2005 Legislative Session: First Session, 38th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2005

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 2, Number 9

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

Trans-Canada Highway safety

N. Macdonald

Small business

R. Cantelon

Williams Lake and District Chamber of

Commerce

C. Wyse

Bear safety awareness

D. MacKay

Mid-Main Community Health Clinic

D. Chudnovsky

MRI scanning services in central

interior B.C.

J. Rustad

Oral Questions

Role of facilitators in teachers labour

dispute

C. James

Hon. M. de

Jong

J. Horgan

L. Krog

J. Kwan

M. Karagianis

Impact of government policies on

education system

D. Thorne

Hon. S. Bond

D. Routley

Hiring of Gary Cowan for Fast-Track

program

H. Lali

Hon. C. Hansen

Committee of the Whole House

North Island–Coast Development

Initiative Trust Act (Bill 7)

N. Simons

Hon. C. Hansen

J. Horgan

S. Fraser

C. Trevena

D. Routley

Report and Third Reading of Bills

North Island–Coast Development

Initiative Trust Act (Bill 7)

Committee of the Whole House

Southern Interior Development

Initiative Trust Act (Bill 8)

N. Macdonald

Hon. C. Hansen

C. Evans

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Southern Interior Development

Initiative Trust Act (Bill 8)

Committee of the Whole House

Forests and Range Statutes Amendment

Act, 2005 (Bill 10)

B. Simpson

Hon. R.

Coleman

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Forests and Range Statutes Amendment

Act, 2005 (Bill 10)

Second Reading of Bills

Civil Forfeiture Act (Bill 13)

Hon. J. Les

J. Brar

M. Polak

D. MacKay

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Community

Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors' and Women's Issues

(continued)

Hon. I. Chong

H. Lali

Estimates: Ministry of Agriculture and

Lands

Hon. P. Bell

B. Ralston

[ Page 913 ]

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2005

The House met at 2:03 p.m.

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

N. Macdonald: It's with pleasure that I rise to introduce Pavi Khun Khun. He's a small business owner, a volunteer with victims services, an RCMP auxiliary constable for Golden detachment and a former student of mine. I'm very proud to introduce him as well as Neelam Bains, a local teacher in Victoria at Stelly's Secondary School. Please join me in welcoming them.

[1405]

Hon. R. Thorpe: This week we are celebrating Small Business Week, a week dedicated to celebrating the tremendous contribution that small business makes to the economy of British Columbia. Today in British Columbia, one in five of our entrepreneurs is under the age of 35.

Visiting the Legislature today are Jan Bell-Irving, president of Junior Achievement British Columbia; Steve Wilson, chair of Junior Achievement B.C.; Jason Guille, president of the Young Entrepreneurs Association; Kate Falkenberg, a young entrepreneur; Davin Greenwell, a young entrepreneur; James Hackett from the Canadian Youth Business Foundation; Leah Painter of Business Victoria, a young entrepreneur; and Brian Wesley, chair of the Greater Victoria Economic Commission. Would the House please make these visitors very welcome.

J. McIntyre: I would like to welcome good friends of mine visiting the gallery today: Mr. Ted Upward and Ms. Julie Glover. Julie retired earlier this year from the Agricultural Land Commission after many, many years of service on staff and as a commissioner. I would like the House to make them both feel very welcome today.

Hon. W. Oppal: I have the pleasure of introducing the consul general of Portugal, Mr. Juan Adabrio, and a Member of Parliament for the national parliament of Portugal, Mr. Consuelo Santos, and his wife Mrs. Santos, who are in the gallery today. I want a warm welcome for them.

L. Mayencourt: I have the pleasure of introducing two guests from my neighbourhood in Vancouver-Burrard. They are Lowell MacRae and Tim McMahon. Today Tim is here in the Legislature to celebrate his 70th birthday. Would the House please make them both very welcome.

Hon. O. Ilich: I would like to recognize the accomplishments of one of my constituents in Richmond. Celine Gittens recently competed in the Genée International Ballet Competition in London, England.

This very prestigious competition promotes and rewards standards of excellence in young ballet dancers, age 19 years and under, from all over the world. Fifty-three of the world's best dancers had the experience of working with world-renowned teachers and choreographers and the opportunity to dance at the prestigious Sadler's Wells Theatre in London.

Celine Gittens won a gold medal — the first gold medal for Canada in the 75-year history of this storied competition. I ask the House to join me today in congratulating Celine Gittens on this truly outstanding accomplishment.

D. Hayer: Today we had, from the Surrey RCMP, visiting the caucus members, Patrick Mehain from Surrey. He's the president of the Mounted Police Professional Association in Surrey. He was here with others of his colleagues discussing some issues with the caucus members. Would the House please make them welcome.

Hon. W. Oppal: I want to introduce to the House articling students from the Ministry of Attorney General — Susan Nary, Simon Owen, Kathleen McIntosh, Bryant Mackenzie and their legislative counsel, Don Leroy — who are in the gallery.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, I would like to take this opportunity to introduce 25 public servants seated in the west gallery who are participating in a full-day parliamentary procedure workshop. This workshop, offered by the Legislative Assembly, provides a firsthand opportunity for the public service to gain a greater understanding of the relationship between the work of their ministries and how their work affects the Legislature. Would the House please make them welcome.

[1410]

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY SAFETY

N. Macdonald: I'd like to take the opportunity to talk about the Trans-Canada Highway and in particular around safety. In ten years, on the stretch of highway from Salmon Arm to the Alberta border, 150 people were killed and 2,900 injured.

I just want to talk to the House about a group of mayors, regional district chairs, MPs and MLAs from along the Trans-Canada. It stretches from Cache Creek to the border. They speak for the communities that know this highway has never been at an appropriate standard.

The spokesperson for the group is the mayor of Revelstoke, Mark McKee. The point he makes at the meetings that we go to is that the problems of the lower mainland are around the frustrations of gridlock for the most part, while the problems we face are around safety.

The implications of traffic accidents are not only for the victims, of course, but also for the circle of friends

[ Page 914 ]

and family that are scarred by the violence of the accidents. This government and my predecessor as MLA, Wendy McMahon, should be commended for the work on the Kicking Horse Pass. That is an incredible project.

[Applause.]

That shouldn't come out of my two minutes.

But the point I want to make is…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

N. Macdonald: …that the amount of money that has gone in, and all of the work, represents just four kilometres of road. I know there are stages to come, but what the member for Kamloops–North Thompson and the member for Shuswap will know is that that whole highway will always need more work.

I realize there are limitations, but I am just going to raise it, as the member here told me I must do, again and again. It needs federal help. It needs provincial money. It is not an area that many of you live along, but to those of us that do, it is crucial that more investment go in there.

You've thrown me off my speech, but I think my two minutes are up.

SMALL BUSINESS

R. Cantelon: I rise today to speak about Small Business Week. We have heard an array of numbers this week providing statistical evidence of the importance of small businesses to B.C., but it isn't just about the numbers. It celebrates what is at the core of what has built this great province. It celebrates individual entrepreneurship and people with a vision, a dream, who are willing to take the risk of putting their dreams on the line in that crucible of public judgment — the marketplace.

These are the individuals who have built and will continue to build this province. It is one thing to have big ideas and quite another to act on them. It is safer to tell no one, maybe to go so far as to talk it up among friends, to stay in a comfy job and not move out of a comfort zone, to take a safe attitude that might be described as one of entitlement. It's quite another to put it all on the line and just do it.

Yet this is the very spirit of individualism and entrepreneurship that has not only made B.C. great; it distinguishes us as a distinct region in Canada. Separated as we are by the mountains from the rest of Canada, geography made it necessary for our pioneers to be self-reliant and independent, and this spirit has endured. Those who have come here have embraced this can-do attitude.

One of the most encouraging trends lately is the increasing rate at which a number of women are taking up the challenge of opening up new businesses. Again, we lead the country in that regard. Recently I visited just such a business in Parksville. A young woman, Lori Wright, and her partner Jessica Cody, who is from the other side of those mountains — somewhere in Ontario, I think — started up their own business. They offer shiatsu massage, hot stone massage and facial rejuvenation in their spa to help us feel better, look better and indeed be better. We could probably all use some of that.

I asked them: "Why here? Why now?" Their answer was that the market was ready but, most importantly, that the economic climate in B.C. was ready and ripe. Creating and sustaining this economic climate of optimism where opportunity abounds is a key priority of this government. A key initiative that the Small Business and Revenue Ministry has begun is the small business round table.

[1415]

WILLIAMS LAKE AND DISTRICT

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

C. Wyse: I rise to recognize the Williams Lake Visitor Information Centre. Tourism B.C. ranked Williams Lake the number-one information centre on its provincewide quality service evaluation for 2005. The Williams Lake and District Chamber of Commerce has operated this centre for over 30 years, with Claudia Blair presently serving as the executive director. The independent evaluation gave excellent overall marks and granted special recognition for the centre's wide array of information displayed, as well as noting the extraordinary sales skill displayed by its counsellors.

The Williams Lake Visitor Information Centre is one of 108 community-operated visitor information centres under the direction of Tourism B.C. In addition, at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce AGM in Charlottetown, P.E.I., the Williams Lake and District Chamber of Commerce was one of ten chambers accredited with distinction. While recognizing the president, Kathleen Cook, and her board of directors, I also wish to acknowledge the co-chairs of the committee undertaking this task: Lori Rushton and Ken Wilson.

To achieve accreditation, a chamber must meet minimum standards in critical areas including areas of governance, operations, membership, programming, policy and advocacy, as well as strategic planning.

I request the House to join with me today in recognizing these most significant achievements by the Williams Lake and District Chamber of Commerce.

BEAR SAFETY AWARENESS

D. MacKay: On September 12, a 13-year-old boy from Burns Lake named Chris Solecki was attacked by a grizzly bear. The bear attacked Chris while he was on a hike with his brother Matthew and their dog just a few hundred metres from their ranch, which is located about 30 kilometres south of Burns Lake. The boys were well prepared. They were close to home, familiar with the area, had a dog with them and were carrying bear mace.

It is common for the family to see and encounter black bears, but this bear surprised the boys and at-

[ Page 915 ]

tacked quickly. Matthew ran for help, and Chris estimates that the attack lasted just ten seconds, but in that time significant damage was done. Chris suffered a depressed skull fracture that resulted in pieces of his skull bone piercing up to five centimetres into his brain. His skull was torn in four places. He also suffered a fractured femur.

Today Chris is recovering. He has undergone surgery and will need further surgery in six months to fill the gap left in his skull from the attack. His courage and recovery from this attack are remarkable and a testament to the resiliency of his family and the people of the Lakes District.

This is also a reminder about the dangers of bear attacks. We have had at least one tragedy this year from a bear attack, and at least one person is missing, with the concern of a bear attack. We must promote awareness of the danger these animals can pose.

On a final note, one thing Chris has asked for at Christmas this year is…. He'd like a bearskin rug. I hope the conservation officers who are looking for that bear find it for him.

