1980 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 32nd 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, JULY 9, 1980

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

3223 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Employment Standards Act (Bill 36). Hon. Mr. Heinrich.

Introduction and first reading –– 3223

Mineral Resource Tax Amendment Act, 1980 (Bill 41). Hon. Mr. McClelland.

Introduction and first reading –– 3223

An Act to Establish an Institute of Native Indian Languages for British Columbia

(Bill M211). Mr. Hanson.

Introduction and first reading –– 3223

Matter of Privilege

Alleged bias of Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker rules 3224

Hon. Mr. Mair –– 3224

Routine Proceedings

Oral Questions.

Fisheries jurisdiction. Mr. Lea –– 3224

Hydro line between Prince George and Prince Rupert. Mr. Howard –– 3224

Fisheries jurisdiction. Mr. Lea –– 3225

Mr. Howard –– 3225

Mr. Barrett –– 3225

Future of St. Mary's Hospital. Mr. Cocke –– 3225

Victoria-Seattle ferry service. Mr. Lockstead –– 3225

Mr. Hanson –– 3226

Emergency facilities at Vancouver General Hospital. Hon. Mr. Mair replies –– 3226

Committee of Supply; Ministry of Transportation and Highways estimates. (Hon.

Mr. Fraser).

On vote 193: minister's office –– 3227

Mr. Lockstead

Mr. King

Mr. Barrett

Mr. Barnes

Mr. Cocke

Mr. Skelly

Mr. Passarell

Mr. Mitchell

Mr. Davis

Mr. Lorimer

WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 1980

The House met at 2 p.m.

[Mr. Davidson in the chair.]

Prayers.

HON. MR. FRASER:

In the galleries today is Mayor Tom Mason of the city of Williams Lake

in the riding of the Cariboo, which is the stampede capital of the

world. I would like to ask the House to welcome Mayor Mason.

MR. STUPICH: In the gallery today are Chief Petty Officer Dorrington, serving with HMCS Provider ,

and his lovely daughter, Miss Robin Dorrington, visiting Victoria from

Halifax, Nova Scotia. I would ask the members to welcome them.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY:

Mr. Speaker, today we were privileged to hear the prayer and the

blessing on this House from the commissioner for Canada and Bermuda for

the Salvation Army, Commissioner Waldron. I would like to ask the House

to welcome him. His home is in Toronto. He is visiting us in British

Columbia this week and we have just had a meeting with him. Would you

please welcome the commissioner?

Mr. Speaker, if I may, I would like to explain that the commissioner is here

for a historic meeting of the two advisory boards from Vancouver and Victoria,

which have met today. Some members, after the luncheon meeting today, have joined

us in your gallery. I would like to announce to the House that with us are:

Lieutenant-Colonel Willard Rae, the divisional commander for British Columbia;

Major Hugh Tilley from Vancouver; Captain Bill Merritt of Victoria and Vancouver

Island; Mr. Merlin Hawes from Victoria; Murray Glazier from Victoria; and David

Mellor from Vancouver. They are all members of the advisory boards. Will the

House please welcome them,

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, visiting the capital today is Her Worship, Mayor Mabel

McCrory, from the large metropolis of, New Denver, British Columbia. I

would ask the House to extend a warm welcome to Mayor McCrory.

HON. MR. SMITH:

Mr. Speaker, also visiting the House today is another mayor, Mayor

Salvador of Creston. In the absence of his member, I would ask that the

House make him welcome today as well.

MR. LOCKSTEAD:

Mr. Speaker, as well as welcoming the Governor-General of Canada, who

is visiting my home community of Powell River today, we have in the

members' gallery my mother, my daughter Gina, her good friend Fay Hall,

and the apple of my eye, my nine-year-old daughter Jennifer.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Speaker, in your gallery today are three constituents

from Dewdney. I would like the House to welcome my mother; Alderman Perry Cleven

from the district municipality of Mission; and Min Delmonico. I might add that

the member for Dewdney (Mr. Mussallem), I think, last saw my mother when I was

six weeks old. This is revenge, to the hon. member. He came out into the valley

in 1936, six weeks after I was born, I think, and tried to sell my father a

new sedan. My father was having no part of it; he retained his convertible.

Introduction of Bills

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS ACT

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

a bill intituled Employment Standards Act.

Bill

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

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

MINERAL RESOURCE TAX

AMENDMENT ACT, 1980

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

a bill intituled Mineral Resource Tax Amendment Act, 1980.

