ministry is doing to help these families.

Hon. L.

Reid: We as a government made a commitment to increase parental choice, to

increase parental involvement, to support families who have a child with autism.

We are, today, living up to that commitment. I can assure the member opposite

that we have an individualized funding program that is very close to being ready

to go. The dollars, frankly, to purchase services on behalf of children will be

in the hands of those families by the first day of June of this year.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Saanich South has a supplementary question.

Brice: I know the government has said it is committed to helping special

needs children receive the services which they and their families require. Can

the minister please tell us what actions she is taking to fulfil that

commitment?

Hon. L.

Reid: In addition to the individualized funding program, we certainly have

early intensive behavioral services available to 75 children in eight

communities across our province. We have a school transition year which will

assist families whose children are either five or six years of age to have a

better entry into the school system. It's vitally important that we do that. We

will continue to offer service supports to families who have children with

autism, whether that be respite service, home support service, services that

actually assist families in staying together and staying healthy.

GLOBAL WARMING

J. Kwan:

Yesterday the Minister of Forests was lamenting the fact that a warm winter has

fuelled the infestation of pine beetles and the destruction of B.C.'s forests.

The Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection has released a report on climate

change saying that global warming contributes to the pine beetle crisis.

[ Page 2719 ]

The Premier

has just returned from meetings with oil industry representatives and is

opposing the Kyoto protocol on climate change. To the Premier: as climate change

is contributing to a crisis in our forests, can the Premier tell us what

brilliant ideas he has to reduce the effects of global warming?

Hon. G.

Campbell: I'm interested if I was meeting with industry representatives in

my living room. The fact of the matter is I haven't recently been meeting with

industry representatives, so I'm not sure what the member opposite is dealing

with. There are these mythical meetings that we have.

I have met

with ministers of the federal government. I have met with editorial boards. I

have met with potential investors in British Columbia. But I can tell you this.

Interjection.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order.

Hon. G.

Campbell: What we have said is that we want to be part of the solution with

regard to global warming. British Columbia is actually leading the rest of the

country as part of the solution to global warming. We intend to continue to do

that, because we know that everyone benefits from that.

WATER POLLUTION AND PROTECTION

R. Lee:

My question is to the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection. Last year it

was discovered that Chevron had polluted the groundwater under its refinery in

Burnaby North. In order to deal with this contamination, Chevron has announced

plans to collect, treat and discharge the groundwater into Burrard Inlet. Can

the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection assure us that this will not have

a negative impact on the marine life in Burrard Inlet?

[1430]

Hon. J.

Murray: I understand the concern of the member and the member's

constituents…

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. J.

Murray: …about the Chevron spill. The ministry has carefully considered

all of the environmental concerns in reviewing this request of Chevron to

release the treated water into Burrard Inlet. The levels will be well within the

ministry standards that were set for environment and human health protection.

This plan actually allows Chevron to move forward to collect and treat this

material.

addition, there is a study, which the ministry required Chevron to commission,

that has to do with the human health risk assessment tied to the MTBE issue, and

this is nearing completion. The ministry will review it and take any additional

actions that it may suggest.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Burnaby North has a supplementary question.

R. Lee:

The quality of groundwater is of great concern to my constituents. Can the

Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection tell us what steps she has taken to

prevent these types of accidents from occurring again in the future?

Hon. J.

Murray: This government made a commitment in our New Era document to

protect groundwater resources in British Columbia. The action was to appoint a

panel to look at drinking water protection, including groundwater protection. I

want to assure the member that we are reviewing the panel's report, and we will

take the steps to protect groundwater.

Also, in

February government amended the contaminated sites legislation to require owners

of sites that are contaminated to notify their neighbours if any of the

contamination…

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please, hon. members.

Hon. J.

Murray: …moves across the boundary of the site. In this way, contamination

will be caught early and will be reduced. MTBE is a classic case of a

contaminant that moves through the soil and into groundwater.

[End of question period.]

Petitions

S. Orr:

I rise to table a petition in the House on behalf of the SaveRail coalition.

This petition has 5,675 signatures and asks that the Esquimalt and Nanaimo

Railway be saved and revitalized to create a viable, environmentally sound and

economically sustainable rail service for Vancouver Island.

The

petition asks that this House work together with federal, regional and local

governments and stakeholder groups to find a way to encourage the reinvigoration

and the renewal of this railway.

Orders of the Day

Hon. G.

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

members we'll be discussing the estimates of the Ministry of Water, Land and Air

Protection. In this House I call committee stage on Bill 22.

[1435]

Committee of the Whole House

SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 22; T. Christensen in the chair.

[ Page 2720 ]

[1440]

The

committee met at 2:43 p.m.

On

section

MacPhail: On this particular section, as I understand it, the responsibility

for landscape units and objectives is being shifted over to the Minister of

Sustainable Resource Management and, as the notes here say, away from the

district manager. But there was also a requirement for the then Minister of

Environment, Lands and Parks to have input into establishing landscape units and

objectives. Does this clause remove any involvement of the now Minister of

Water, Land and Air Protection in establishing landscape units and objectives?

[1445]

Hon. S.

Hagen: Before I answer the question, I'd like to introduce Mr. Warren

Mitchell, who's a staff member in our ministry. He's the director of regional

planning. We may be joined by Jim Mattison, who's the director of water

management.

Water, Land

and Air Protection will still be giving input to the decisions we make, but the

responsibility is shifted to this ministry.

MacPhail: They'll be given responsibility. Are there any changes in what

input the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection has?

Hon. S.

Hagen: With regard to landscape unit objectives, some of the staff from the

old Ministry of Environment is now in my ministry, but we don't do this in

isolation. We do it with input from Water, Land and Air Protection.

MacPhail: Well, that answers my question, but it's not legislated input.

There used to be legislated input where the then Minister of Environment, now

the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection, had a legal right to that input.

Now that's been removed by this legislation, which is a step backward.

Why is the

minister now authorizing these plans, as opposed to the chief forester?

Hon. S.

Hagen: The chief forester never had that responsibility. That responsibility

used to be the district manager of forests. It's now under the minister because

of the numerous impacts, including impacts on the social structure, economics,

environmental issues and community issues.

MacPhail: Then why does the explanatory note of the bill say it authorizes

the minister rather than the chief forester to make directions? That's just what

the explanatory note of the bill says.

Hon. S.

Hagen: I'll get you that in writing. There's a discussion as to whether this

is correct or whether an error has been made in the information that was given

to me. I would like to clarify that, and I'll get it to you in writing.

Sections 1

to 6 inclusive approved.

On

section

MacPhail: As I understand it, previously the board was, first of all,

unpaid. They were volunteers. Secondly, the chair was chosen from amongst the

board. Why has the minister decided to interfere with what was a workable

process?

[1450]

Hon. S.

Hagen: The first thing I did was decide not to have a politician chair the

board, because I didn't think that was appropriate. The politician who was chair

of the board — well known, I'm sure, to the member opposite — in fact was

getting paid, because he was getting paid a salary as an MLA. He was getting

paid while he was doing that job. The reason to pay the new board chair, who is

not a politician — he's a private citizen who is taking a lot of time, a lot

of time, out of his private life to carry out the duties as the chair of the

Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board — is because it takes so much time. That's why

we've decided to remunerate him.

MacPhail: I'm sorry. Who is the person the minister is talking about? Who is

the chair?

Hon. S.

Hagen: The chair of the board is Ross Peck.

MacPhail: I assume Mr. Peck has a job as well. It's kind of a silly

comparison to say that…. I fully accept that the minister may not want to

appoint a politician, but it's ridiculous to say that, oh, the politician was

earning money. He, too, was doing it as a volunteer, outside of his full-time

job as an MLA. I assume Mr. Peck has a full-time job.

All I'm

saying is that there's a very disturbing trend with this government to take what

used to be volunteer positions, appoint their business friends and then pay them

money. What will the remuneration be for other board appointees?

Hon. S.

Hagen: The only member of the board being remunerated is the chair of the

board. By the way, I didn't clarify that he came from the board.

MacPhail: How much will he be paid?

Hon. S.

Hagen: He'll be paid $24,000 a year.

Sections 7

and 8 approved.

On

section

MacPhail: Can the minister explain why he chose to reduce the trust fund

top-up from $3 million to $1 million?

[ Page 2721 ]

Hon. S.

Hagen: The reason we reduced the fund is the same reason that we have had to

reduce a lot of budgets, except Health and Education, and that is because of the

fiscal situation we inherited from the previous government. I would have loved

to have kept the budget where it was, but I think we've come up with a very good

answer, and that is to guarantee the funding of a million dollars and then

increase the matching amount from $400,000 to a million. They've already made

great headway in raising that money, and that'll kick the fund back up to $3

million.

MacPhail: It's just simply ridiculous for this minister to stand up and say

it's the situation they inherited, because the Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board

inherited a trust fund that was topped up to $3 million every year and received

worldwide recognition for that. I predict that with the changes this government,

and this minister particularly, is making in terms of sustainable land

protection, revenues into this province will actually be reduced with campaigns

that will be mounted against this government for their regression on sustainable

land use protection. This is but one example of that.

The

minister seems quite confident that the fundraising will go just fine. Who is

contributing?

Hon. S.

Hagen: In the first year of our administration, in the matching fund part of

this, we raised $548,000.