MID-MAIN COMMUNITY HEALTH CLINIC

D. Chudnovsky: I'm pleased to speak today about a community health clinic in Vancouver-Kensington, which should be a model for community-based, community-governed, patient-centred primary health care in our province. Mid-Main Community Health Centre offers a wide range of health care services under one roof. Seven doctors, one physical assistant, one chronic disease specialist, one clinical pharmacist, two nurse practitioners, one advanced clinical nurse, four dentists, four hygienists, four certified dental assistants and two dental assistants see more than 1,400 patients a month in an accessible, welcoming and community-based facility.

The Mid-Main clinic is unique in many ways. Perhaps the most important way it differs from traditional health care delivery is its governance structure. The board of directors is made up of members of the community and other interested parties. Among the current board members are an economics professor, a mental health nurse, a lawyer and a human resources worker. Instead of a bureaucratic and centralized hierarchy, Mid-Main is governed by community members volunteering their time, expertise and energy to help serve our neighbourhood.

Mid-Main has now instituted a system under which 80 percent of patients can book an appointment with their physician within 48 hours of calling the office. Unlike most of their colleagues across the province, the physicians at Mid-Main are on salary.

[1420]

I want to congratulate and thank the staff and board of Mid-Main Community Health Centre for all of their hard work. Their dedication to more than 5,000 patients — members of our community — makes Vancouver-Kensington a better place to live, makes British Columbia a better place to live.

MRI SCANNING SERVICES

IN CENTRAL INTERIOR B.C.

J. Rustad: Last week the Prince George Regional Hospital marked a milestone: the 10,000th magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, scan performed at PGRH. This event was no doubt an important event for the person who received the scan, but it also served to highlight the advances in medical care in northern B.C., especially in the numerous northern communities that depend on the services of the Prince George Regional Hospital.

The people of the central interior made it clear they needed a permanent MRI. They proved that by raising more than $1 million through the Spirit of the North Health Care Foundation. Government heard their voices, and that's why the province contributed over $2 million towards the cost of the $3.4 million MRI machine. A permanent MRI unit was established at the PGRH in 2003, replacing the original mobile unit, which had to be shared with Kamloops and Kelowna. Thank you for that.

Since then, wait times for the crucial medical service have improved dramatically. Most urgent scans can now be performed within a single day. Elective scans are performed within four to six weeks, compared to wait times of up to eight months with the old mobile unit. The number of MRI scans performed in Prince George each year has jumped from between 500 and 700 to upwards of 2,000. This isn't just Prince George residents. PGRH serves patients from a large region, including communities in my riding like Vanderhoof and Fort St. James. Residents of those communities now have much better access to this critical diagnostics tool.

Health care needs and medical technology are constantly evolving. The government will continue to support our hospital's health care professionals to deliver the quality medical care that northern B.C. deserves.

Oral Questions

ROLE OF FACILITATORS

IN TEACHERS LABOUR DISPUTE

C. James: Yesterday we learned that Vince Ready has been brought into the current teachers dispute, perhaps a positive sign that government recognizes we need to resolve this dispute. I'd like to ask my question to the Premier. Can he explain what direction his government has given to Vince Ready in his capacity as facilitator between the two sides in the dispute?

Hon. M. de Jong: With the greatest respect, I hope they didn't learn yesterday, because the appointment was made on October 6. He is fulfilling a role as an industrial inquiry commissioner, under the Labour Code. I did anticipate the question, and following question period or now, I'm happy to provide the Leader of

[ Page 916 ]

the Opposition with the terms of reference that provide him with the authority that he is relying upon now.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

C. James: I continue, as I know the public does, to be confused about whether this government is actually finally taking some direction to try and end the dispute that has children out of classrooms. We hear the minister say that Mr. Ready in fact isn't fulfilling the role of facilitator, but today we understand that the Premier let some of the media know that Ken Dobell is now involved in this dispute.

My question is to the Premier. Can he confirm or deny that Mr. Dobell is involved as a third party, and has he had any conversations with Mr. Ready or the Premier or the Labour Minister on this dispute?

[1425]

Hon. M. de Jong: Again to the Leader of the Opposition: the short answer is yes. Mr. Dobell is working with Mr. Ready and the deputy minister in particular.

Let me take a moment, though, to alert the Leader of the Opposition that on October 6, Mr. Ready was asked to do the following.

Make inquiries, consult with parties and make recommendations to the minister concerning the following labour relations matters between the parties — the parties being the employer association and the union: (1) determining which matters, if any, should be concluded at local bargaining; (2) methods and costs associated with the harmonization of compensation structures within the financial mandates established by government from time to time; (3) establishment of a provincial master collective agreement; and (4) bargaining processes for provincial negotiations that are timely structured, provide for public accountability, promote settlement at the bargaining table, and foster effective and productive union management relations.

He was under the terms of those terms of reference and granted wide latitude to employ the methods he thought best to achieve those.

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

C. James: I'm going to continue to ask the question because I'm getting different answers and different responses. What I heard from the minister was the involvement of Mr. Ready in the long-term process in looking at the process after Bill 12, after the current dispute that we have now. The issue that the public is asking, the issue that 600,000 students are asking, is when this government is going to do something to make sure they get back to school, and accept responsibility for the problem they caused.

Again, I'd like to ask the minister: are Mr. Ready and Mr. Dobell involved in this issue to resolve the current dispute, and if so, are they in conversations with the government around that?

Hon. M. de Jong: Actually, I think the public are asking a few questions. First and foremost, to all of the parties: get my children back in school. I think they're also asking that the parties ensure that when negotiations resume for a collective agreement next year, this doesn't all start again — so rebuild a broken negotiating system that has failed for a dozen years.

You know what else? They're also asking this question: when are parties that have been accused and actually charged by the Supreme Court of British Columbia with breaking the law going to start following the law? I think they're asking all of those questions.

To the extent that Mr. Ready, an eminent labour mediator — one of the country's leading labour mediators — has a task to do and he must complete that task by December 31 of this year, I'm pleased that he's seen fit to begin that exercise now.

J. Horgan: I think we're getting to the nub of it now, after many countless days of discussion with the minister. In May of this year the Minister of Labour said the following during the election campaign: "The B.C. Liberals will not allow our students to be used as pawns in labour disputes with the teachers or support workers. The choice is clear," they went on. "Education is an essential service in B.C. It's either the B.C. Liberals or chaos and paralysis in the school system."

So my question is…. After ten years of NDP government, you allege that there were four million days of instruction lost — after ten years of free collective bargaining in British Columbia. After four months….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: Under this government…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, members. Order, members.

Continue.

J. Horgan: …in four months we've had paralysis and chaos. The prediction was correct from the Minister of Labour, but the shoe was on the wrong foot. Why is it that we've had 13 days of Mr. Ready's involvement, allegedly not talking to the parties but now maybe talking to the parties? Get your story straight. Are we solving the problem, or are we wasting time?

Mr. Speaker: Does the member have a question?

J. Horgan: Are we solving the problem, or are we wasting time?

Hon. M. de Jong: I'm actually obliged to the member for pointing out a fundamental difference that distinguishes this side of the House from that side of the House.

[ Page 917 ]

It was an issue that was canvassed extensively during this year's past election campaign. We who sit on this side of the House do believe that education is an essential service. We do believe it is a fundamental right for students to be in the classroom and that that right shouldn't be held hostage to a labour dispute — no less a labour dispute that's being carried on in an illegal fashion. So that difference is there. It remains. And you know what? The public wasn't convinced by this member's argument in May. They're not convinced by it today.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[1430]

J. Horgan: I certainly do, and the proof is always in the pudding. The public was duped in May, and we've had paralysis and chaos in the school system ever since.

My question is to the Minister of Labour. Is the former deputy of the Premier, Mr. Dobell, working on this file, or is he working on another file? Are they meeting with the parties? Are they preparing for some collective bargaining process in the future, or are we trying to get to the bottom of the issue?

This government has a responsibility and an obligation to tell the public — not cryptically. Is Mr. Ready working to solve the problem, the impasse, the dispute we're in today, or is he looking at something into the future? Are you going to try and get our kids back into classrooms today, or are you talking about something in the future? What is Mr. Dobell doing? What is Mr. Ready doing? Tell this House, so the public will have a clear understanding of that.

Hon. M. de Jong: Right. Well, look, out of fairness to his colleagues, the member should leave a few questions for some of his friends over there.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: I'm not sure what part of this exercise the hon. member is having difficulty with…

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. M. de Jong: …particularly when you consider that the terms of reference under which Mr. Ready is operating were laid before the public in this chamber on October 6. Those terms of reference stated that he would determine his own procedures, as he deems necessary and advisable, for the proper and efficient carrying out of his mandate. He's trying to fix a problem. And you know what? To fix that problem, these parties are going to have to learn to talk to one another. He is involved in that exercise.

The member himself, I think — and he may have chosen to forget this — not that long ago, just in September, spoke about that bargaining system and said on CFAX Radio on September 26: "But the process didn't work during the 1990s, Joe. You're absolutely right. The NDP was no better at this than the Liberals."

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, members.

L. Krog: I will try and make this as simple as I can for the minister — very simple, a yes-or-no answer. Is Ken Dobell working on this file or not?

Hon. M. de Jong: Yes. I thought I told the Leader of the Opposition that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. The member has a supplemental.

L. Krog: Mr. Ready's terms of reference prohibit looking at class size, composition, ratio or money, etc., —

section 7(3) of the Public Education Labour Relations Act.

A couple of weeks ago we were told that the government wouldn't negotiate because it's illegal. Notwithstanding all of this, we are now in a situation where it appears there are negotiations going on. I guess the issue for me is — and I want to address this to the Attorney General: if it was illegal a couple of weeks ago, what's changed?

Hon. M. de Jong: I can only endeavour to assist the member by again referring him to material that was, in this chamber, laid before the public on October 6, which charged Mr. Ready with performing a specific task under the provisions of the Labour Code. He is performing those duties now. I'm glad he's performing the duties.

I, quite frankly, don't understand the angst that appears to exist on the opposition side of the chamber. On the one hand, we have the critic confirming on September 26 that we've got a broken bargaining process. Now we have someone, an eminent labour mediator, involved in trying to rebuild or construct something that will work better.

[1435]

He's trying to engage the parties in that process, and he's got a very limited time in which to do his work. He's got to report out by December 31. I would have hoped that all of the members opposite on that side of the chamber would join with members on this side of the chamber in wishing Mr. Ready all of the assistance, and good wishes, because he's got a hell of a job ahead of him when you look at the history of this negotiation.

J. Kwan: I'd like to get a clear answer from the minister. Is Mr. Dobell looking at the issues that Mr. Ready

[ Page 918 ]

was prohibited from looking at — class size, class composition and money?

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Dobell is there to lend Mr. Ready whatever assistance he requires in fulfilling his duties under the terms of reference that the member is aware of.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

J. Kwan: I think I actually hear the minister providing himself some wiggle room here. Is the minister saying that Mr. Dobell is assisting Mr. Ready and looking at issues that he was prohibited from looking at, or is he looking at the issues around class size, class composition and money in the current dispute?