Bill

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

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

AN ACT TO ESTABLISH AN

INSTITUTE OF NATIVE INDIAN

LANGUAGES FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA

On a motion by Mr. Hanson,

Bill M211,

An Act To Establish an Institute of Native Indian Languages

for British Columbia, introduced, read a first time, and ordered to be

placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of

the House after today.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. members,

yesterday the hon. Minister of Health (Hon. Mr. Mair) rose on a matter

of privilege to give notice of that matter to the House at the earliest

opportunity pending efforts to obtain a transcript of certain

statements which give rise to the alleged breach.

The hon.

minister advised the House of the substance of the statements in

question, which was sufficient upon which to frame a motion.

The

House will appreciate that situations of this kind present a dilemma in

that if they are not raised at the earliest opportunity, priority over

other business will be denied. But on the other hand, complaints

founded upon reports of statements made outside the House require the

tabling of the publication in question, whether it be a newspaper or

other transcript. Without such tabling, a matter of privilege may not

be proceeded with. Had the hon. minister not brought the matter to the

attention of the House until he was in a position to table a

transcript, and provided that he later offer a valid reason for the

delay, he would be procedurally in order.

This being the

case, I cannot conclude that the hon. minister was not in order as far

as he went in rising at the first opportunity to make the House aware

of his intention to complete his presentation to the House upon receipt

of a transcript.

However, the authorities and previous

rulings by Speakers of this House make it clear that the motion

intended to be made giving the House power to impose a remedy must be

[ Page 3224 ]

presented even although a ruling has yet to be made by the Chair on whether or not a prima facie case exists.

Since

this was not done the Chair must rule that notice as required by

standing orders would be required in order to proceed further.

HON. MR. MAIR:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If I might just get a point of clarification

out of your ruling, which I appreciate, it seems to me that by your

ruling — which I of course accept — a Catch-22 situation is raised

whereby if a member is to raise a question of privilege in a timely way

and yet does not have the evidence with which to bring a motion, then

he cannot raise the question of privilege and the matter can never be

before the House. Yet if he waits until he has the evidence he is out

of time for bringing the motion. I wonder if the Speaker has any

direction he might give other hon. members who, in keeping with their

duties to this House, wish to protect the Speaker and other hon.

members by raising a question of privilege.

DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Thank you, hon. member. I am sure that the hon. minister, in having an

opportunity to read the decision I have just handed down, will find the

clarification and remedies available to him.

Oral Questions

FISHERIES JURISDICTION

MR. LEA:

I have a question for the Minister of Environment. Yesterday it was

announced that British Columbia was demanding jurisdiction over

fisheries. On June 17 the Minister of Forests (Hon. Mr. Waterland)

welcomed the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada reducing the power

of federal fisheries officers to prosecute polluters of provincial

waters. Can the minister confirm that the change in British Columbia's

position on fisheries is designed to accommodate Alcan in its pursuit

of the Kemano completion project?

HON. MR. ROGERS: No, Mr. Speaker.

MR. LEA: Does he deny it?

HON. MR. ROGERS: By the first question I assumed he would understand that yes, I am denying it.

MR. LEA:

Can the minister tell us what made him, as the minister responsible,

and his government, change their minds about jurisdiction over

fisheries?

HON. MR. ROGERS: It is a matter of policy.

MR. LEA:

I am asking for the reasons behind the policy decision that has been

announced. That is an entirely different question, I believe.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is in order.

HON. MR. ROGERS: No policy decision has been announced.

MR. LEA: Is the statement that was made yesterday not an accurate statement

of the province's position?

HON. MR. ROGERS: Perhaps the member could clarify for members on this side of the House what statement he is referring to.

MR. LEA:

The statement made by the Premier yesterday. Is the position of the

provincial government now that they don't want jurisdiction over

fisheries?

Interjection.

MR. LEA: No, I'm

not asking for future policy. I'm asking: is the position of the

provincial government of British Columbia at this moment that you do or

don't want jurisdiction over fisheries in this province?

HON. MR. ROGERS:

Well, Mr. Speaker, the position of the province of British Columbia

will be put forward by the Minister of Intergovernmental Relations

(Hon. Mr. Gardom) at the constitutional conference.

MR. LEA: I'm not asking what the minister is going to do in Ottawa. I'm asking: what is the position of the government now?

DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Hon. members, we are very closely related to matters of policy and I

wonder if possibly, for clarification purposes, the member might expand

a little on his question.