MacPhail: Who is that from?

Hon. S.

Hagen: I was hoping that the member was going to ask me how that compared to

previous years.

An Hon.

Member: Answer it, anyway. I'd like to know.

Hon. S.

Hagen: I know there is a lot of interest in knowing that.

An Hon.

Member: How does it compare to previous years?

[1455]

Hon. S.

Hagen: Seeing as the question has been asked, in fiscal year '98-99 there

was $110,000 raised. In '99-2000 there was $117,000 raised. In 2000-01 there was

$77,000 raised. In the first year that we were government — $548,000.

I might say

that in the first few weeks of this fiscal year they have raised something

around $300,000. There is no doubt in my mind that they're going to raise that

million dollars in this fiscal year.

However, to

get back to the question. I apologize for moving off course a bit.

Interjection.

Hon. S.

Hagen: I'm sincere.

The

question of who the moneys came from was asked. This is public information. I'm

pleased to list it out. I'd be pleased to give you a copy of this. Abitibi

Consolidated….

Do you want

the amounts too?

MacPhail: Yes, please.

Hon. S.

Hagen: Okay — $25,000. Northern….

Interjection.

Hon. S.

Hagen: I would ask people not to interrupt, so that she can hear the

numbers.

The

Northern B.C. Guides Association — $35,000; Macilhaney Land Surveys — $200;

Western Geco — $500; an environmental group, the Round River Conservation

Studies — $5,000; Imperial Oil Resources — $500; the North Peace economic

development commission — $725; Home Hardware — $500; Anadarko — $2,000;

the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Society, another environmental group —

$1,000; Murphy Oil Co. Ltd. — $500; Slocan Western Geco — $2,000; Anderson

Consulting — $1,000; Gibson Petroleum Co. Ltd. — $250; the Oil and Gas

Commission — $340,000; Northeastern B.C. Wildlife Fund — $7,500; the North

Peace Rod and Gun Club — $15,000; the Henry P. Kendall Foundation — $51,480;

district of Mackenzie — $625; city of Fort St. John — $4,000; Shell Canada

— $1,000; Canadian Forest Products — $625; Canadian Association of Petroleum

Producers — $3,000; Ross Peck Outfitters — $250; E.B.A. Wabeski Darrell

Consulting — $1,500; another donation from the Northern B.C. Guides

Association — I think these are like guiders, not guides — $250; Interra

Planning Services — $150; Northgate Land and Associates — $150; Peace River

regional district — $2,500; Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers —

$5,000; Northern B.C. Guides Association — $250; the Northern B.C. Wildlife

Fund — $20,000.

MacPhail: What's the oil and gas commission that donated $340,000 to this?

Hon. S.

Hagen: That's the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission. They donated that from their

environmental fund.

MacPhail: That's an industry-led fund, is it?

Hon. S.

Hagen: Yes. It's the same commission that the previous government set up.

[1500]

MacPhail: It's the first time they've made a donation of this amount to

this, I expect. The minister was claiming great victory on the great

fundraising, and well over the vast, vast majority of it has come from the B.C.

Oil and Gas Commission.

What's

happened here, as I see it, is that

whereas this Muskwa-Kechika trust fund was

set up so that

[ Page 2722 ]

there's a balance between the environmental protection of the land base and

allowing sustainable development through a trust fund that doesn't have strings

tied to it, it's now funded much more greatly by the very people who were to be

kept in check, the oil and gas industry.

Hon. S.

Hagen: Could you ask the question over again? I didn't realize there was a

question.

MacPhail: I said that I take it…. Sorry. Does the minister need the voice

inflection to go up at the end?

I said that

what was supposed to be in balance, having a trust fund that was supposed to be

a balance of interests, has now, because the government has reduced the funding

to the trust fund by $2 million and has relied on fundraising…. We now have an

inexorable shift, do we not? There's the question.

Hon. S.

Hagen: I appreciate your patience.

The answer

is that what we are striving for in the Muskwa-Kechika, as we are striving for

in the rest of the province, is to find that critical balance between the

environment and the economy. I believe that this province will turn — and

is, in fact, turning — its economy around. We are a resource-based economy. We

are turning the economy around, but not at the expense of the environment.

That's a principle in my ministry, and it's a principle of this government. It's

a commitment we made in our New Era document. It's a commitment we made

during the campaign.

I can't

stress enough that yes, we are inviting investment back to the province, and we

are inviting industry back to the province so that our people can get back to

work, but they're not being invited back at the expense of the environment.

MacPhail: What is the document the minister is reading from that he said is

public, so that I can make sure I get the numbers accurately? Where would I find

that, please?

Tabling Documents

Hon. S.

Hagen: I'd like to table the document.

Leave

granted.

Debate Continued

Section 9

approved on division.

Sections 10

and 11 approved.

section

MacPhail:

Section 12 is where the government is now permitting, for the very

first time, short-term diversion or use of water in accordance with the

regulations.

What is the

government's intent in making this change?

Hon. S.

Hagen: My understanding is that there is nothing new to this. It was done by

the previous government as well. All we're doing is changing the legislation to

make it official.

[1505]

MacPhail: I'm sorry. This is new legislation. This legislation, to allow for

the short-term diversion of streams for up to 12 months, wasn't there before. I

don't know what the minister is talking about. Why is this being legislated?

Hon. S.

Hagen: This is to help reduce the paper burden and look after many routine

functions that take place every year, year after year. An example would be dust

control where companies come and fill up their water trucks, and then spray

water on the road for dust control.

MacPhail: Why is there legislation required to do this for up to 12 months?

What restrictions are there on this diversion so that it won't interfere with

habitat or spawning grounds?

Hon. S.

Hagen: Regulations will be developed to control volumes, location, in-stream

impacts. Sensitive streams will be exempt. There will be no impact on fish

habitat or other habitat.

MacPhail: Could the minister table the regulations from which…? Have the

regulations been published at the same time that this act is introduced? How can

we rely on what the minister is saying if we can't see the regulations?

Hon. S.

Hagen: This

section of the act will not come into force until the

regulations are developed.

MacPhail: Will the regulations receive consultation before they're put in

force?

Hon. S.

Hagen: Yes, that's our intention.

Sections 12

and 13 approved.

MacPhail: Sorry. Just to confirm the minister's commitment, I note that

sections 12, 17, 20 and 21, all of which deal with the issue of diversion of

water for 12 months, will come into force by regulation. It's under 24(3) that

the minister is making the commitment that they will not come into force until

the regulations are established.

Hon. S.

Hagen: Yes, that's correct.

Sections 14

to 24 inclusive approved.

Title

approved.

Hon. G.

Collins: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

[ Page 2723 ]

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 3:09 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

[1510]

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 22,

Sustainable Resource Management Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete

without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Collins: I call committee stage on Bill 25.

Committee of the Whole House

TRANSPORTATION STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2002

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 25; T. Christensen in the chair.

The

committee met at 3:15 p.m.

On

section

MacPhail: Mr. Chair, just to seek clarification, my questions all revolve

around changes to the inland ferries that were announced April 1, 2002, by the

Ministry of Transportation in an information bulletin. I assume that's all under

part 4, if I'm correct. I don't want to miss the opportunity to ask those

questions, but I assume that's

section 6. If it is, then that's where my

questions lie.

Hon. J.

Reid: That would be correct.

Sections 1

to 5 inclusive approved.

On

section

The

Chair: Under

section 6, it adds

part 4, of which there's four separate

sections, so we can deal with each of those separately. Initially, we'll deal

with

section 48 under

section 6 of the bill.

Section 6,

section 48 approved.

section

section 49.

MacPhail: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for being so accommodating and separating

this out.

Section 49 is the one that I assume gives all the powers that gave

rise to the announcement. I'm looking at, just for the minister's edification,

the Ministry of Transportation information bulletin dated April 1, 2002,

entitled "Update on Changes to Inland Ferries." Is

section 49 the

authority that allows the minister to make these changes?

Hon. J.

Reid: Yes, this

section does talk about both the tolling and the schedules.

MacPhail: Where is the

section that allows the minister to cancel service,

or does that not require legislation — the service that's been cancelled to

the Marguerite, McLure and Little Fort ferries?

Hon. J.

Reid: That does not require legislation.

MacPhail: Under

section 49, what alternatives is the minister preparing for

those communities whose service is reduced and who are alleging they will be

compromised from a health and safety point of view?

[1520]

Hon. J.

Reid: We have ferries that already operate less than 24 hours a day — for

example, the Francois Lake ferry. It has an emergency call-out procedure that's

been operational and has worked for that service. The same emergency call-out

procedure will be made available to all the other ferries. In addition, by

delaying the implementation of the times scheduled by the 45 days, it's given

additional time to satisfy the concerns people might have had with regard to

that procedure, to make sure that everybody is aware of it.

MacPhail: Well, I checked in with the community yesterday. Their concerns

haven't been allayed at all. Sorry, I must make it clear what community I'm

talking about. It's the community serviced by the Arrow Lakes ferry. I'm

wondering whether the minister has actually had a chance to review the

commitment she made to the mayor of Nakusp that if they could find evidence that

as a result of the Columbia River damming, the community was promised a free

ferry until a bridge was built, she would get them a bridge — whether she's

revisited her commitment.

Hon. J.