Hon. M. de Jong: The last thing this member wants to see is me wiggle.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: Back to the member's question. Look, we understand that the opposition takes great umbrage with the fact that we believe education is an essential service. We had that debate. The public spoke. We didn't, in fairness, actually think that we would be standing in this chamber having a debate or discussion with the opposition about the merits of obeying the law. That is not something I, quite frankly, anticipated, but here we are.

We asked Mr. Ready on October 6 to get involved in this exercise, to provide his guidance and assistance to the parties. That's what he is doing. He is deriving some assistance from Mr. Dobell and, quite frankly, from the deputy minister of Labour, Rick Connolly. That will continue. I hope these parties — one of them — can first of all see their way clear to abiding by the courts and obeying the law, and then get down to the very difficult but important business of rebuilding a broken bargaining process.

M. Karagianis: As fascinating as the continued storytelling is from the other side of the House, we're still not getting a clear answer to a very clear question that was asked by one of my colleagues. What are the terms of reference that Mr. Dobell is currently using — and Mr. Ready? Are they in fact reviewing class size, class composition and all of those things that were forbidden in the previous contract?

Hon. M. de Jong: It would take far too much time during this question period to read that. But I will, through the Clerks now, send the member a copy of the two pages which lay out, and have since October 6, the terms of reference by which Mr. Ready is operating.

IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT POLICIES

ON EDUCATION SYSTEM

D. Thorne: Apparently, since 2001 the Liberal government has changed the education system in a number of ways. While school board budgets have been frozen and school boards are not allowed to run a deficit, many unexpected and unanticipated downloaded costs have hit school boards in a negative fashion. Some of those costs we have mentioned before: pension increases, MSP premiums, unfunded salary increases, hydro and the move to the generally accepted accounting principles. The estimate on those costs across the province is $141 million.

[1440]

Day after day we sit in this House. Questions are asked to the Education Minister, and we hear about the same increase of $150 million — day after day. I would like the Minister of Education to explain how this wonderful $150 million of new money in 2005 even begins to make up for the government's decision to shortchange school districts — $210 million in 2003 and $90 million in 2004.

Hon. S. Bond: The member opposite is absolutely right. This year and this year alone, the largest single increase in over a decade — $150 million. But it doesn't end there. Let's go back and actually look at what's happened since 2000-2001, as the member brought up. Let's look at the fact that the education budget in British Columbia exceeds $5 billion for the first time — a 10-percent increase, the largest budget ever in the history of British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Thorne: Based on the facts that I just repeated — the $141 million in unanticipated costs to school boards — and from the minister's excited response to my question about funding, I would like her to explain why, if this $150 million is so wonderful and is enough money for the system, we do have classes with 40 students and others with multiple special needs students and no support.

Hon. S. Bond: Part of the reason that we are creating a round table in British Columbia is to talk about the issues of class size and composition. If the member opposite has class sizes that are in fact 40, I would ask her to please send me that class, and I'd be happy to go and have a look.

When we added $150 million this year alone, we looked at what school districts did with that, in fact. School districts have reduced class size. When I look at school district 57, for example, for the first time they've actually targeted dollars. We've given school boards autonomy to do that. They've reduced class sizes by two in every elementary school class from grades four to seven in the entire school district.

D. Routley: We hear often from the Education Minister the number that she has repeated just now. I as a

[ Page 919 ]

school trustee see the reality of Liberal underfunding in our classrooms, and I share that reality….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, listen to the question, please.

D. Routley: I share an acute awareness of that reality with the parents and the children of this province, who stand outside the schools and bemoan the fact that their kids don't have the learning conditions that ought to be provided by this government. I'd like to ask the Minister of Education, who seems to like to take credit for funding that isn't materialized in improved classroom conditions, why she won't face the realities of what her government's funding formula and her government's policies have done to our classrooms.

Hon. S. Bond: Since 2000-2001 — to the member opposite — we've added $460 million to B.C. public schools, including $153 million in special one-time grants. We've added $253 million for the next three years and $700 million for the 2005-2008 capital plan. We added $5 million to support literacy programs, $10 million for new textbooks and $10 million to help make school centres for community services, and the list goes on. In fact, let's make it perfectly clear. Education funding is at its highest level ever in the province.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Routley: Again, let's switch back to the reality. The reality is that the $10 million for school textbooks, put together with the amount spent already, was not half of what had been spent under the previous administration. Let's face facts. There were more schools built in the ten years previous to this government. They have closed 113. Before that, schools were being built regularly.

[1445]

What matters is the effect of your policies and your funding in our classrooms and the effect well-known to students, well-known to teachers, well-known to school trustees and well-known to British Columbians who watch this debate and watch this minister try to elude her responsibility for those effects — that Liberal underfunding and downloading of costs have added up to exploding classroom deficits.

I would ask the Minister of Education or anyone in her ministry, for that matter: has there been an analysis of how these increased cost pressures like transportation, heating, salaries downloaded to school boards, the GAAP funding requirements that weren't funded, and on and on and on…? Has there been an analysis of what effect that has had in our classrooms?

Hon. S. Bond: In fact, we value the role of school trustees in British Columbia. The members opposite don't hold the only seats that actually had people serve as trustees. Our side of the House, as well, has people who have served. We understand that the people in the best position to make decisions about how we serve our children are people at the school board level.

In fact, we have added funding to every school district in this province to allow school trustees to make the decisions necessary. The member's own school district — school district 79, Cowichan — has in fact received, out of the $150 million, over two million additional dollars — that, at a time when they have 183 fewer students.

HIRING OF GARY COWAN

FOR FAST-TRACK PROGRAM

H. Lali: During the 2001 election the Premier promised that he was going to pass merit employment legislation based strictly on merit and not on patronage. Diane Rabbani was the Deputy Minister of Management Services and past Merit Commissioner under the Liberals, hired in 2001. The Merit Commissioner was charged with ensuring neutrality and fairness in public sector hiring, but not when it comes to her husband or when it comes to the Premier's friends.

The Premier circumvented his own merit-based hiring policy in 2003 when Gary Cowan, who is the common-law husband…. He was appointed as the head of the Liberal's fast-track program for decisions on economic development with a salary of $15,000 per month.

My question is to the Minister of Economic Development. How does the husband of the Liberal's Merit Commissioner, who is entrusted with ensuring neutrality and fairness in public sector hiring, get hired by the Liberal government for this plum $360,000 position in an untendered direct-award contract?

Hon. C. Hansen: I would certainly recommend to the member that he do some research and that he doesn't just fly based on some rumours and some false innuendo that he may have picked up. In fact, there was a position that was posted. At the time, there was an executive search firm in Vancouver that was contracted to find an individual to serve in this capacity. After an independent process, the gentleman that the member talks about was selected as a short-list of one.

What was determined at the time was that this was a position that was more appropriately set up in a contract rather than an FTE position within the ministry. So there was an objective process, it was independent, and it was in keeping with guidelines.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

H. Lali: As a matter of fact, I have done my research, and the minister's explanation is just as lame today as it was in the newspaper

article that appeared this morning.

I wonder if the minister knows the definition of "nepotism." You know, with the patronage appointments that this government has done over the last four

[ Page 920 ]

years, they're beginning to make the Social Credit look good.

[1450]

Gary Cowan was the husband of Diane Rabbani, who is the past Liberal Merit Commissioner entrusted with ensuring fairness and neutrality in the hiring process for the public service. Gary Cowan was the past vice-president of Marathon Realty Co. That's where the Premier was the head honcho at one time. So my question is to the Premier. Can the Premier tell this House…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

H. Lali: …why a competition for a civil service posting was turned into a sweetheart contract for a former senior executive in the Premier's former realty company?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Can we have some silence here for a second.

Do you want to continue? Your question?

H. Lali: I would like to repeat that. Can the Premier tell this House why a competition for a civil service posting was turned into a sweetheart contract for one of his friends in his former realty company? Can the Premier tell this House how he can break his own promise and government policy and direct-order a sweetheart contract…

Mr. Speaker: Member, put the question.

H. Lali: …worth almost $400,000 to a Liberal friend and insider?

Hon. C. Hansen: I wish to assure the member that the selection of Mr. Cowan for this position was done as a result of an independent process. If the member had done his homework properly, he would actually recognize that Ms. Rabbani did not become the Merit Commissioner until after this particular process had taken place. She was not in that position at the time.

Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I didn't take this opportunity to point out some of the success that has happened in this government as a result of some of the work that Mr. Cowan and others have done around programs to stimulate economic development in British Columbia. Just yesterday we had the Royal Bank come out and actually acknowledge that this province has gone from the dismal decade of economic decline in the 1990s to a dynamic economy today in the 21st century.

We have seen this province go from a time in the 1990s when he was a government member and a government cabinet minister, where young British Columbians were fleeing this province to seek economic opportunity in Alberta and other parts of Canada and the world…. Today because of the work that has been done in the Ministry of Economic Development and other ministries throughout government, we're seeing those job opportunities come back to British Columbia once again.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call in this chamber committee stage of Bill 7 and in the Douglas Fir Room, Committee A, continued debate, for the information of members, on the estimates of the Ministry of Community Services.

[1455]

Committee of the Whole House

NORTH ISLAND–COAST DEVELOPMENT

INITIATIVE TRUST ACT

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 7; S. Hawkins in the chair.

The committee met at 2:57 p.m.

section 1.

N. Simons: Madam Chair, I appreciate your indulgence, this being a fairly new process for me.

I rise to propose an amendment to

section 1. I have copies for the Clerk and a copy for the minister. I'm simply asking that

section 1 be amended.

[SECTION 1, by adding the text shown as underlined:

Section 1 is amended by adding the following:

"Powell River Sunshine Coast region means the area of British Columbia comprising the Powell River region and Sunshine Coast region."

And by amending the definition of "region" by

adding:

Powell River Sunshine Coast region.

And, by deleting:

"Sunshine Coast", after "North Island"]

On the amendment.

N. Simons: The purpose of this amendment clearly is to separate the geographical locations that are physically separated by the Strait of Georgia and other bodies of water from the North Island. Obviously, if the minister is amenable to this amendment, we would be looking at making the relevant changes throughout the act at another time.

The reason — if this is the right time to address the concerns that have been brought to me by the local governments…. I would just like to state that, as you know, the mayors of the major communities on the Sunshine Coast and Powell River — the mayor of Gibsons; the mayor of Sechelt; the regional district chair; the mayor of Powell River; the regional district chair in Powell River; the Chief of the Sechelt Nation, also the Sechelt Indian Government District; the municipality,

[ Page 921 ]

as well as other first nations in the area — all believe that the interests of the Powell River–Sunshine Coast community are not significantly similar in most regards to those interests of the residents of the North Island.

[1500]

I don't mean to create a division where none exists in regards to the desire to take full advantage of the opportunity to have some good economic development take place. But I do believe there's a significant difference between those needs of the various communities in this regard, and for that reason I'm suggesting this amendment.