Reid: This whole issue is part of a legal action against the province. It's

currently before the courts. It's inappropriate for me to comment on the matter.

MacPhail: I only have a couple more questions, and then I'll yield the

floor.

The

commitment around keeping the ferry free and running as a result of the Columbia

River flooding is subject to a court case, and no more questions are to be

answered around that. Is that what the minister is saying?

Hon. J.

Reid: That's correct.

MacPhail: Yikes. That's unfortunate for the community — very unfortunate.

My gosh, the legal actions are building up against this government like we've

never seen before.

Has the

minister had a chance to visit the community in the last four weeks?

Hon. J.

Reid: I was out to the communities when we first made this announcement. I

haven't been out in the communities in the last four weeks.

[ Page 2724 ]

Suffredine: The point raised earlier in the questions is that this

legislation refers only to tolling powers. Reduction of service levels doesn't

require legislation. If tolls were not implemented, what consequences would that

have for service levels?

Hon. J.

Reid: I'm sure the member is aware that I am on a fixed budget and certainly

understands the difficulties that we're facing with regard to budgets. I have

those budget targets to meet. If there was to be no tolling, we would either

have to find another source of revenue or else drastically reduce the service

levels.

Suffredine: To the minister: you've stated publicly that you're flexible and

that your focus is to meet your budget targets, but you're willing to work with

communities to find acceptable solutions to meet their needs. I know people in

my area are concerned. I've received many, many calls today alone from Harrop

and Procter. The costs of tolling in Harrop look like they'll add about $500 per

year to the average user. In Glade, which isn't in my riding but is just

adjoining it, it's much more significant.

I believe

there are better ways to generate revenues and spread the costs more evenly

among the users. I've been working with local committees to try to find some

acceptable ways to do that. If the legislation is passed and tolls are approved,

do you remain committed to continuing the discussions and to having that

flexibility so that we might be able to avoid tolls if we can find acceptable

alternatives that are the best solution for the community?

[1525]

Hon. J.

Reid: I'm very committed to working with the communities and to addressing

the concerns and looking for other ways of finding revenue. The people who are

covered off in the area, for example, of the Columbia Basin Trust are free to

make application to that trust to look for ways of working with them. There are

a lot of other suggestions out there. There are a lot of other — as you say,

in communities looking for ways of applying this….

Certainly,

within each community there's also a different mix of people and a different mix

of users. In some communities it might be predominantly freight or industrial,

in others it's more of a mix of tourism, and in others it's mainly the

residential users. We need to be sensitive to that. We need to work with them to

find what's going to work best with their communities.

We have not

established any rates for tolling. This legislation gives us that ability. The

process, which is already started in the member's communities, will continue.

Our objective is that by the end of this year we will have a tolling structure

in place. That gives a lot of time to try and look for those solutions, to try

to work with the communities and try to individualize the approach to each

community's needs.

Suffredine: On the topic of the Columbia Basin Trust, I have some concerns.

The trust was created by the former government. It created a structure by which

it said: "You can't use this money to do what government would otherwise

do." That's of concern to me because it seems to me that the Keenleyside

expansion project is exactly what government did in the first place in building

the Keenleyside Dam, and the suggestion that the trust can't use its money for

projects the government would otherwise do is directly contravened by the

construction of the Keenleyside expansion.

I don't

agree, of course, that the money should be used to fund the operation of

ferries. I don't think that's any way of accommodating communities. But I do

think the trust terms should be expanded so that projects that government might

technically be able to do but is not willing to do could be levered by the use

of the trust funds. I wonder if I could count on the minister to participate in

discussions with the Ministry of Energy to help broaden the terms of the trust

so that things the community does want, like the Needles bridge, could be

levered by use of the trust funds if the community was behind that.

Hon. J.

Reid: I am committed to working with the member, to working with the

communities, to working with the minister mentioned and looking for solutions. I

don't know, obviously, right now what those answers might be, but I think we do

need to have the dialogue, and I'm certainly willing and committed to having

that dialogue.

Suffredine: The ongoing need for the ferries on the Arrow Lakes is a direct

result of the operation of the Keenleyside Dam. It's my view that Hydro should

actually pay this cost as an operating cost of the reservoir. The people of

British Columbia are benefiting from the power generation, and in my view it

should be spread over the load of the customer base. Are you willing to

participate in discussions with the Minister of Energy to see if that cost could

be passed along to the customer base of Hydro customers rather than fixed solely

on the users in the Arrow Lakes region?

Hon. J.

Reid: That whole issue the member mentions, I would say, is part of the

legal action that's against the province and currently before the courts, so it

is inappropriate for me to comment on this matter.

[1530]

MacKay: I understand the problem you have today, with a fixed budget, to

continue to operate all the services the province presently does for the

citizens of this large and diverse province. I would like to ask you a question

about the tolling of the inland ferries, having to do, more specifically, with

the François Lake ferry, which last year — 2001 — carried approximately

600,000 passengers. In the year 2001 the ferry carried approximately 6,453

loaded logging trucks on that short haul across François Lake, which equates to

about 290,000 cubic metres of wood. Based on an average cost of $70 a cubic

metre, that wood which came across on the ferry is valued at $20.326 million.

The

[ Page 2725 ]

stumpage that went to the province, based on that $70 a cubic metre, realized

a revenue of approximately $7.260 million. That's just from the forest sector.

The recent

announcements to cut back sailing times from 20 hours to 17 would suggest to me,

from the research that I've done, a saving of approximately $825 a day or

approximately $300,000 per annum to the ferry by cutting back the three hours of

sailing time. I would like to ask the ministry if they would look at the ferry

crossings in terms of the large forestry sector issue that needs to be addressed

and the large volume of beetle-infested wood that has to come out of the Lakes

District and look at a fee structure for logging trucks to offset the budget

shortfall that she now faces.

A simple

example would be to charge $15 per truck for a round trip across and back on the

ferry. This would more than offset the $825 shortfall that she has. If we were

to charge the $15 round trip, based on a 20-hour sailing time, the province or

the ferry system would realize revenue of approximately $1,200 per day, which

would more than offset the cost. I wonder if the ministry would look at that to

continue until the privatization of this ferry project is completed, which would

allow the ferry to operate for the 20 hours at no cost to the residents. The

cost would be borne directly by the movement of that wood coming across the

lake.

Hon. J.

Reid: It's an interesting idea that the member proposes. I understand the

way of trying to address the situation and the shortfall, as he's presented it,

and I appreciate that. I would need to talk to the Minister of Forests about the

idea from the point of view of any duress this might put on an industry that's

already been severely impacted. I'm certainly willing to have those discussions

and follow up on that idea.

MacPhail: My questions arise from the questions asked by the member for

Nelson-Creston. If the member is seeking ways to work with the minister, as I

understand it, to find alternatives to shutting down the hours, then my question

to the minister is: other than tolls, government funds to the ferry or

reductions in hours of service, what other alternatives could there possibly be?

[1535]

Even if

money is taken out of the Columbia Basin Trust, it's government money, so it

doesn't help. The minister started off in answer to the member for

Nelson-Creston: "You know the difficult financial situation we find

ourselves in. There's one bottom line." Putting aside the fact that this

would be a violation of the purposes of the Columbia Basin Trust, it's still

government money. It doesn't assist the minister and her bottom line one iota to

take funds out of the Columbia Basin Trust, because her bottom line is the

entire taxpayers' bottom line. What alternatives could there possibly be that

she's working on?

Hon. J.

Reid: It's absolutely right. There is only one taxpayer in British Columbia.

It's

interesting — the member's questions — in that this is a matter of difficult

choices. We are in a situation and a time in this province where we do have to

make some very difficult choices. The previous government made a choice to

double the provincial debt in their time in office, and that has left us now

with some very difficult choices to make. One of the choices we made was to

maintain and protect funding for health care and education. That means that all

the other ministries have to be extremely careful with their expenditures and

have to look for savings and efficiencies wherever possible.

It is a

difficult situation we're in; it's a very challenging situation we're in. We are

looking at ways of trying to help communities out as they grapple with this

situation so that they can understand that we are trying to reduce the costs of

these ferry services. I think that's a very important part to remember. While

we're asking people to participate in part of the operating costs, we're doing

everything we can to find ways of reducing the costs of this service.

Other than

tolls, we have talked with some regional districts about the regional districts'

participation in how they might want to fund ferry service. We have been open to

suggestions from the communities, and certainly we will continue to work with

the communities and industry groups and look for ways to make sure this service

is provided.

It's also

important to realize that what we want is a dependable, sustainable service for

the future. We have seen another ferry system in this province under the

previous government that has been operated in a manner that has not been

sustainable, and we have seen the difficulties we've inherited because of that.

We have to be very careful about our dollars here. We have to work with the

communities. That's what we're doing.

[1540]

Section 6,

section 49 approved on the following division:

YEAS — 64

Falcon

Coell

Hogg

L. Reid

Halsey-Brandt

Hawkins

Whittred

Cheema

Hansen

J. Reid

Bruce

van Dongen

Barisoff

Nettleton

Roddick

Wilson

Masi

Lee

Hagen

Murray

Campbell

Collins

de Jong

Nebbeling

Stephens

Abbott

Neufeld

Coleman

Penner

Jarvis

Anderson

Orr

Harris

Nuraney

Brenzinger

Belsey

Bell

Chutter

Mayencourt

Trumper

Johnston

Bennett

R. Stewart

Krueger

McMahon

Bray

Les

Nijjar

[ Page 2726

Bhullar

Wong

Bloy

Suffredine

MacKay

Cobb

K. Stewart

Lekstrom

Brice

Sultan

Hamilton

Sahota

Hawes

Kerr

Manhas

Hunter

NAYS — 2

MacPhail

Kwan

[1545]

Section 6,

sections 50 and 51 approved.