I believe the minister has met with some of the representatives from this area, but it's my duty to make sure that their interests are carefully debated — as a representative of their interests. I understand that we will work together ultimately.

The fear, I believe, of the municipal councils who've passed resolutions to the effect that they would like to be seen separately in this regard is of being pushed aside as the application.… We're talking about an area on Vancouver Island from Malahat all the way up to the top end of the Island, and a significant lack of interaction — economically, for the most part — between the lower Sunshine Coast and that area, notwithstanding the fact that on the Powell River side there's obviously a ferry to Comox.

I believe there has been some discussion with the minister in this regard. I haven't been privy to all of it. Suffice it to say that I believe the reasons are fairly evident — fairly self-evident, in fact — that the region of Powell River–Sunshine Coast is not, even in terms of electoral districts, associated with North Island. So I propose that amendment to

section 1 of this bill.

Hon. C. Hansen: I thank the member for his input on this.

We certainly had a very good meeting at UBCM, which the member attended along with mayors and representatives of regional government from the Sunshine Coast, during the UBCM convention in Vancouver and had an opportunity to discuss this proposal. As I indicated at that time, there is the power for the trust board itself to designate whatever subregions it would like to see within the overall north island–coast region. There is absolutely nothing to prevent that from happening. It can be done at the wishes of the trust board itself.

I appreciate where the member is coming from. I understand the dynamic that takes place on the Sunshine Coast and how they see themselves as an entity. But in fact, if you look at a lot of the economic development initiatives that have taken place…. The one that comes to mind is the circle tourism routes, where there is the encouragement for people to do the tourist route over to Nanaimo, up to Comox, over to Powell River and down the Sunshine Coast. It is an absolutely fabulous trip that I know a lot of tourists enjoy. I think we have to be careful to keep open the opportunities to look at economic opportunities that are broader than just one smaller region.

Another reason why I would not be willing to accept this amendment is that I do believe it would lead to other similar requests that would have the net effect of balkanizing the trust.

For example, I was born in Port Alberni. I have family who live in Ucluelet, and that whole area of the west coast of Vancouver Island is also an economic region unto itself in some

definitions. Would the logical next step be that we carve that off into its own separate regional advisory committee? Again, if that's the wish of the trust board, they have the power to do that, but I don't think it would be appropriate for us to direct that from Victoria.

While I recognize the intent of the member's amendment, I believe there are other ways to accomplish that objective. If the board of the north island–coastal trust were to see fit to do that, they would have the power to do that.

[1505]

N. Simons: My understanding is that there will be one representative, one mayor, on that first committee, and I believe he's the mayor of Gibsons. I'm just wondering. Within that context, does the minister…? I respect the fact that there are some mechanisms there in the process to, hopefully, come together on these issues, but can the minister tell me exactly what composition the regional advisory committee will have that will allow it to stand separately or how the trust board will allow that separation to occur within the context of the bill as it stands now?

Hon. C. Hansen: The board itself is made up by a formula that's set out in the legislation. I think the first thing I need to stress is that this is just the interim board. We've got to set some governance framework to allow this to go forward. What we didn't want to do was appoint the entire board from the provincial government. We want it to be driven by individuals who are duly elected at their municipal or regional government levels.

In the case of the regional advisory committee for the north island–coast, which is the regional advisory committee that would include the Sunshine Coast…. It actually includes several representatives of the Sunshine Coast, including the chair of the Powell River Regional District. It would include the chair of the Regional District of Sunshine Coast. It would include the mayor of Gibsons, the mayor of Sechelt and the Chief of the Sechelt Indian Government District. So there is representation on there.

Again, I do want to emphasize…. The way the legislation sets it up, this is for the interim boards, the interim advisory committees. If the board itself was to determine that they wanted to restructure this into some other form of governance, they have the power to do that under the way the legislation is worded.

N. Simons: I'd just like to thank the minister for his responses. That answers the questions.

[ Page 922 ]

Amendment negatived.

section 1.

J. Horgan: I appreciate the opportunity to have a chat with the minister about this important piece of legislation, and I'd like to go to the first line in

section 1. That is the central south Island region.

I appreciate that it will be defined by regulation, but if you're not aware, minister, Malahat–Juan de Fuca is a semi-urban, semi-rural constituency. As I understand, in the press package that went out with this during the election campaign or just prior to it, the defining line for central south Island was the Malahat. Can you give me any comfort on exactly where that line would be drawn?

Hon. C. Hansen: So the boundary for this south Island region…. The southern boundary of that would be the Malahat. Everything north of the Malahat would be in this south Island region, and south of the Malahat is, in fact, outside of the trust area.

J. Horgan: The Malahat isn't an area; it's a highway and an indigenous people. I know that it will be defined by regulation, but is it going to be at Spectacle Lake? Is Shawnigan Lake included in that?

[1510]

Before you go on, I might bring up also on the west coast of the Island, in my constituency, are the communities of Port Renfrew, Jordan River, Shirley, Otter Point and, for that matter, Sooke. I think it could be argued that those communities are probably closer to Bamfield in terms of the economic development opportunities, and are even linked by a gravel road now to Lake Cowichan.

So I'll certainly take any guidance you have, minister, on where the line would be on the Malahat, but these west coast communities of Port Renfrew in particular, Otter Point and Shirley would certainly benefit from participation in this fund. I was wondering if there'd been any thought to that or where they would place in the region.

Hon. C. Hansen: The trust area includes all of Vancouver Island, with the exception of the capital regional district. So if you look at the economy of the capital regional district, it's been doing considerably well over the last little while. We see the unemployment rate in Victoria has been the lowest in many months. I'm not sure if it's actually every single month that the labour force survey has come, but certainly in most of the months over the last number of years the CRD areas had the lowest unemployment rate in the province.

In fact, what we've seen with a significantly declining unemployment rate in the province generally is that the CRD actually has one of the most dynamic economies in all of Canada right now.

J. Horgan: I thank the minister for his comments, but within the CRD we have an electoral area representative, Eric Lund, and he currently represents these unincorporated areas within the CRD. I think an argument could be made. I don't know if we need to talk about amendments, but certainly if the minister could give me some assurance that, particularly with respect to Port Renfrew — which is, I believe, legally within the CRD…. In any realistic description, they don't spend a whole lot of time coming from Port Renfrew into Victoria to do commerce or to affect economic development.

The challenge, I think, with the definition is that those west coast communities linked by the West Coast Trail to Bamfield and by the circle route to Lake Cowichan perhaps may have more economic synergies going north and east than they would coming south to Victoria. Perhaps your officials might give some thought to that. Again, I guess if it's bounded by the CRD, that would mean that Shawnigan Lake, which is part of the Cowichan Valley Regional District, would be under this definition within the boundaries of the trust?

Hon. C. Hansen: As has happened with the northern development initiative, which was put in place by legislation a year ago…. What happened there was the northern development initiative board members came to us with some requests for amendments to some aspects of the previous legislation. As I've said many times in this discussion, it is not for the provincial government to dictate to these trusts. It's up to the trusts to actually manage their own affairs and the scope of their affairs, and if the trust of the north island–coastal initiative was, at some point in the future, to want to request an amendment to their boundaries, it's something that we would certainly be prepared to look at.

J. Horgan: I appreciate that the intent here is to create a trust that is accountable to those areas north of the Malahat, and I understand that the minister doesn't feel it's the province's responsibility to dictate boundaries. But we're in this place creating this law today, and once it's passed you will have authority and your staff will have authority through regulation to define the parameters of the trust in terms of its geographic area.

I think it would be irresponsible of me to let this opportunity pass without saying once again that Port Renfrew, Shirley, Otter Point and Jordan River — these communities within my constituency — would benefit greatly from the objectives of this bill. I believe they fit nicely into the objectives of this bill, but yet they're precluded because of a municipal boundary that may well change during the life of this parliament, with discussions of amalgamation in the lower Island and right through my constituency into the Cowichan Valley.

[1515]

I'm a bit concerned that we leave this one opportunity to speak for the people of Port Renfrew, in particular. But I'd like to go back again to the Cowichan Valley Regional District. If all those areas north of the CRD are within the boundaries, would that then include Shawnigan Lake?

[ Page 923 ]

Hon. C. Hansen: The intent is to establish a trust that would include all of Vancouver Island with the exception of the capital regional district. If the boundaries of the capital regional district were to change at some point in the future, affecting any of the various communities that the member has mentioned, then we would certainly be willing to take a request from the initiative trust board to amend the boundaries to meet their needs. I think it's hypothetical for us to speculate on what may or may not happen to those boundaries in the future, and I believe that there is a mechanism in place for us to deal with that, should the boundaries change at some point.

J. Horgan: That's a fair comment from the minister. We don't want to be hypothetical. Can I get a commitment from the minister and his officials to meet with representatives from Port Renfrew, from Otter Point and from Shirley to discuss why they believe, and why I believe, that they are communities that, although they are within the CRD, are not benefiting from the same economic development that the minister referred to earlier? Would the minister commit to a meeting with representatives from my community, before the regulations are brought into force, to discuss why they are not able to participate in this fund?

Hon. C. Hansen: I'd certainly be willing to meet with them, but I would want to take advice from the board of the initiative trust itself. So if that was to be their goal, they should probably…. It may be a more beneficial use of their time to meet with the initiative trust board members to make that pitch, and if the board itself were then to come back to us with that recommendation, we would do our best to accommodate it.

J. Horgan: I don't want to belabour this — I know my colleagues have other questions — but if I understand the minister correctly, should these communities go to the board after the regulations come into force? Is it not the government that's setting the regulations after this law comes into force? Or is it the board?

Hon. C. Hansen: As I've said in the context of other discussions, it's the intent of government to set up a governance framework. It is not our intent to go in and tell the trust boards how to do their job or how to structure this. We've put in flexibility so that changes can be made in the future by the board without having to come back cap in hand to the provincial government from time to time, but if there are changes that do require the provincial government to act, we're prepared to consider those on the advice of the board.

As it stands now, it is the intention to establish boundaries for the north island–coastal trust that includes all of Vancouver Island except for areas that are currently in the capital regional district. If the board itself were to make a request of government, we would do our best to accommodate changes that they may wish to see happening.

J. Horgan: I understand clearly what the minister is saying, but I still think that cap in hand is going to be the order of the day for the people of Port Renfrew regardless of whether it's to the minister or to the board. I'm hopeful that as legislators here…. If I could get a commitment from you or your staff to sit down with representatives from those communities prior to the regulations coming into force, they'd have a better opportunity to make their case.

I know this is a sizeable sum of money, but Vancouver Island is a big place. I've lived here for a long time, and I know from my experience with the Columbia Basin Trust in the 1990s, that prescribed area was defined by watersheds and the course of the Columbia River, but there were communities on the other side of the hill that felt they had a legitimate reason to be participating in that trust.

[1520]

I understand there are challenges and give-and-takes, but once you're in the tent and you look at the pot, as it were…. Inasmuch as I heard the words of the minister when he was speaking at second reading about the hope that there would be a broader view of that money, parochialism tends to strike fairly quickly when pies are being cut up.