Sections 6

to 8 inclusive approved.

Title

approved.

Hon. J.

Reid: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 3:47 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 25,

Transportation Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Collins: I call committee stage on Bill 24.

Committee of the Whole House

CRIMINAL INJURY COMPENSATION

AMENDMENT ACT, 2002

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 24; T. Christensen in the chair.

The

committee met at 3:49 p.m.

On

section

MacPhail: Under

section 1. I understand this is the

section that removes the

awarding of compensation for non-pecuniary loss or damages for the pain and

suffering of the victim of a crime.

My question

to the minister is this. Previously, people could apply under the Criminal

Injury Compensation Act and be awarded, after examination, damages for pain and

suffering if they were injured on the job. Now they no longer will be able to.

What happens to those people in terms of any claim they now make?

[1550]

Hon. R.

Coleman: First of all, the amendment that was made to the act in 1995

actually brought workers from the Workers Compensation Act, who had suffered as

victims of crime for pain and suffering, into the act. Everybody else was

already allowed to claim for pain and suffering prior to that. Those were the

comments made by the then, I guess, Attorney General.

What

happens now is that pain and suffering basically extinguishes on April 16. Any

application in prior to April 16 will be processed as an application for pain

and suffering. What we're doing now in the transition to the Crime Victim

Assistance Act is putting in the retroactivity in order that people will be able

to avail themselves of the other benefits available under the new act. Also, the

existing benefits under this act will still be available. During transition, the

WCB will still take those applications, and we will deal with the whole

application of those benefits.

For the

information of the members, the additional benefits will be retroactive to start

with. Secondly, the pain and suffering awards are done as of the 16th, and then

we will move forward with the additional benefits being retroactive. These

include things like compensation to the victim's family for loss of love,

guidance or affection. Instead of going through a tribunal process, however, we

would be able to process them quicker, because we're not going to make it a

hearing-type format on a tribunal to determine what the pain and suffering

levels are but actually get to where we can get these resources to the victims.

Those

include counselling for the witnesses, protective measures and physical

rehabilitation. They also include medical and dental issues, as well as income

support for the victim or victim's family relating to loss or reduction of

income or inability to provide services previously provided by that family

member.

The whole

intent of this was to (1) get ourselves away from the very expensive

administrative costs that we felt should be going to victims and (2) be able to

move forward with having services and support for victims of crime available as

quickly as possible to take care of those issues today, rather than having them

go through a process sometimes for 18 to 24 months to receive a small amount.

The average award was about $3,000. We felt that we should have that financial

support and those types of supports there for them right when they become

victims.

Sections 1

to 4 inclusive approved.

Title

approved.

Hon. R.

Coleman: I move the bill complete without amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 3:53 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

[ Page 2727 ]

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 24,

Criminal Injury Compensation Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Collins: I call committee stage on Bill 18.

Committee of the Whole House

HEALTH SERVICES STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2002

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 18; T. Christensen in the chair.

The

committee met at 3:54 p.m.

Sections 1

to 19 inclusive approved.

Title

approved.

Hon. C.

Hansen: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 3:54 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

[1555]

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 18,

Health Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Collins: I call committee stage on Bill 19.

Committee of the Whole House

HEALTH PLANNING STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2002

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 19; T. Christensen in the chair.

The

committee met at 3:56 p.m.

Section 1

approved.

On

section

MacPhail: Could the minister explain to me…? I'll ask my two or three

questions on this section. They're a continuation of the same theme.

As I

understand it, sections 2 through 8 change it so that it removes the Emergency

Medical Assistants Licensing Board and puts under the Health Professions Council

a new college, as I understand it, to deal with emergency medical assistants.

What are

the implications for who is now eligible to be an emergency medical assistant or

to be trained as an emergency medical assistant?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: It's the same people that were eligible before. That would be 7,000

first responders and 3,300 paramedics.

MacPhail: I am aware of a controversy that exists between some first

responders who are employed as firefighters and those who are employed as

paramedics with the B.C. Ambulance Service. Does this change in any way

exacerbate or alleviate that controversy?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I'm advised that it doesn't change that in any way.

Sections 2

to 8 inclusive approved.

On

section

MacPhail: I confess I have not had a chance to read the 1,400-page report

from the Health Professions Council. Can the minister explain, in sections 9

through 13, how health professions will be certified, monitored, administered,

disciplined?

Hon. S.

Hawkins: The Health Professions Council only deals with looking at the

granting of new professions. What the member is talking about — the licensing,

the discipline, the investigation — is all done through the self-regulating

colleges after they've been designated a profession and the authority has been

delegated by the government to those professions.

[1600]

The Health

Professions Council has done a lot of work over the last six to eight years, I

believe, and we have made the decision to wind it up, so it will be wound up

December 31. After that, there will be a ministry designate who will take the

applications of groups that want to be designated, and review them.

Sections 9

to 20 inclusive approved.

section

MacPhail: On

section 21, what are the savings that the government is

realizing from firing the Seniors Advisory Council?

Hon. K.

Whittred: The annual budget of the council was $100,000.

MacPhail: Now what do we do when we need seniors' advice?

Hon. K.

Whittred: I am meeting on a regular basis with seniors groups. I am hoping,

over the next several

[ Page 2728 ]

months, to put a more formal process in place so that there is ongoing

consultation.

MacPhail: The Seniors Advisory Council was a group of people that was

regionally chosen. How does the minister plan to replicate the regional input

that seniors advise is so much needed, now that she's fired the council?

Hon. K.

Whittred: Seniors groups exist all over the province. They exist in a whole

variety of ways. There are seniors groups that deal with housing, there are

seniors groups that deal with transportation, and some groups deal with health,

and so on. I look for input from all of these groups.

There are

seniors organizations, such as the Seniors Summit, that have organized

themselves. They work on a regional basis and are representative, I think, of

seniors across the province.

addition, the health authorities, of course, are organized on a regional basis.

As the plans of the health authorities are implemented over the next several

months, we will find that there is room for advisory councils of seniors in

various capacities at the health service delivery area, I believe, and I await

those programs.

MacPhail: The unique strength of the Seniors Advisory Council — that, by

the way, started in the 1980s and proved to be very effective in advising

successive governments of different political stripes — was that it was

one-stop shopping for advice to a government. Those seniors, who were regionally

and multiculturally based, took input from all of the other seniors

organizations, whether it be on transit, health, recreation, housing, legal

matters or guardianship. Now that's gone. Now there will be an approach to

ensure that the seniors of the province are protected with ad hockery. That's

what this minister is proposing — an ad hoc approach to the well-being of

seniors. For a $100,000 savings, I think the province will be in a much poorer

position to do well by our seniors.

[The bells were ordered to be rung.]

[1605]

Section 21

approved on the following division:

YEAS — 61

Falcon

Coell

Hogg

Halsey-Brandt

Hawkins

Whittred

Cheema

Hansen

J. Reid

van Dongen

Barisoff

Nettleton

Roddick

Wilson

Masi

Lee

Hagen

Murray

Collins

de Jong

Nebbeling

Stephens

Abbott

Neufeld

Coleman

Penner

Jarvis

Anderson

Orr

Harris

Nuraney

Brenzinger

Belsey

Bell

Chutter

Mayencourt

Trumper

Johnston

Bennett

R. Stewart

Hayer

Krueger

McMahon

Bray

Les

Nijjar

Bhullar

Wong

Bloy

Suffredine

MacKay

Cobb

K. Stewart

Lekstrom

Brice

Sultan

Hamilton

Sahota

Hawes

Kerr

Manhas

NAYS — 2

MacPhail

Kwan

[1610]

Sections 22

to 29 inclusive approved.

Title

approved.

Hon. S.

Hawkins: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 4:14 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 19,

Health Planning Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

[1615]

Hon. G.

Collins: I call Committee of Supply. For the information of members we'll be

debating the estimates of the Ministry of Children and Family Development.

Committee of Supply

The House

in Committee of Supply B; T. Christensen in the chair.

The

committee met at 4:18 p.m.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT

(continued)

On vote 18:

ministry operations, $1,558,430,000 (continued) .

Hon. G.

Hogg: I might add, if I may, that there were seven questions put in

estimates discussions and

[ Page 2729 ]

debates yesterday, and we have the answers for those. Some of them were

questions which required more information. I have those in writing, and they're

available for the opposition at their request.

MacPhail: I'd be pleased to receive those now, if I may.

I'm going

to be asking a series of questions on adult community living. The first question

is around handyDART. HandyDART is funded by B.C. Transit, but they are services

for adults with special needs. Recently Linette Baker of the Victoria

Association for Community Living said that the reduction in services for

handyDART will have a significant impact and limit lives that have a number of

There are

about 450 people with disabilities in the Victoria area, and handyDART has

introduced a cap on the number of rides a day at 950 and has limited advanced

bookings from one month to two weeks. Has the minister had any input into these

cuts?

Hon. G.

Hogg: No, we haven't.

[1620]

MacPhail: Well, I would urge the minister to look into this, please. The

services for handyDART serve exactly, right over top, the same clients that the

minister serves. I would ask the minister to investigate with handyDART and to

work with handyDART to figure out a way to not limit the mobility of people with

special needs.

Is the

minister aware of a group called the Provincial Monitoring Group?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Yes, we are aware of the Provincial Monitoring Group. It did have a

contract with the ministry. As a result of the review we're going through, in

terms of the service delivery models and the tests we're applying to those,

we've made a decision that that contract will not be continued. We're looking at

other methods of providing regional responses to the types of services that they

were providing.

MacPhail: Yes, the Provincial Monitoring Group is a unique organization.

It's not a group of stakeholders or a group of service providers. It actually

monitors to ensure that people with developmental disabilities have the same

rights as other people to live, work and spend their free time in the community.

They're really a group that monitors to ensure equality for people with

developmental disabilities.

How much

was the Provincial Monitoring Group receiving? What was the cut? Who will

replace this service?

Hon. G.

Hogg: The amount of the contract was $1.379 million. We are in the process

of transitioning. We've given them 90 days to look at alternatives and

transitions with that. In terms of replacing the types of services that have

been provided, we're moving towards accreditation models and peer review

standards.

I should

also point out that one of the tests in the principles that was applied as we

have been working our way through the ministry's 15,000 contracts is looking at

whether or not they actually provide direct services or a coordinating service.

In this matter we've tried to refocus our dollars around direct services and are

looking at models such as I've outlined to look at and provide the monitoring

and ensuring the credence and credibility of the programs provided.

MacPhail: The important aspect of this group — and they were very

successful — is that they actually did monitor on behalf of people with

developmental disabilities to ensure that the services were there. The

monitoring function is gone.

I want to

talk a little bit about how the Ministry of Children and Family Development is

funding families with disabled members. Has the minister appointed a committee,

a review group, to determine funding options for families with people with

disabilities?

Hon. G.

Hogg: I'm just in the process of appointing a transformation committee that

is looking at moving to new governance models, which will be looking at all of

the indices that the member has made reference to.

[1625]

I have been

meeting with a number of service providers and the B.C. Association for

Community Living, which represents some 75 non-profit service providers, and a

number of parents and clients and self-advocates. This group has been meeting

for probably four or five months, and I have been meeting with them. I'm pleased

to say that just yesterday I was able to come to agreement on a set of terms of

reference for a committee that they're putting together to look at the

transformation, to provide new ways of looking at not just funding but the whole

delivery system.

I'm quite

excited about the opportunity for this province, I believe, to take the next

step. I think we should be proud of the fact that we've led in the

deinstitutionalization of community living for the developmentally disabled. I

think the next step is to give more authority, more autonomy and more funding

options and responsibility to both clients and parents.

We've been

able to come to an agreement in terms of how that process will work with the

coalition of the community living service providers, the BCACL, a number of

parents and clients and a number of the for-profit service providers. We have

about 24 people across the province who are all interested in supporting this

initiative and this direction, and I'm quite excited about the opportunities

which this presents to that community to actually take greater authority for and

responsibility over the services that are provided and the methods by which they

are provided.

MacPhail: Well, there's no question that the minister talks about improving

family and community capacity to exercise responsibility, but the families

[ Page 2730 ]

themselves have made it quite clear that there's no sense in giving families

that responsibility if all the ministry is doing is downloading it onto the

families without giving resources.

I note in

the service plan that the average amount of money it costs the ministry for one

adult with developmental disabilities is about $64,000 each year. The ministry

is planning to increase that funding per adult up to about $67,000 this year.

Then, curiously, the next year it plummets to $59,000 per person and then drops

further to $51,000 for year '04-05. How does it work that at the same time that

families get greater responsibility, there'll be less money available?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Firstly, with respect to downloading and talking about the changes

that are taking place there, I should point out to the member that in the first

meetings I had with the coalition and the BCACL, the people who were talking

about and excited about this unprecedented coalition, this unprecedented

agreement in terms of what's in the best interests of this community, they said

they felt that by giving them some more options, they could actually provide an

equal number of services and an equal quality of services for about 20 percent

less than we're currently budgeting. They, of course, want to be able to use

those moneys to deal with some of the wait-lists we have to face.

In looking

at and developing this year's budget and the projections we have for three years

down the road in the service plan, we're projecting a 17 percent reduction in

this area. That is actually 3 percent, or about $45 million, more than they felt

they'd be able to deal with.

I'm

assuming the numbers the member has referred to, in changing the $64,000 to

$67,000 and the other changes, is a product of dividing the area by the number

of developmentally disabled that we're providing services to. Actually, that

mathematical formulation doesn't work. We're moving towards individualized

funding models where we'll actually be able to provide support for those

developmentally disabled, perhaps in the context of their family.

We had an

example last week of an individual who arrived at one of our member's offices

with her sister and said: "I just can't afford to continue to keep my

developmentally disabled sister with me. It's too costly. For about $400 or $500

more a month in individualized funding, I'd be able to do that." Instead,

in the past the practice of the state has been, "You exist for as long as

you can, and when you can't function any further, the state will take over"

— averaging somewhere around $64,000 a year to do that.

We believe

there is a range that can be provided, and that is that we're able to provide

funding at that range, where we're providing support for families that want to

stay together, and then we're going to see the average drop. That doesn't mean

that those people who are in the full care of the state will not be receiving

more or less. It just means that that function number will probably be the same,

but the average will drop as we're able to look at provision of services in

different methods and at different levels.

MacPhail: The minister is saying that he met with the groups, and everybody

is happy with the 17 percent cuts.

Hon. G.

Hogg: No, I'm certainly not saying that. I'm saying that what the group said

was that they could provide the same level of services that are being provided

today for 20 percent less. They believe that those moneys, the 20 percent

savings, should all be put into the ability to reduce the wait-list, which we

inherited and which has been around for a long, long time.

[1630]

I've made

the decision, with respect to that, that we contribute about $45 million to

addressing that wait-list. Clearly, we won't have enough money to deal with all

of the issues there, but we will be able to provide the same level of services

that we've had. We'll be able to provide them more effectively and better

because we're going to give clients, parents and the community more authority

and responsibility over that decision-making process and because we're going to

move to individualized funding models that allow them to actually develop

wraparound services rather than having to force them into different programs and

services which the ministry funds in a block fashion.

MacPhail: Well, the minister seems to think that everything's rosy, so I

certainly wish him well. I hear of concerns out in the community, but all I can

rely on is the minister reiterating or recounting, I hope in an accurate way,

that the community seems to be fine with this. We certainly hear rumblings that

are much different. Of course, for the minister to somehow suggest that cuts of

17 percent will be entirely made up somehow with families being able to find

efficiencies in an experimental model…. It will require close monitoring.

That was

why my question about…. The cuts in funding to the Provincial Monitoring Group

seem to be so ill-advised at a time when the minister's moving into a new model

that…. Really, with cuts imposed, it would seem more than ever that there

would need to be a time for the most vulnerable to have their own provincial

monitoring group.

The

minister mentioned that they'll be going to a new governance model. Yes, this is

a governance model. As I understand it, it's exactly the one that the Minister

of Health Services threw out — the regional model for service delivery. In

fact, I've met with groups who said: "Oh my God, we were just told that we

won't have any input into health authorities anymore, and now we're being asked

to replicate what we used to have under the Children and Family Development

ministry." That's a curious aspect of this government: the one hand doesn't

know what the other hand is doing. What is the process for implementing a new

governance and service delivery structure?

Hon. G.

Hogg: I don't want to pretend that every one of the developmentally disabled

or every one of some 75 non-profit service providers within the province is

ecstatic or delighted or happy, but the proposal

[ Page 2731 ]

we're dealing with is a proposal that came from them. It's not a proposal

that was dreamt up or thought out somewhere outside of that.

As a

government we share a vision with the community living sector as represented by

their umbrella agency, the B.C. Association for Community Living, as represented

by a coalition of for-profit providers that are a part of that. We share that

vision. We're moving to a model that will actually see the monitors put into

positions of being able to monitor parents and clients who are actually going to

be a part of the government's structure that will be in place. I am delighted

and to some degree excited.

I was just

sharing with the Minister of Finance that I was able to finalize some terms of

reference with respect to the process and the appointment of the committee of

some 24 clients and service providers and parents yesterday. This morning about

120 service providers and parents from all over the province met, as they have

been, to look at the strategies they want to move with. They were read the terms

of reference which I provided, and I was told that they actually provided the

terms of reference and the opportunity which they were given.… They greeted

that with a standing ovation. There is, certainly within the context of this

sector, some optimism and some excitement around the vision and around the

process that will give them more authority and more responsibility as we move

forward.

The process

is that there is a transformation committee of some 24 members. Their first

meeting, I believe, will be in two weeks' time. They'll be looking at the

vision, which we can talk about, but it is well articulated and laid out on our

website. They'll be talking about the vision and an operational model that will

allow that vision to come into being. More than half the representatives are

parents or self-advocates from the community living sector, so they'll be well

represented within that. We hope to have that process completed by the end of

June. They'll come back with their recommendations in terms of the process and

the model they see as being best able to effect the vision we've laid out.