I would prefer to have my communities have the opportunity to speak directly to the minister responsible for the bill, at this stage, rather than have to go to a board that's already entrenched and that is looking to the future to how they can spend that money in their community. If I could have a commitment to meet with some staff members and you, that would be terrific.

Hon. C. Hansen: We can certainly try to facilitate a meeting, but as the member knows, every change has other consequences. I think, as the member just alluded to in his comments, you can always move a boundary, and there's always one more community that's just not quite in, and at the end of the day, you would probably wind up with a region that would include the entire province of British Columbia.

This would take us back to square one and really not accomplish the goals that we're trying to make — that's to target some money at regions of the province and to give them the decision-making power in terms of how moneys are allocated. But I'd certainly be willing to try to facilitate a meeting with representatives of those communities.

J. Horgan: I thank the minister for that. I will agree with him that, if you open up the door, everyone will try and get in. But I do invite the minister. I'd be delighted to drive out with him to Port Renfrew on a sunny day and see the breathtaking scenery out there and give him a clear understanding of the vast difference between that part of the CRD and any other part.

N. Simons: I'm just going to ask about another aspect of the

definitions. It stood out to me when it said a qualified individual didn't include an MLA, but I know that the context of this bill doesn't really cast aspersions. But it doesn't include, for some reason, a Mem-

[ Page 924 ]

ber of Parliament in this list. Is that deliberate, or is that an oversight?

Hon. C. Hansen: Our desire here is to make sure that the role of the provincial government is clearly arm's length from the actual decisions that need to be made. The intent is to make sure that it is local and regional elected officials that make the decisions on how this money should be spent. We want to make it very clear that the provincial government's role is very limited. In the case of the advisory committees, the MLAs do have a role there. But when it comes to the actual board itself, we want to make it explicit that this is up to local and regional government to make ultimate decisions.

I can't think of a case where a Member of Parliament would be involved, but I think that this particular clause was put in there more around how we make it explicit that the provincial government doesn't have a direct role on the board itself.

N. Simons: Yeah, I sort of see your point. It just sort of strikes me as interesting that it isn't…. We have somebody who could potentially work thousands of miles away, yet be a representative on the board. I understand the minister's explanation. I think it wouldn't hurt to be in there.

Section 1 approved.

section 2.

S. Fraser: I'd like to thank government in this regard. The trust is, I know, a one-time setup, and it's spread over a fairly large area, but it's very much appreciated and very much needed in the region.

[1525]

part 2(2)(1), it's dealing with the establishment of the regional advisory committees. I'm going to propose the amendment, and I can speak to it after the amendment. That might be the best way to do it.

[I move that Bill 7 be amended in subsection 2(1) by the addition of a new subsection (d) "representatives of First Nations".]

I'd be happy to speak to that. Or maybe I should….

The Chair: The amendment is in order, member. Continue.

On the amendment.

S. Fraser: In keeping with the government's New Relationship document and some of the words that I happen to agree with that came out of the throne speech and the budget speech, I believe that there is a lacking in the way this

section is written now, because it does not include first nations. I know there is movement, rightly so, towards an inclusion of first nations in working on economic developments — not exclusively, but inclusively — with local communities.

I think this would be a very, very good fit with the New Relationship agreement and the statements and the good words that came out of the throne speech and the budget speech that followed.

Minister, if I could have some comment.

Hon. C. Hansen: I agree with where the member is coming from on this, because we, too, are anxious that first nations be a part of how these funds may be allocated. I think, as I mentioned yesterday afternoon in the context of the northern development initiative, I can't think of a leader of a municipality or a regional government in British Columbia that would not want to have first nations involved to the fullest extent possible in economic development opportunities. There are several funds available for economic development, including the new first nations New Relationship fund of $100 million. It will obviously have an economic development component to it.

I think what we want to make very clear is that these initiative funds are to the benefit of first nations just as much as they are to the benefit of everybody else, and the first nations have every right to expect that their proposals will be considered by the trust board.

In the case of the regional advisory committees, there is, in fact…. With the case of the north island–coast development initiative…. The way it's set up there would, in fact, be a first nations representative appointed as a result of their position as the Chief of the Sechelt government. But I think what's probably even more important is the role on the initiative trust board itself where the ultimate decisions will be made.

On that, it is our intent as government…. We have five representatives that we will be appointing. We recognize that it is very important that first nations be represented on that board, so I can assure the member that there will be first nations representation among the government appointees to this trust.

S. Fraser: I appreciate the response from the minister. Just for clarity, though: does that mean this amendment would be potentially changed or accepted to include, specifically written in the bill, a representation from first nations, that that will be an addition? Sorry if I misunderstood.

Hon. C. Hansen: The initiative trust has the power and the flexibility to make those kinds of changes if they wish to, but in terms of setting up the initial regional advisory councils, we felt it was best based on a formula that identified municipal and local government representation which, in this particular case of the north island–coast regional advisory committee, would include a first nations representative as a result of that formula that's in place.

I don't believe the amendment is necessary because the trust board itself would have that flexibility and power to structure the regional advisory committees in that manner on a go-forward basis. The flexibility is there to do that. But while I don't believe this particular amendment is necessary, I can also assure the member

[ Page 925 ]

that it is our intent to make sure that first nations are represented on the trust board itself.

[1530]

I don't believe the amendment is necessary. Therefore, I wouldn't support it, but I think the objective that the member is trying to achieve can be achieved through the board itself.

S. Fraser: I appreciate the minister's statements, again, and I would hope that such a position would be made available, but as the minister has indicated, it's not mandatory. We've seen other examples in the past where first nations have not been included in committees or in meaningful representation, and I believe the new relationship is supposed to get beyond that. I don't think it's just symbolic to have first nations explicitly placed, as the amendment would do.

I know the minister is probably aware, but the Columbia Basin Trust…. If I can just read from the mission statement…. This is a trust that's been in place, and it's been considered quite successful. It "supports efforts by the people of the basin to create a legacy of social, economic and environmental well-being and to achieve greater self-sufficiency for present and future generations." Then it goes on: "The Columbia Basin Trust's program model both reflects the diversity and history of the basin and allows many decisions to be made directly by the basin's residents."

This trust does include first nations representation, and it's been quite a successful model, I think. The Columbia Basin Trust has all the subregions within the trust area represented on the board of directors, and in addition, it has a representation from the tribal council. Another example is the BC-Alcan Northern Development Fund Act, which includes the Nechako-Kitimat development fund, and it, too, includes first nations in its decision-making structures.

So I appreciate where we're going with this, and I'm supportive of this trust, but I mean, with other examples out there that have been successful and successfully including first nations and that are so in keeping with the new relationship, it just seems like an opportunity that we should actually make to formalize.

If I can just add further to that. As the minister has indicated, he certainly has some experience on the west coast of Vancouver Island, and I had some experience in the creation of the Clayoquot Sound UNESCO biosphere reserve in the year 2000. That trust is set up explicitly with an equal representation between first nations and non–first nations. There are quite a number of examples that predated the new relationship document and the words of the throne speech and the budget speech, so to omit them formally from this trust seems not in keeping with that new relationship. I'm very hopeful for that new relationship. I'll leave that for now.

N. Simons: I'd just like to speak in favour of the amendment for a reason that my hon. friend has not stated already. My concern is that, in fact, there is a place for the Sechelt Indian government district as a municipality. However, further up the coast and across the Jervis Inlet, there's another band of equal size — it's closely in proximity to Powell River — that will not have legislated status on the regional advisory committee. That concerns me because I'm already concerned about the potential for conflict between the different regions' concerns.

While I hope — and I'm hopeful, as the minister is — that we will be working together and finding solutions together, I'm concerned that we have…. There are two major first nations on the Powell River–Sunshine Coast area. One is Sechelt; one is Sliammon — equal size, both Coast Salish. One has the status on this committee, and one does not.

[1535]

The situation is clearly different in every region, and I know the response before has been to say: "Well, if we do this here, we'll have to do it everywhere." But I think in terms of the Sunshine Coast and Powell River, it almost reinforces my concern on the earlier question about not being lumped in with the Island. Can the minister advise me and the residents of Powell River–Sunshine Coast, and particularly the first nations, how that can be explained?

Hon. C. Hansen: I think the member may have answered his own question, in that, if you were to take every single municipality on the north island–coast region, there's an argument for every one of them to be involved. If you took every single first nations community, there's an argument for every one of them to be involved. The answer is: we want them all involved.

I think when you come up to actually having a governance structure in place that is arm's length from government…. It's not something that we can manipulate. It's one that we have to put in place and allow for individuals, based on a prescribed formula, to form the governance bodies. Then, they in turn can make decisions.

This is an interim body. It's there initially for a six-month period, and then it's up to the trust board itself to establish the governance and the advisory committees going forward from there. So there's the flexibility to make that kind of change.

The other thing I'd like to point out is that another important role for the individual MLAs to play on their advisory committees is to make sure that they are bringing the concerns and the ideas and the proposals from first nations communities to the regional advisory committees and to make sure that those proposals from first nations are front and centre as the work of the advisory committee is done.

N. Simons: You can obviously count on me bringing forward the issues of the first nations' communities, but there are places where this might not happen. What will be the mechanism in place if first nations are not being heard?

Hon. C. Hansen: As I said earlier, we are committed to making sure that there is representation for first nations on the trust board itself among the five provin-

[ Page 926 ]

cial government appointees, and I would welcome suggestions from the member. If he has suggestions of first nations individuals that would be able to bring a first nations voice to the board, I would welcome those suggestions, and we would certainly consider those. I want to find the best people possible to make up the five provincial government representatives.

N. Simons: I just wanted to be on record as stating that I believe there's a definite role, there's a definite place in the bill for ensuring that it happens. The good graces of this government may not always carry the day, and I believe that in legislation we need to account for the possibilities of the future.

I see that it's very clearly stated…. We could say the exact same argument for the municipalities. We could say: "Well, as an MLA you're representing Gibsons and Sechelt and Powell River." That argument could work in every single respect. You have two formal governments that have elected bodies representing significant numbers of people who are excluded through legislation from taking part, and I don't think they're going to be satisfied with that explanation.

Hon. C. Hansen: I just want to make sure I correct the record. In the definition

section that we approved already, there is a list of individuals who would be excluded from serving on the board itself, under the definition of qualified individuals. Those are the only restrictions. Certainly, not only is first nations representation not excluded, it is in fact welcomed, and I would heartily invite suggestions of potential candidates.

[1540]

S. Fraser: Well, I'll echo the comments of my colleague from Powell River. I appreciate the fact that I think it's necessary that first nations are represented on the trust, but there's a very key role that the regional advisory committee plays. While it's great that the government has a desire and is urging these committees to have first nations representation…. I don't want the minister to speculate, but in a hypothetical situation, if the committee has the ability to choose a first nations representative, does that also not mean that committee has the ability to choose not to have a first nations representative?

I'll wait for an answer, and then I'll respond.

Hon. C. Hansen: One of features of the board itself, going forward on a permanent basis, is the fact that the provincial government will be able to designate five individuals to serve on the board itself. As a government, we are making that commitment here and now. I've made it earlier in days prior, subsequent to this legislation being introduced — in fact, at the time the legislation was introduced on that very first day — and that is that among the five representatives that the provincial government will designate, there will be first nations representation. I invite suggestions as to who that might be.

S. Fraser: I appreciate the minister's comments, but the advisory committee…. It's not explicitly laid out. My amendment, the amendment proposed, would ensure that on the advisory committee there was, incorporated in the bill, first nations representation or tribal council representation as an advisory function, as part of the advisory committee.

As the minister knows, traditional knowledge of first nations is an important part of any inclusivity in decision-making and economic development on the Island, and certainly in the rest of the province and the rest of the country, and is a direction we should be encouraging. I think it can be done quite easily by simply including the

section (

d) as proposed in this amendment.

The Chair: Members, the question is on the amendment.

N. Simons: I just want to reiterate…. I'm sorry. I'm the third of three boys in my family, and I'm often worried about being overshadowed by larger communities. In this particular case, I believe that first nations in my communities will be worried about being overshadowed. There's a legislated mandate that the regional advisory committee be made up of the mayors and the regional districts of any community over 500. There is not a huge number of first nations communities in my riding, in my particular constituency, of over 500. There are two.

If you have set random…. Not randomly, excuse me. If you've picked the number 500 for any particular reason — I don't know — that's one thing. But perhaps there's a number that we could choose of a first nations community with a membership of a certain number that could also find representation. I believe that with the spirit of goodwill and the new relationship, one glance at this legislation will indicate that they're not in the regional advisory committee.

I think there's a way, and if you want my help in figuring how to do that, I can do that. I can offer my assistance in trying to figure out how we can manage that. I just want to say quite clearly that I believe this amendment would be appropriate so as to ensure that first nations do not feel…. They are not seen to be excluded.

Hon. C. Hansen: The board itself will have the obligation under the terms of this act to establish a strategic plan. It would certainly be my expectation, although we can't direct this, that the strategic plan would actually include deliberate initiatives to support first nations communities. The other thing, I just want to remind the member, is that he is a member of that regional advisory committee, as are his colleagues from the opposition benches and as are the government MLAs from these various regions. They serve on the regional advisory committee.

I would be astounded if this member did not feel that he was a worthy advocate for the interests and ambitions of the first nations communities in his riding.

[1545]

S. Fraser: We'll move along with this. We have assurances of representation. I must say I do regret that

[ Page 927 ]

we can't have the assurance written in the bill as far as the advisory committees go. While my colleague and I and others in this room, as MLAs, will be doing our best to represent first nations on the advisory committee and first nations interests, it is not the same. And it is not in keeping with the new relationship, I believe. So we will certainly be working with that, and we will be working with government to try to effect, maybe, a more effective way to run this advisory committee.

Amendment negatived.

section 2.

C. Trevena: I have a question. It is on the composition again. I think it's just for some clarification. In

section 3(

b) it says that there will be "an opportunity for municipalities or regional districts within the region that have populations of less than 500 to be represented."

I'm wanting some clarification on what this means.

The Chair: That's

section 3, member. We're still on

section

Section 2 approved.

section 3.

C. Trevena: I'll repeat my question. I apologize for that. I was looking at division sections.

Yes, there is under

section 3(

b) the statement that there is "an opportunity for municipalities or regional districts within the region that have populations of less than 500 to be represented on the regional advisory committee." I wanted some clarification of what that meant and possibly some indication of which municipalities we're talking about.

Hon. C. Hansen: Again, I think this speaks to some of the challenge that we had in trying to design a governance structure for a body that's going to be arm's length from the provincial government. We've got to get it going somehow. We've got to put a structure in place so that you have a body that can then make decisions. We've established the initial makeup, the initial governance structure, but we've also built in the flexibility going forward.

We recognize that small communities should have a voice, and we are putting in there the opportunity for the board itself to determine how that representation should be there going forward. So the flexibility is there. We're not prescribing how they do it. We just want to be able to flag that they need to cover that base as they look at what kind of a permanent governance structure would be desirable.

C. Trevena: I thank the minister for the response.

Would this be one representative for each community? So if there were four communities with fewer than 500 people, that would be four representatives? Or would it be one person representing all communities with fewer than 500?

Hon. C. Hansen: That would be up to them to make that decision. We won't be prescriptive. We won't give them any kind of direction in that regard. It's going to be up to them to make that decision when the time comes.

C. Trevena: Going back to the issue of the first nations involvement and mentioning that one possibility of getting first nations involved in this would be through the appointments…. Is this also being perceived as a way that small first nations bands could become involved so that they could have more voice in the structure?

[1550]

Hon. C. Hansen: There is a requirement that they be elected officials. So in the case of the Sechelt aboriginal government, that does meet those qualifications, but that's part of the reason why we feel it's important to have a strong voice for first nations on the board itself. In terms of the regional advisory committees, we see those being comprised of elected officials from municipal and regional government.

C. Trevena: So elected officials, but not elected officials from band councils, not elected officials from within a band?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, and as the

section states, it would include or be made up of individuals who are elected officials of municipalities or regional districts within that region. The flexibility is there, but they would have to meet that parameter. As I say, when it comes to the overall board itself, there is the flexibility to make sure that first nations are represented as a result of the five provincial government–designated individuals.

Section 3 approved.

section 4.

D. Routley: To the minister.

Section 18, management of the regional account: will the moneys invested be taxable to the recipients?

The Chair: Member, we're on

section 4.

Sections 4 and 5 approved.

section 6.

C. Trevena: I wanted to ask about the five members who are going to be appointed. Yesterday the member from government benches for Nanaimo-Parksville was talking about somebody who has already been referred to as a possible member of the board. I may be a little behind on this, so please indulge me. I understood that

[ Page 928 ]

this bill was what's going to be setting up the board, so I wanted to get some clarification on how these five members are going to be appointed and what sort of areas are being looked at for those appointments.

Hon. C. Hansen: There have been no predeterminations as to who individuals should be, and I can tell the member quite frankly that we have not decided on any single member. To date I've only had one suggestion come to me, so I would welcome suggestions that the member may have for any nominees for these five particular appointees.

We do want to look at skill sets that would be useful to the board. Looking at the skills that some of the various elected officials will bring to the table…. Just as an example, I personally feel that there should be somebody on the board that would have some financial experience. There's going to be a need for an audit committee or a finance committee, and to have somebody that has some financial skills would be great.

After November 19 — after the dust has settled on municipal elections — if we recognize that one of the new mayors or regional district chairs has one of those qualifications, then the board may be well served in that capacity. My intent is to wait and see what happens with the municipal elections on November 19, and then ensure that the provincial government designations — the nominees — will flesh out some of the other skill sets that may be desirable on a board of this nature.

C. Trevena: Well, you have given me confidence in the respect that we're waiting until after November 19. I think that's very healthy. Will there be a commitment to make sure that these are from across the region? As my colleague from Malahat–Juan de Fuca and others have pointed out, we are talking about a very large area for these boards. Will there be that commitment, as well as the skill sets?

[1555]

Hon. C. Hansen: I think the member touches on a challenge that governments always have when it comes to appointments, which is that you need…. We often refer to a matrix, where you've got certain skill sets, and then you've got regional things that you're looking for. You're looking for a balance of a whole bunch of competing interests, one of which is a balanced geographic representation. Certainly, all of those factors will come into play. I wouldn't want to give the member any sense that each of the five people is going to be from distinctly different parts of the region, because we do have to make sure that some of the other balancing objectives are met as well.

C. Trevena: We are, though, effectively talking about four people, because you made a commitment earlier that one of these five is likely to be first nations. So it's going to be four people from across the communities including, possibly, more first nations. Is the flexibility there for including more first nations here as well as others?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes.

C. Trevena: I have a slightly separate question on this. How much ability will the board and the trust have in inviting advisers to work with them beyond the prescribed numbers here that have been set out?

Hon. C. Hansen: They will have total flexibility to do exactly that.

Sections 6 to 10 inclusive approved.

section 11.

N. Simons: I'm just curious as to whether there are any guidelines or regulations over the appointment of the CEO and the CFO in this, besides what's exactly here.

Hon. C. Hansen: As the explanatory notes in the legislation explain…. Let me give the short answer to the member's question. No, we would not be providing any additional direction on this. We do want to leave that up to the board at their discretion. We're not going to try to prescribe a process to them. As is noted in the explanatory notes, we are encouraging them to be guided by some of the best-practice publications, which are outlined in the explanatory notes to the legislation, but we are not giving any specific direction over and above what's actually in the text of the legislation.

C. Trevena: In the appointment of the CEO and the CFO, I wondered whether they will be appointed on a fixed salary scale, so all across the trust we're talking about the same salary.

Hon. C. Hansen: That would be up to the board of the trust to determine.

C. Trevena: Will the salaries for the CEO, the CFO and the other administrative staff come from the $50 million that is there for the trust?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, that's correct.

C. Trevena: Just maybe a point of clarification. That means all administrative costs for the running of the trust — including all salaries, office space and so on — come from that $50 million?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, it would come from the $50 million, plus whatever interest would be earned on the trust itself. In the case of the northern development initiative, they've taken some approaches that are actually trying to make…. One approach is to only spend the interest earned. There's another approach that is to

[ Page 929 ]

look at repayable, interest-free loans to the trust, which would extend the life of the trust.

[1600]

There are different initiatives, and it's really in the power of the trust itself to determine how it would like to approach this particular initiative on the north island–coast region.

Sections 11 to 13 inclusive approved.

section 14.

C. Trevena: It's about the strategic plan. I just really wanted to know how the minister envisages the time frame for the strategic plan if it is the duration of the trust itself — the time frame for drawing up the strategic plan.

Hon. C. Hansen: I knew there was a requirement that it be done within six months of the proclamation of the bill. I was actually just trying to quickly double-check whether that's in the legislation itself, which it is not. In fact, it will be in the regulation — a requirement that the first three-year strategic plan has to be put in place within six months of this act coming in. Sorry, if I said "royal assent," I was mistaken — within six months of this act being brought into force.

C. Trevena: It's going to take six months to get together to get the strategic plan for the trust, which is going to then run for approximately three years. Am I correct?

Hon. C. Hansen: There is no termination. There's no time frame in which the trust exists other than what we've built in, as we'll get to in one of the later sections — a provision that if the trust actually disburses all of its funds, then there's a sunset clause that winds up the affairs of the trust at that stage.

The first three-year strategic plan would be in place within six months. Then each subsequent year, they have to issue a new three-year plan. It will always be rolling forward an additional year each year, so there's always that future three-year vision for where the trust would like to go and where its priorities would be. There's no set time frame by which the trust would cease to exist.

C. Trevena: The annual updates. If they're every year, these are really seen as sort of a continuation. Or would it involve writing a new strategic plan for each time?