I will be

meeting with them sometime within the next…. Hopefully, I will be able to

attend their first meeting, in fact, and talk to them about the issues and the

initiatives and again be able to thank them, because the community has really

stepped forward and said that this is the way we should be going. This is in the

best interests of making sure that we're able to have the developmentally

disabled move into the mainstream part and existence of our society. I hope that

we're able to go there and to give them that responsibility, authority and

ability.

[1635]

MacPhail: Well, it sounds great. I wish the minister well. It's sounds like

the community groups are completely on board. A standing ovation — that's

wonderful. Where would the terms of reference be found — on your website?

An Hon.

Member: He said.

MacPhail: No, he said the vision is found on the website, but thank you for

your help.

Hon. G.

Hogg: The first issues around the transformation and the layout of the

process are on the website. The terms of reference as now approved by that

group, which were just approved this morning, will be loaded hopefully…

Certainly by tomorrow those will be on the website as well. The other issues

that we've been talking about with them are on the website of BCACL and

certainly will be on our website as well.

Again, the

Leader of the Opposition had commented that it sounds good, and I think it does

sound good. It sounds good because the community has really come together and

has been willing to take some responsibility and put forward…. They've put an

enormous amount of energy and effort into developing this model which they

believe, and I believe with them, is in the best interests of the

developmentally disabled. I hope very much that we're able to see it through to

a conclusion that will allow them to have the type of freedom that we want them

to have.

MacPhail: Those people that were running ads against the government around

services for the developmentally disabled are now on board?

Hon. G.

Hogg: That was the Developmental Disabilities Association out of Richmond.

They had some particular concerns in the early going with respect to some belief

that there was going to be some form of institutionalization taking place. I

have met with them a number of times. You'll notice that the ads have stopped.

They are actually being represented on our transformation committee. They have

agreed to sit on that committee and to be a part of developing this new vision

for the province. So, yes, they are a part of it.

MacPhail: The ministry has already announced that there's going to be 11

community care regions. Apparently, they've also been told that they need to

balance their budgets. Is that accurate?

Hon. G.

Hogg: I know that's not accurate. In fact, we are moving to five regions

which are consistent with the regions that exist for the Ministry of Health. The

Leader of the Opposition may well be referring to the 11 regions which were in

existence prior to us making the shift to the five regions and may well be

referring to some initiatives that may have existed within the context of some

of those regions to deal with the budget overruns.

When we

formed government, this ministry was between about $55 million and $60 million

projected over budget. We asked that they come in on budget, and they have done

that. Any of the issues which the Leader of the Opposition may be referring to

may well have come out of that. We have now moved to five

[ Page 2732 ]

regions and appointed interim CEOs for those five regions.

MacPhail: The 11 community care regions came from what the ministry itself

announced in the last few months. Has the ministry now moved to five regions —

is that it?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Yes, we have moved to five regions. I don't remember any announcement

about 11 regions. It may well have been just consistent with the 11 regions

which we inherited when we formed government and looked at and made the decision

to move to five regions. I'm not aware of any announcements. That may well have

been something that was old news.

MacPhail: The Victoria Association for Community Living raised a concern

around the need for the capital region — I guess it's now the whole Vancouver

Island region — to balance its budget. They articulated the concern that

community associations all over the province were coming under increased

pressure to provide more services, reduce staff wages or lay off staff. For

instance, I'm sure the minister is aware that the Victoria Association for

Community Living was contemplating laying off staff and reducing programs. Staff

were being asked to contemplate wage cuts of up to 24 percent. Is that old news

too? Has that problem been resolved?

[1640]

Hon. G.

Hogg: The Leader of the Opposition references situations that were in

existence within last year's budget in an effort to bring them in on budget. The

ministry is still working with the Victoria Association for Community Living. I

met with about 150 representatives of that association about two weeks ago and

went through a number of the issues and concerns. Clearly, there is concern

amongst that group around some of those issues.

We have

said to each of the regions: "You have a responsibility to handle the

budget which you were given responsibly and come in on budget." In fact,

the budget they have been working with within that framework was the budget

which was given to them and approved last year by the former government. We've

asked them to come in consistent with that model. I understand they're very

close to having done that, and they're actually doing some continuing work into

this year to ensure that they're not dealing with a structural deficit.

MacPhail: I'm not going to spend much time challenging the minister. He's

very smooth and very glib. Somehow he's trying to say that things are no worse

than they were before. That's the message I get.

I hope

that's true. It will be unbelievable if, indeed, they are no worse than before

with these massive cuts to his budget. Clearly, he's brimming to the fullest

with confidence that things are fine. Somehow he tries to say, as I've pointed

out to other ministers who have been in this chamber with me before: "Oh,

don't worry. We're just doing exactly the same thing as what was done in the

past." Now, that's convenient on a day like this. Earlier in the day it was

like everything in the past was hell.

This

minister is just repeating this message from this government. I'm not going to

challenge him at all. It will be up to him to prove that all he's doing is

carrying on with what happened before and that the associations just have to

buck up or that the families have figured out that a 17 percent cut really isn't

bad.

Things are

very different. It would be folly for this minister, on two counts, to not admit

that things were different. If it fails, it'll come back to haunt him. If it's

successful, he won't be able to claim credit.

Hon. G.

Hogg: If the Leader of the Opposition is picking up that I'm glib, then we'd

better go back into another study of body language, listening to intonations and

being able to pick up a little more effectively.

I'm

anything but glib. I'm darned excited and pleased because the community has been

given the authority to make some decisions and has actually done that. The

community of parents and developmentally disabled has said: "We want to

have more authority. We want to have more responsibility. We want to make some

decisions."

I'm excited

because they've said that and they're willing to do that. I'm excited because

we've been able to facilitate that, despite them trying to do that for a number

of years and never getting to the point they're at today. I think we should be

darned pleased and darned excited about that, and I am.

Things are

very different. I'm pleased that things are very different. The community is

pleased that things are very different because they're going to have an

opportunity to take more responsibility for their services and the things that

they have.

I'm not

glib; I'm excited. Things are different. The Leader of the Opposition made

reference to the funding. The funding model that we have in existence today is

virtually the same one that existed last year in terms of the envelope of

funding. The way that we're being able to administer that is much more

consistent with the way that the BCACL with the service providers and the

clients want. We're being able to administer and change that in fashions that

focus services on the direct service delivery, where we think it should be.

I'm not

glib; I am excited. Things are very different. They're going to continue to be

different because the community is driving that. The community wants that. They

see the vision and the opportunity. We want to facilitate that. We don't want to

get in the way.

MacPhail: The minister misses my point. The organizations with whom he is

working are the exact same organizations that have existed delivering services

in a dedicated and time-honoured fashion over the last years. If somehow those

associations for community living have remade themselves, good.

[ Page 2733 ]

It's not as

if those associations weren't remaking themselves, developing new programs and

working closely at a community level before.

[1645]

That's all

I'm saying to the minister. Either something — and he can certainly articulate

that — was seriously amiss in the past, and that would be working with those

same organizations, or else the mandate given the organizations has been such

that they're forced to make change. That's all I'm saying.

Perhaps the

minister could articulate, given that these are the same organizations

delivering the services, what creates the new excitement that wasn't there

before.

Hon. G.

Hogg: Well, I have spoken with past ministers in this ministry, and I know

that there have been efforts made in the past government to try and build the

coalition, and it never quite made it to the level that it's at today. That's

one of the reasons I'm excited about what has taken place.

Interjection.

Hon. G.

Hogg: The Leader of the Opposition said: "Because it's facing

cuts." In fact, this came forward prior to knowledge with respect to

budgets. This is something that has been worked at. I give full credit to the

parents and the service providers and the clients in the work that they've done

in the past to do that. I'm not denying that they believe that the full level of

funding should be there through the full course of the three-year service plan.

The reality

is that we're going to have to deal with a 17 percent cut. They're not happy

about that. I'm not saying that they are happy. What they are happy with is the

change in a service delivery model that says to them: "We're giving you

some responsibility, and you're going to have the ability to make some more

decisions around how that service is provided."

As an

example, one of the models that parents are looking at and have met with and

have arranged for me to meet with was a fellow from the Western Australia's

Disabilities Commission, Eddie Bartnick. I had a chance to meet with him and

talk about the initiatives that have taken place in western Australia. Many of

the parents are excited about that model and about what it has to offer.

When I

first met with them, the parents said that the meeting was unprecedented in the

history of British Columbia, inasmuch as the developmentally disabled community

had come together to focus on a direction and to focus on an idea. Of the 25

representatives we have on the transformation committee, 14 of them are families

or self-advocates. We really are saying to the community: "Here are some

parameters; here are some ideas. Let's see if we can reinvent this system so

that we can take the next iteration, the next step."

As I said

earlier, British Columbians should be very proud of the fact that we have

deinstitutionalized; that we've closed down places like Woodlands, Glendale and

Tranquille; and that we've moved the developmentally disabled into the

communities. And we should now have the chance to take the next iteration, the

next step in the growth of that. That's really what we're trying to do. We're

doing that because the community is taking some initiative, because we've been

able to facilitate them to do that and because they want to. Not only is it

economical, but morally it's the right thing to do. Morally, it's the right

thing to do to take that step to ensure that the developmentally disabled are in

the community and have the opportunity to be full participants in our

communities.