Hon. C. Hansen: Actually, I'm going to apologize to the member because I didn't catch her question. I was actually just getting a clarification on what I had said previously. In fact, in the legislation is the requirement that the strategic plan be prepared…. Let me just read the

section here: "The directors must prepare (

a) the first strategic plan required under subsection (1) on or before the earlier of (

i) the date on which the North Island-Coast Development Initiative Trust makes any of the payments contemplated by

section 20, and (ii) the first anniversary of the coming into force of this section."

When I said it was within six months of the coming into force of the act, I was mistaken. It is, in fact, within 12 months of the coming into force of that particular section. It is certainly our anticipation at this time, at least, that we would be bringing the act into force in its entirety, not

section by section. But again, for those that will be the makeup of the first board, there may be an argument to bring in some sections at different stages. We would certainly receive that advice from them at the time. I apologize to the member for the need for that correction, and I would ask her to restate her next question.

C. Trevena: I apologize. That has given me, actually, a separate question. We're talking of directors coming together and spending up to a year building up their plan, their vision for how they would like the moneys to best be spent. Am I correct?

[1605]

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, but I also think there's an incentive for everybody involved with the trust to get this done as quickly as possible. I think it's in everybody's best interest that this money be put to work in these communities. As the member knows, in the North Island there's a need for these moneys to get put to work as soon as we can.

Our hope, obviously, is that it would take much less than the one year, but we did want to put some time frame on it.

C. Trevena: If you'll excuse me, I'm working this through. We have a pot of money — we have $50 million — that is a lot of money, and it's going to be very useful. I know in my constituency and in my colleagues' constituencies around the coast, there is a real need for this money. What concerns me, I think, is that the overriding need for moneys for specific projects will come before the strategy and vision is in place of how the community, the board and the trust see the economic development plan going.

I wanted to know, really, if there is any guidance on effectively waiting for the strategic plan before moneys are allocated or if the board will start allocating the money ahead of having written the strategic plan.

Hon. C. Hansen: I think it's stronger than just guidance because it's actually a requirement that the trust cannot be disbursing moneys for projects, other than their administration needs, until such time as they have that strategic plan in place.

I think that's an important element of this legislation. I think something that was requested, in the context of the northern development initiative, was the need to not just look at proposals one at a time but to

[ Page 930 ]

look at them in a broader context of what can really be accomplished by this particular trust initiative.

So there is a requirement that the strategic plan be in place and made public for everybody to read and inspect and to comment on. There is that requirement that the strategic plan be in place before funds are disbursed. While there is going to be some anxiety to get the moneys flowing to good projects, that will be all the more incentive to get the strategic plan done as quickly as possible.

C. Trevena: The question which you didn't hear before, minister, is on the updating of the plan. Is this going to be an annual update, or will the board be looking at more of a revision on lessons learned as the moneys are starting to be disbursed?

Hon. C. Hansen: The answer is yes, there is a requirement that a new strategic plan be put out each year. Whether that is just an update of the previous year or whether it's going to be a whole new rewrite of a strategic plan is really up to the board to decide. They do have that kind of flexibility. If they were to set out a three-year vision for that plan and then substantially alter it 12 months later, they're going to be held accountable by the residents of the region, who will have the opportunity to read these various reports as they are posted and made publicly available.

Sections 14 to 17 inclusive approved.

section 18.

D. Routley: Will the funds be taxable income to those recipients and project recipients?

[1610]

Hon. C. Hansen: There are rulings that prevent us from doing what the member is suggesting. It may be useful if I read this explanation, because it gives some of the technical background on this. There has been a concern expressed that the trust is not exempt from taxation. Interest earned on the funds is taxable, creating a significant expense. Exemption under paragraph 149(1)(d.3) of the federal Income Tax Act essentially contemplates an exemption for entities owned or controlled by the Crown — in this case it would be the province of British Columbia — or are agents of the Crown. It also contemplates municipal authorities.

For us to be able to set up a trust that is arm's length from the provincial government and not controlled by the provincial government, we do not have the power to make it tax-exempt. The only way that that can actually happen would be for them to make application through the federal government. For us to provide for any kind of a tax-exempt status would be one of the indicators that says that that is, in fact, an entity of the province of British Columbia, and that's not the intent of what we're trying to accomplish with these trusts.

D. Routley: We've heard discussion of first nations involvement. If there are projects either sponsored by first nations or participated in by first nations, with their tax-exempt status, would this be an advantage to the fund — directing funds to projects either with participants who are first nations or through first nations bodies?

Hon. C. Hansen: There is certainly nothing about these trusts that would make them an exception to funds that may be received by a first nations community for an economic development initiative. I think the same rules would apply. If there are employment opportunities provided on-reserve, then those obviously have a different tax status than employment opportunities provided off-reserve. But the same rules would apply with moneys flowing from this account as other sources of economic development funds for first nations communities.

N. Simons: Would there be a substantive difference between moneys administered by one of the municipalities — i.e., the Sechelt Indian band and the Sliammon Indian band? Is there a difference in how they would administer the funds in terms of their tax-exempt status?

[1615]

Hon. C. Hansen: The tax-exempt status of first nations is really driven by federal legislation, so I can't give the member a specific answer. I'm not familiar with the federal statutes that would apply in this case.

Sections 18 and 19 approved.

section 20.

N. Simons: I'm proposing an amendment to

section 20. I believe it's possible that the minister is aware of this proposed amendment. I have copies here for whoever needs them.

[SECTION 20, by adding the text shown as underlined:

Section 20 is amended in subsection (1) by

adding the following paragraph:

(

j) marine infrastructure; and

(

k) community appurtenances.]

The purpose of the amendment is to add to the list: "The purpose of the regional account." Under

section 20(1)(i), I would add "(

j) marine infrastructure" and, as well, "(

k) community appurtenances." That was a direct response to a request by the two regional districts, four mayors and first nations in communities on the Sunshine Coast — so the coastal part of the North Island constituency there.

On the amendment.

N. Simons: Marine infrastructure. Partly because many of the projects anticipated to be worked on with the assistance of this generous trust, including marine infrastructure, as it states, the wharves and the marinas and such, which may, in fact, already be covered under another subsection…. I may be reassured by that.

[ Page 931 ]

However, community appurtenances include such things as community facilities, which unfortunately are sadly lacking on the lower Sunshine Coast, and there is some hope among the elected representatives there that these will be part of that.

I would like to propose that amendment. I'm hoping that it will receive some thought and some consideration. I know that the elected officials there would be most appreciative.

Hon. C. Hansen: I would like to assure the member that the intent of the amendment can be achieved without the amendment being put in place. If we talk about marine infrastructure, you know, there are certainly opportunities, whether it's under transportation, whether it's under tourism, in some cases, or whether it's just under economic development, which can be pretty broad. We are not giving any kind of limited scope to how these various areas need to be defined.

I think in the cases of both marine infrastructure and the community appurtenances that the member refers to, they can certainly be covered under these other areas. I would like to assure the member that the amendment he proposed is not required because it's otherwise achieved through the other wording.

N. Simons: To the minister: thank you for that response. I'm hoping the community will be reassured. I guess that's part of the problem of listing some so that others will feel that they're out of it. I would like just to make sure that harbours are included and community centres are included as potential recipients of funding.

Amendment negatived.

section 20.

C. Trevena: I, too, have an amendment to

section 20.

[SECTION 20, by adding the text shown as underlined:

Section 20 is amended subsection (1) by

adding the following paragraph:

(

j) arts and culture.]

On the amendment.

C. Trevena: I know that there is the argument that this would be as part of economic development, but I think arts and culture does have a separate niche. I know already from my own constituency that there is a new theatre festival that's opened up, and our office has already been approached about how they can apply for funding through this trust, even though the trust isn't active yet. I know that there are other arts festivals that will be looking for this, as well as other small theatre groups and so on.

The needs of arts and culture, really, while they could be defined as economic, I think are much broader. There is much more to their requirements, helping in different aspects of the cultural development of communities. By saying that it is economic development, my concern is that these will be sidelined for also very important economic development projects.

But if arts and culture is there as a separate heading, there will be the opportunity for them to be taken as a separate entity rather than just being seen as, "Well, we really do need this economic development one," whether it is a small fish processing plant in one community weighed against moneys for a theatre festival in another community. I think that by having a separate

section for arts and culture, it will allow that area to have the recognition which I think it deserves for our communities.

[1620]

Hon. C. Hansen: There was a similar amendment put forward in the context of the northern development initiative yesterday, and I think the same discussion applies here. I think it's important that we look at what the intent of these trusts is. The intent of these trusts is to provide financial resources to community leaders at the community and regional levels to help to direct, to guide, to structure the economic future. Arts and culture, I believe, has a very legitimate place in the context of economic development.

I had the pleasure just eight weeks ago of being in Telegraph Cove in the member's riding. It's a great little community where they've really celebrated some of the history and culture of Telegraph Cove. There was a parking lot full of tourists, and it was a great economic generator for that part of Vancouver Island.

I think what's here in the wording, as we have proposed for the legislation, is the opportunity to approve projects that relate to economic development. I believe that it is up to the board members themselves, to local and community leaders, to decide what constitutes economic development. If they make the determination that an arts-and-culture-related project fits into their definition of economic development, then they have all the power necessary to fund those kinds of initiatives.

I do not believe that I as the minister should be prescribing to the members of the board how they should define how arts and culture fits into economic development, because I think the right place for those decisions to be made is in the region by those officials that will serve on these boards.

The Chair: Member, on the amendment.

C. Trevena: Yes, on the amendment. I understand that you don't want to give the boards prescription and to say that these are the specific areas. However, basically we have a prescribed list. We have forestry, transportation, tourism, mining, Olympic opportunities, small business, energy and agriculture, as well as economic development. If we're looking at this list, we could put all of these categories just under economic development. There is no need to break the list down in this way.

So by giving that focus to the boards in this list and suggesting that these are the areas they may want to look at, including that subcategory of economic development which I think does envelope everything, I

[ Page 932 ]

think it's really only fair to include arts and culture as a separate category and to give the boards the flexibility, if they choose, to invest in that way. If they don't choose, that's fine, but we have already got a list which has given prescription to the boards.

Hon. C. Hansen: I think if the member looks at the various subject areas or industry areas, as she mentioned in her remarks, they are all economic development initiatives. They're all economic-focused, whether it's forestry, transportation, tourism, mining, Olympic opportunities, small business, energy and agriculture — all are economic development opportunities. The reason for adding economic development as a line unto itself is just to say that these are all areas that should be included. We're not saying that it's just these, that it's that narrow in scope. We wanted to broaden the scope to include other things.

I think in the member's second reading remarks she mentioned fisheries and aquaculture, which I think have a very legitimate role in terms of the future of the economic development of the province. I think those examples she mentioned in her second reading remarks are case in point as to why it's important that we not just list the initial list, because we may have forgotten one. It's important to give it a little bit broader scope to say "and anything else that's of an economic development nature."

In the case of arts and culture, it can fit in there, providing the proponents of a particular project can convince the board members that their particular arts-and-culture-related project fits into what the board's definition of economic development might be.

C. Trevena: So really economic development, subsection (g), is the catch-all. It's for fisheries. It's for aquaculture. It's for arts and culture. It's for anything we haven't listed anywhere else. If the board wants to look at it, they would be looking under subsection (g).

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes. The board has the flexibility to define these categories as they see fit.

[1625]

N. Simons: I am concerned that the definition of arts and culture is quite subjective. It is very likely that all the boards will see it differently. I know the minister sees that this local decision-making is always a good thing. I don't think there's ever any doubt about what mining is. I don't think there's every any doubt about what forestry is. There's never any doubt about what tourism is.

Arts and culture. This is a list, (

a) through (

i) currently, which basically can mirror actual ministries themselves.

Tourism. Is part of tourism sport and the arts? Sport and the arts are not in here. Sport and the arts could be. There's no guarantee in this list. There's no guarantee that a board can't summarily dismiss a request from arts and culture by saying: "We don't see any economic benefit to the community." They don't have to have any justification,

whereas if somebody comes with a mining proposal that would be an economic development initiative, there will necessarily be a reasoning on the record as to why a certain proposal will be turned down.

I'm quite sure that whatever happened in Telegraph Cove was a tourism event. It could also be that there are arts and cultural activities that are simply for the benefit of the communities themselves, within the communities. It's not always a tourism event. I really do think that people who work…. As a musician, myself, I do know that sometimes it's not always considered art, too. However, that's another issue altogether. I do think that it's a worthy amendment to this section.

Amendment negatived.

Sections 20 to 23 inclusive approved.

section 24.

N. Simons: Could I just ask how the Offence Act does not apply in this act, and if there's any reasoning that I just don't understand at first scan here?

Hon. C. Hansen: I will just read the explanatory notes on this. For everybody's edification, it refers to the….

Section 5 of the Offence Act does not apply. What

section 5 of the Offence Act says is the following: "A person who contravenes an enactment by doing

an act that it forbids, or omitting to do

an act that it requires to be done, commits an offence against the enactment."

[1630]

If this

section were to apply to the act that's before us today, it is conceivable that the trust or a director of the trust, if having committed an offence against this act, would be subject to a criminal prosecution. Now, when we look at the requirements that are in this particular act, we're talking about the requirement to submit a strategic plan. We're talking about an annual report. I would argue that those are not the kinds of oversights that we would perhaps want to see trigger a criminal response.

The accountability is to the public, and so there is a requirement that these officials who are duly elected by their respective electorates…. If they don't put out the three-year strategic plan or if they don't put out their annual report in the time frames that are required, they're really going to be held accountable in a court of public opinion. We felt that in this context, that's a far more powerful accountability than holding them subject to what, in fact, could be a criminal process.

N. Simons: I'm wondering if this has anything to do with liability issues for members of the board or in any respect.

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, it does. It prevents the members of the boards, including the advisory committees, of being charged with an offence as a result of the spe-

[ Page 933 ]

cific work of their…. It doesn't indemnify them, but it does prevent them from being charged in a criminal sense with respect to oversights of requirements in the legislation, which as I mentioned, are primarily those reporting requirements.

N. Simons: Those requirements also have a significant fiduciary obligation and could potentially run into some criminal act besides just the legislation discussing issues of annual report filing. So I'm just wondering if it has the potential of affecting criminal activity or the investigation of such.

Hon. C. Hansen: There is a requirement in this act that the trusts have an auditor duly appointed that would be required to abide by generally accepted accounting principles. So there is that extra level of oversight the public can count on to ensure that the work of the trust is aboveboard and that it is properly reported publicly for everyone to inspect.

N. Simons: In the unfortunate circumstance of the auditor coming back with evidence of questionable activity, it will not have an impact on whether or not a board member responsible would be subject to investigation?

Hon. C. Hansen: This

section would not, for example, prevent somebody involved with the trust, whether it's a staff person or a board member who was, perhaps, responsible for misappropriation of funds…. They would still be held responsible for that, and they would be subject to charges under other legislation. The wording of this legislation or this particular

section would in no way save them harmless in a situation like that.

N. Simons: "Rest assured that the fund itself will not be subject to penalty because of the offence of a board member," I guess is…?

Hon. C. Hansen: The legislation actually provides for the trust to be set up as a corporate entity. This corporate entity would be responsible in the same way that any other corporate entity would be.

N. Simons: I hope that reassures me adequately.

Sections 24 and 25 approved.

section 26.

N. Simons: I'm just wondering if the minister can explain who is going to be a member of this committee, and what is a…? I guess we know what a qualified individual is; it's not an MLA. Just a little explanation of what the committee is, in this respect, to review the act….

Hon. C. Hansen: The intent of this

section is to provide for an independent review of the trust after a period of time. It's partly because this is an entity that will be outside of government — totally at arm's length from the province — that we need to set up a requirement for this review that, again, is driven from the legislation and is not something that gets directed from the provincial government, when the time comes.

[1635]

This committee is set up of qualified individuals, and if you go back to the definition of qualified individuals, it includes an individual who is not an elected official of a municipality or regional district. In other words, the individuals who have served on the regional advisory committees and the members of the board itself who are drawn from municipal or regional governments cannot serve on this. It cannot be an employee of government. It cannot be a member of the board of directors of the initiative itself. It cannot be a member of a regional advisory committee. And finally, it cannot be a person who is a spouse, child, parent, etc. of the above.

The intent is to have a body that is independent and can take an independent review of the work of the trust, but the actual structure of that committee beyond that would be determined by the trust board itself.

N. Simons: My question is: does the minister, then, suggest that the fact that the committee is appointed by the directors makes it independent of the directors?

Hon. C. Hansen: It would be appointed by the committee. Again, it's a way to facilitate this body, and the effort, in terms of defining who is a qualified individual, is to ensure that there is a degree to which these individuals are arm's length from the board itself. There is a requirement that they publish their report, and there's also the requirement that they consult with a range of individuals in producing their report. We believe that will lead to the kind of independent, arm's-length review that can allow the public to really evaluate the success of the board, when that time comes.

N. Simons: My question is: would it be only if the trust has not been dissolved at that point? Is there any review? If, in fact, it does dissolve, is there any possibility for review of the act if the committee's been…?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, there would be that kind…. Well, it wouldn't be the same kind of a review, but there would still be a requirement for financial audits to be done in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. There would also be a requirement that the trust would produce its final reports and make those publicly available, as provided for in the act.

N. Simons: The audit and those other reviews are not a review of the act. I'm curious as to whether

[ Page 934 ]

there's a mechanism for a review of the act by any committee if the trust has been dissolved?

Hon. C. Hansen: If the trust was dissolved at that point, which means that they would have disbursed all of the funds in the account, I think the review of the act at that point would be somewhat redundant. There is certainly the opportunity, when that day comes — or if it comes, because there's the opportunity this could exist in perpetuity if they structured it that way….

If it came to the point where the trust was dissolved, there is always the opportunity that the government of the day, when that time comes, would have the opportunity to put in place a similar trust or to learn from the experience of the trust. That would be a decision that would be made by a provincial government when that time came.

[1640]

Sections 26 and 27 approved.

Title approved.

Hon. C. Hansen: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 4:41 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

NORTH ISLAND–COAST DEVELOPMENT

INITIATIVE TRUST ACT

Bill 7, North Island–Coast Development Initiative Trust Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. C. Richmond: I call committee stage on Bill 8.

Committee of the Whole House

SOUTHERN INTERIOR DEVELOPMENT

INITIATIVE TRUST ACT

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 8; S. Hawkins in the chair.

The committee met at 4:43 p.m.

Section 1 approved.

section 2.

N. Macdonald: I rise to propose an amendment to

section 2 of Bill 8. Norm Macdonald to move in Committee of the Whole on Bill 8, intituled Southern Interior Development Initiative Trust, 2005, to amend as follows:

[SECTION 2, by adding the text shown as underlined:

Section 3 subsection (1) is amended by

adding:

(

d) First Nations representatives from within

the region.]

On the amendment.

N. Macdonald: The tradition in the Kootenays is to work with first nations. The example I give you is the Columbia Basin Trust. The Columbia Basin Trust is something that has long standing and is well-respected within the Kootenays. Certainly, within that framework the first nations are there. The regional advisory committees are where proposals, as I understand it, are going to come forward from. It's an important group. It's a group that is going to generate the ideas. Participation from first nations, I'm sure, would be welcome.

[1645]

Since it is such an important committee, then, and given the fact that during the throne speech there was a lot of talk about first nations and the important role that first nations need to take within all aspects of government, this is an appropriate amendment. It is one that definitely has a representative from the Kootenays who supports this initiative. It is an amendment that needs to be made. There has to be first nations participation, and it has to be there in a systematic way.

Hon. C. Hansen: A similar amendment was put forward with respect to the north island–coastal trust, and we had an extensive discussion when that legislation was before the House. At that time, I made it clear that it is the intention of government to make sure that among the five provincial government–designated board members, we are committed to making sure there are first nations individuals that will be chosen to serve on these boards for both the north island–coastal trust and the southern interior trust. There is currently first nations representation on the northern interior trust board, as it is constituted. So that commitment is there.

As I mentioned with the previous bill, the challenge we have is to set up an entity which is arm's length from government and to provide for an initial governance model for it. There is also an opportunity for the board themselves to look at how these bodies should be constituted going forward. There is flexibility there for the board to constitute these in a different manner if they see fit. In the meantime, we do welcome and respect the contribution that first nations individuals can make to the trust and the allocation of the funds of the trust, and we will be ensuring that that's provided for on the board itself, as opposed to on the regional advisory committees.

N. Macdonald: I'll make two points. First, just to emphasize, it is absolutely crucial that first nations are involved not only in the board but also within the regional advisory committee. That's what we're talking about here. It's the regional advisory committee. It is in

[ Page 935 ]

that place, as I understand it — and the minister can correct me if I'm wrong — that the proposals for spending will be made. That is the area where they're going to decide what proposals are put forward to the board, and it is in that place that you need first nations participation, if you are serious about having a first nations voice.

I'm asking you to reconsider and really think about what is being talked about here. Now, as I understand it, the minister has said that the committee can be changed. But in reading

section 3, to me it seems restrictive. There's language around: "…the regional advisory committee must" and then it lists…. But in that list of what must be included, first nations is not included. It seems to me that you cannot change the structure with the bill as it is presently. So what I'm suggesting is that this amendment is something that will actually allow first nations to participate.

Like I say, in the Kootenays it is traditional that local government also include first nations and that we work together. In the structure that we have within the Columbia Basin Trust, we have included first nations, and the outcome of that is that some very good work has been able to be done with the Columbia Basin Trust. First nations have felt involved. They have taken leadership roles, and they have benefited from that model.

I am just asking members to please look at this amendment. It is something that I think really benefits this trust, this act. It will improve it. It is something that fits exactly with what was said in the throne speech — that first nations are important; they are going to be included. So there again…. I've said a few things, and I'm sure the minister has explanations that he wishes to share with me.

Hon. C. Hansen: It is