That's the

step we're trying to take. That's what we're trying to facilitate, and that's

what the parents and self-advocates and service providers want. That's the

direction we're going. That's what the transformation committee is working on;

that's what the parents are working on.

MacPhail: How will the minister be making sure that the provincial

standardized eligibility and assessment process for adults with developmental

disabilities is a fair one?

Hon. G.

Hogg: The role of the state throughout all of this is to fund the

programming, to ensure that standards are in place and are followed, and to use

accountability to ensure that it happens.

I don't

want to preclude or predetermine what the outcome of the process that parents

are involved in will be, but if we go to the model that exists, like the Western

Australia disabilities model, then we're going to a model where parents and

service recipients are actually there monitoring and advocating for the quality

of services that exist. Combined with accreditation models, I don't think there

can be a better model in terms of quality of service than having provincial

standards set, holding people accountable and actually having the recipients of

service and their parents there to monitor and ensure that the quality of

service that they receive is the quality which they're entitled to. I think

that's an awfully good system for ensuring that there is quality of service out

there.

MacPhail: In answer to my question about what kind of eligibility and

assessment process is in place to make it fair, it's the western Australia

model? Is that the answer?

Hon. G.

Hogg: No, it's not. I said I didn't want to preclude the outcome of the

process that parents and service providers and clients are involved in. But

certainly that's one of the models that they're looking at. Ultimately, they're

going to be making some decisions about that.

There are

internationally accepted standards for the definition of the developmentally

disabled that are sometimes an impediment, but those broadly accepted

international standards are probably ones which will continue to be accepted in

terms of the standards that

[ Page 2734 ]

will see people coming into the care of the state through that model.

[1650]

The parents

and the clients may well, within the purview of the direction that they have and

the terms of reference they have, adjust some of those in some fashion as well.

I don't know the final outcome of that, because we're giving parents and clients

some ability to make some decisions and to recommend on that.

MacPhail: I hope we're talking about the same thing. I assume the minister

is putting in place a provincial standardized eligibility and assessment process

to determine support for an adult with a developmental disability. That's what

I'm talking about. Is that what the minister is talking about, too, in what he

just said to me?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Perhaps I'm not directly and correctly understanding what the Leader

of the Opposition is saying.

The

international definition of developmentally disabled is a standard which is out

there and which is used in this province and used internationally. That is still

there. Within the service plan there is some discussion of the processes we're

going through to deal with governance models which may, in fact, give parents

the ability to adjust that in some fashion.

Does the

leader have something I could eat? Do you have food to share? No.

MacPhail: No. You know we're not allowed to eat in the chamber.

Hon. G.

Hogg: How depressing. Not that I need anything to eat, not that there's

anything required, but I did see you chewing and thought perhaps you were not

chewing on your tongue but probably had food to share. If you don't have

anything to share, I'll move on hungry.

The

international definition is in effect and in place in this province. There may

be some modifications to that as the parents become involved in it. I'm not sure

whether I'm actually answering the question the Leader of the Opposition has

put. Perhaps we could redefine the question so that even I can understand it.

MacPhail: I'm just quoting what the ministry has said — that they will be

introducing a provincial standardized eligibility and assessment process for

adults with developmental disabilities. I assume that's a process whereby people

go forward and say: "Here are my needs. What am I eligible for?"

My next

question was going to be: will that eligibility process involve means testing?

Hon. G.

Hogg: I think I understand the question. The process we are following as a

ministry is to look at the standardized eligibility and assessment process, and

the process we're following to do that is reviewing research and existing

practices around assessment tools; determining a rate structure around

assessment that is based on budget and categorized by service level; exploring

issues such as income testing; drafting assessment processes, policies,

procedures, practice and guidelines; and after piloting, evaluating and

finalizing, introducing standardized assessment and rate structures to implement

it provincially. All of those issues are issues which will be managed, directed

and controlled by the transformation committee we've put in place as of

yesterday. I expect, again, that we're going to have the recommendations with

respect to the outcomes of those coming from the parents and the self-advocates

and the service providers who sit on that committee.

MacPhail: It's my understanding now that there is no income testing, so if

income testing is being explored, it will be a new concept.

Hon. G.

Hogg: I'm not sure who I should be thanking for the envelope, but obviously

somebody is caring, and I'm willing to share that which has been provided to me.

The Leader

of the Opposition is correct. There is not now income testing in existence, and

as we go through this process, it is something the committee will be looking at

and examining and determining the impact of. Clearly, no decisions have been

made with respect to that. Clearly, that is something which is in the purview of

the transformation committee to review.

[1655]

MacPhail: Just for the minister's information, I have learned my lesson

about placing things on members' desks.

Children

and adults who require specialized equipment for their homes and workplaces are

growing. What's the ministry doing to assist people in securing equipment?

What's the policy now? How much funding is being provided in this budget for the

purpose of purchasing specialized equipment?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Could I ask the member to clarify whether that is for children or

adults? Apparently we have two different programs that exist, depending upon

which….

MacPhail: Both.

Hon. G.

Hogg: With respect to special needs children in the medical benefits program

and equipment, it supports some 2,600 children who are either in care or

eligible for the At Home program and the medical benefits program that comes out

of that.

I was

honoured to be at the opening of a recycling program that the ministry sponsored

with the Canadian Red Cross Society, which actually recycles much of the

equipment that is used and needed in these…. We were able to name that after a

member of the ministry who met an untimely death, Jane Bayliff, who had

[ Page 2735 ]

been most active in terms of contributing to and supporting this.

The program

will be maintained at the current funding level, a level it has been at for some

time. If the member wishes more of a breakdown of the types of service provided

in that, I'd be happy to provide some of that.

With

respect to the adults portion of that, those under B.C. Benefits fall under the

Ministry of Human Resources. The medical equipment portions of that fall under

the Ministry of Health Services.

MacPhail: There are no cuts to that budget, then, in this ministry.

Hon. G.

Hogg: That's correct with respect to the special needs portion of the

medical benefits program in the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It

is maintained.

MacPhail: The group Aim High, in Prince George, was fairly active in their

community to protect their services. Is Aim High one of the organizations that

is working so well with the minister now and is fully in the loop?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Aim High is a member of the B.C. Association for Community Living.

There are some 75 service providers within that. BCACL has been representing….

All of their member agencies have been a part of that representation.

[1700]

MacPhail: I still have a couple of questions on the early childhood

development initiative that arose yesterday, and that will complete the

opposition's discussion with the minister. I want to go through this because I

am pursuing this vigorously myself. I'd be happy, if the minister can answer my

questions, to leave it alone.

We've

already explored the fact that the early childhood development initiative is a

provincial-territorial-federal government program. In '01-02 the federal

government transferred $39.6 million to B.C. So far the Minister of State for

Early Childhood Development has accounted for $20.8 million of that and then

suggests that the rest of the money has been administered by other ministries,

specifically in areas relating to early childhood development, but we can't find

out the details of that.

There's

about $19 million — almost half of it — unaccounted for. These are federal

dollars. It's not even provincial money that we're talking about here. Then this

program expands over the next five years, so there'll be $291 million from the

federal government. The provincial government will be investing $249 million, so

that's a total of $540 million, but no one, even in looking at the three-year

service plan, can figure out where this money is going. Organizations who know

this is targeted money from the federal government are desperate to find out

where this money has gone. This government is not allowed to spend the money on

anything other than early childhood development because it's not their money to

spend. It's federal money.

That's the

background of my questions. Here is my question: how are the Ministry of Health

Services, the Ministry of Human Resources and the Ministry of Community,

Aboriginal and Women's Services spending these federal early childhood

development moneys? If I could just clarify, Mr. Chair. These questions were

directed to us to be answered by the Minister of Children and Family Development

by other ministers.

Hon. G.

Hogg: I'm able to provide the Leader of the Opposition with the breakdown of

those expenditures within the Ministry of Children and Family Development. I

know she's requesting those as part of the agreement. There is currently being

developed a letter of reporting-out to the federal government with respect to

those expenditures. I saw a draft of that letter this morning. I expect it will

be finalized and going to the federal government probably within a week. We will

commit to posting that on the website when that goes out within about a week's

time. There were still some discussions to be held with the Ministry of Health

and the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services, as well as with

the Ministry of Education, to make sure that those numbers and figures are

accurate. I'd be happy to ensure that the Leader of the Opposition receives a

copy of that when it is completed and ready to go.

I don't

know if the member is interested in hearing about the initiatives that have

taken place within our ministry, but I think, as I understand the question, it

is a more global question in terms of the accounting of the dollars that have

come from the federal government, the accounting of the dollars which the

provincial government has put into it and a breakdown of those. Part of the

accountability process requires that we report that out to the federal

government. We'll be doing that within the next week, and I'm happy to provide

the Leader of the Opposition with a copy of that.

[1705]

MacPhail: So that's to answer the question? That will be a full accounting

of the $39.6 million that was given to the province from the federal government

in '01-02?

Hon. G.

Hogg: The baseline figures with respect to the federal funding models are

from the year 2000-01. That's what the federal government is now asking us to

put in place to ensure the monitoring is there and to show the projections that

come off that.

We're now

putting together the final figures for '01-02. I have to report those out as

well. I'm advised that those numbers have to wait for the public accounts to

report out. Those numbers will be provided both provincially and to the federal

government as part of the reporting-out process by the end of June. We'll have

those figures in place by the end of June.

[ Page 2736 ]

The

reporting that we will be providing to the federal government within the next

week to ten days will show the baselines upon which the $291.2 million funding

over the five-year period would be built upon. The actual expenditures for

'01-02 will be reflected in the public accounts.

MacPhail: Okay. People have been waiting a long time for it, so whatever.

I'm asking

whether it will be an accounting of the $39.6 million. That's all I was asking.

Hon. G.

Hogg: Yes, when public accounts report out and we get those figures at the

end of June, it will be a full accounting of the $39.6 million.

MacPhail: Will it be published in such a way that the people who are

concerned about this can go to one page and say: "We were given $39.6

million, and here's how it was spent"? Or will the minister guide us to

where else we would look?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Yes, they tell me that even I will be able to understand it. It will

be posted both on the federal government site as well as on our ministry site,

and it will be broken down according to programs.

MacPhail: My last two questions are on the areas of inner-city kids and

mental illness. The two are separate. I'm not tying those two together.

I just

wanted to bring this to the minister's attention, because yesterday I was

reading the Hansard debate between the minister and my colleague from

Vancouver–Mount Pleasant, and I noted one area that affects my riding

directly. That's the cuts to inner-city school funding that will directly affect

prekindergarten kiddies.

This is a

huge issue in my riding — a huge issue. Families who live in my riding are

amongst the most vulnerable. They have very few resources to organize themselves

beyond feeding, clothing and getting children to bed. Now the inner-city school

funding is greatly at risk. Part of that inner-city school funding funds the

prekindergarten program at one of my schools, the Hastings School.

[1710]

Yesterday

the Minister of State for Early Childhood Development said, "Don't worry.

There are programs like HIPPY," which is the home instruction program for

preschool youngsters. The one on the east side of Vancouver is at Britannia

Community Services Centre.

I just want

to let the minister know, as he's deliberating on what to do about inner-city

school funding, that this is not an answer. It may make sense for those of us

who have well-organized, well-resourced lives, but if these families had

well-organized, well-resourced lives, there would be no need for inner-city

school funding.

Getting

from my riding to the HIPPY program at Britannia is an impossible task for the

families in my riding. We're talking about prekindergarten. It requires two

buses and a walk, at a minimum. Secondly, it also requires people to have bus

fare. Frankly, there's also a substantial waiting list for the home instruction

program for preschool youngsters at Britannia. For all of those reasons, that's

why Hastings School, through the Vancouver school board, used some of its own

inner-city school funding to fund a prekindergarten at Hastings School. It's

paid off hugely. The last time I visited it, the program people working with

these kiddies said: "This is such an investment. When these children enter

kindergarten and grade 1, they're adjusted, and they're entering on a basis of

equality for behavioral development."

I know that

the minister is not coming clean on what he's going to do with inner-city school

funding, which means, I think, that there's still lots of opportunity to lobby

him. I'm encouraging everybody to lobby this minister as hard as possible to

maintain inner-city school funding.

Above all

else, inner-city school funding is all about what Dr. Fraser Mustard says is an

investment in the economy. The minister stood up yesterday — or whenever my

colleague asked the question in question period about inner-city school funding

— and said: "We're relying on Dr. Fraser Mustard." Inner-city school

funding is a Fraser Mustard initiative. I make that appeal to the minister to,

whatever he does with inner-city school funding, think about those

prekindergarten kids who don't have the ability to take two buses and do a long

walk, let alone have the bus fare.

Hon. G.

Hogg: I thank the member for her comments. I'm well aware of the research

and the impact that has. It's also been pointed out to me that at the Britannia

Community Services Centre, the HIPPY program has actually received a one-time

grant of $75,900 within the last week or two, which will assist and support them

with respect to wait-lists that the Leader of the Opposition may have referred

to. I thank her for her comments with respect to inner-city schools.

MacPhail: My last area to explore is child and youth mental health. This

minister is responsible for that. What are the plans? The ministry service plan

says that it will be developing a child and youth mental health plan. When will

this be made available?

Hon. G.

Hogg: One of the issues of concern for me when I took over this ministry was

that we had an adult mental health plan but not a child and youth mental health

plan. I talked to many of the professionals in the field and many of the service

providers, and they saw this as an issue and a concern. There were particular

concerns around the transitions. We don't do a very good job of transitioning

children and youth out of psychiatric acute-care hospitals into the community.

We don't do a very good job of transitioning when they reach the age of

majority.

In an

effort to deal with that, the Minister of State for Mental Health and I

appointed a committee to develop a comprehensive child and youth mental health

[ Page 2737 ]

plan. They have been consulting and meeting with that and are supposed to

have a draft ready for us by the end of this month and a final report sometime

during the summer.

[1715]

MacPhail: How many dollars of this minister's budget will go toward that

child and youth mental health plan?

Hon. G.

Hogg: The budget in the child and youth mental health services area is $69.1

million, which I'd say is an increase over the restated budget of '01-02. In

terms of the amounts that will go directly into the mental health plan, we don't

know exactly what those will be for this point in time. We don't know what it'll

be requesting and the actions and recommendations that will come out of that. We

will be looking at the budget we have and looking at the plan and seeing how we

can adjust the services and the funding to address the direction and

recommendations coming out of that plan.

MacPhail: Will the services for child and youth mental health be delivered

through the regional structure of this ministry?

Hon. G.

Hogg: Yes, they will, with the exception of the central agency, the

residential centre, which is the Maples, but the remainder will be delivered

through the regional model.

MacPhail: Mr. Chair, thank the minister. Those are the questions that the

opposition has. I'll yield the floor, if any, before conclusion of estimates.

S. Orr:

I have a few questions left over from the other day that I would like to ask for

my constituents. One of my questions was actually going to be about inner-city

schools, but I just noticed that the member previous brought it up, so I'm not

going to repeat it. I would like it on record that we have in fact lobbied the

minister many times.

My first

question is: what will happen to the 2,800 social workers who will find their

jobs going to the community governance authorities?

Hon. G.

Hogg: To facilitate the transfer of 2,800 social workers to community

organizations, there will have to be legislation. That legislation we expect to

be introduced in about a year. The model for doing that…. Traditionally,

government looks at introducing legislation and struggling to find out what

happens and how that's going to be implemented. We are anxious to have some

experience with that and experience with the public policy — to push the

public policy so that legislation is in fact a reflection of the public policy

initiatives that we're taking.

Towards

that end, we are looking at co-locating a number of our staff members today.

Co-locating our staff members in non-profit service sector organizations,

perhaps even some for-profit organizations, where they will carry out their

tasks side by side with community organizations and community groups…. In this

area the Western Communities has been a wonderful demonstration of that type of

initiative where we'll be able to co-locate with them.

As the

transition takes place with these workers, we've been very diligent in this

ministry, and I don't expect that in terms of the targets that we have, as the

workload reduces, we will have any staff members that we will have to lay off.

Certainly, we haven't had to do that to this point in time. I expect that we

will be able to meet our targets with respect to that without any layoffs —

just by the natural attrition and the processes that we've been following.

I expect

that as we develop the social service authorities and the legislation to put

those in place, we will see the 2,800 workers making these transitions to these

community-based organizations. I expect they will do that with the full benefits

of their union agreement — the same wages, benefits and seniority, and all of

the issues associated with that — that they currently enjoy. It's simply that

their cheque will come from a different point at that point in time, as the

state continues to be responsible for ensuring that they are funded and that

those services are provided.

[1720]

Certainly,

there is a certain amount of uncertainty and angst that goes through the

transition. It comes with transition and change. But I have met with a number of

social workers who are really, genuinely excited about the opportunity to work

within their communities and respond to the needs and nuances of the social

service needs of families and individuals within their communities. I'm very

excited that they will have an opportunity to actually utilize their training,

skill and education in a much broader sense than they have ever been able to do

within the confines of a large bureaucratic structure and all the limitations

that it presents. I expect we're going to see better services for the children

and families of this province, because we're going to give social workers more

flexibility and more ability to work and to function within their communities.

S. Orr:

I have a couple of questions. This is the last question under the governance

structure. What kinds of controls will the ministry maintain with respect to

appropriate use of funds and overall policy coordination?

Hon. G.

Hogg: The ministry is developing a provincial accountability framework. We

have a committee of experts which I met with about a week ago. They are a number

of experts, including one from the Canadian Comprehensive Auditing Foundation in

particular, David Moynagh from Toronto, who is one of the acknowledged experts

in accountability in Canada, combined with representatives from the University

of Victoria and a number of representatives from around the province in both

government and NGO responsi-

[ Page 2738 ]

bilities. They will have a draft of their public consultation process that

will be up on the website in mid-May. We'll expect to have consultation and

review of that, because when we last posted some of the transformation

documents, we had some 100,000 hits on that, and we've had great participation

as we've been developing this model.

Secondly,

we'll be looking at performance contracts with boards. We'll be looking at

accreditation of boards and of service providers. Auditing and financial

accountability will be in place. We're going to, again, look at the whole

process of whether or not the BCASW, B.C. Association of Social Workers, should

be looking at becoming a college or havin