MR. LEA: I could ask the

minister: has corruption gone on in government, or do you plan it? It's

two different things. I'm asking now: what is the present policy — what

is the present position — of the British Columbia government in terms

of jurisdiction over fisheries?

MR. HOWARD: The answer is obviously that they don't have any policy.

But I wonder if I could....

Interjections.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. members, this is question period. It is not time for remarks. The member has a question?

HYDRO LINE BETWEEN

PRINCE GEORGE AND PRINCE RUPERT

MR. HOWARD: Yes, I have a question and I hope I get an answer. Question period implies an answer period as well.

I'd

like to direct a question to the Minister of Environment. I'm advised

that B.C. Hydro has recently obtained rights-of-way for a 500-kilovolt

line parallel to an existing B.C. Hydro 500-kilovolt line generally

between Prince George and Prince Rupert, in the area where the Kemano

completion project is contemplated. Can the minister advise or confirm

that B.C. Hydro is doing this and acquiring these rights-of-way in

anticipation of the Kemano completion project being allowed to proceed?

HON. MR. ROGERS: No, Mr. Speaker.

[ Page

3225 ]

FISHERIES JURISDICTION

MR. LEA:

In the past two weeks, has the Premier told anyone that the position of

the British Columbia government is that the British Columbia government

wants jurisdiction over fisheries?

HON. MR. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, policy decisions on fisheries are a matter for the

cabinet, and its discussions are privy to cabinet and a matter of

confidentiality.

MR. LEA: I'm not asking about future

policy; I'm asking whether the Premier has said to anyone that the

position of the provincial government is that it wants the jurisdiction

over fisheries. Have you said that to anyone?

DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Hon. members, Beauchesne's fifth edition clearly states: "A question

ought not to refer to a statement made outside the House by a

minister." The Chair cannot insist on an answer, hon. member. It can

only recognize questions.

MR. HOWARD: One final

question: can I ask the Minister of Environment whether he knows that

B.C. Hydro has acquired rights-of-way for that 500-kilovolt line?

HON. MR. ROGERS: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't want to be facetious, but does the member know I'm not the minister responsible for B.C. Hydro?

MR. HOWARD: I know you're the minister not responsible for very much.

MR. BARRETT:

I'd like to ask the Premier a very simple question. Will he state, as

Premier of this province, what this province's position is on offshore

fisheries?

HON. MR. BENNETT: In due course, Mr. Speaker.

MR. BARRETT: Are we to believe, by that answer, that this government has no known policy on offshore fisheries?

HON. MR. BENNETT: No, Mr. Member, through you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. BARRETT:

If the Premier knows what his position is on offshore fisheries, can he

give this House and the people of British Columbia the assurance that

he knows it's the same policy he had a week ago?

HON. MR. BENNETT: One thing this government has that that member, when he was government, doesn't is consistency in our policy, Mr. Speaker.

FUTURE OF ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL

MR. COCKE: Mr. Speaker, we've learned consistency is inconsistency over there.

I have a question I'd like to direct to the Minister of Health. Two months

ago the senior assistant deputy, Mr. McDermit, assured the mayor of New Westminster

that St. Mary's Hospital would not be closed. At a recent meeting of the

Greater Vancouver Regional Hospital District the same Mr. McDermit asked for

an in-camera session, and from that meeting came a decision advising that the

St. Mary's Hospital should be closed and converted to an extended-care facility.

Did the minister instruct Mr. McDermit to ask the GVRHD to hold a closed meeting

to consider St. Mary's?

HON. MR. MAIR:

Mr. Speaker, in direct answer to the question, no. I did not ask Mr.

McDermit to hold a meeting, but I know that it was going to be held.

Let me say that it seems to me that the member opposite is now

attempting to build a case for use in the future. I'm not sure that the

conversion of an acute-care hospital to an extended-care hospital now

or some time in the future means that the hospital is closed. This is

the same thing that's happened at St. George's Hospital. and in London,

England, and elsewhere. The moment you change the classification from

acute care to something else, immediately the NDP, the Labour Party or

whatever it may be on the socialist side says that you've closed an

acute-care hospital.

MR. COCKE: Mr. Speaker. I'm

extremely impressed with the intelligence of the minister. Did the

minister instruct his deputy to persuade the GVRHD to have St. Mary's

Hospital changed from an acute-care to an extended-care facility?

Incidentally, it doesn't lend itself to that. I know a little bit about

this subject, and it does not under any circumstances.

HON. MR. MAIR:

Mr. Speaker, I did not instruct Mr. McDermit to do anything of the

sort. The question of St. Mary's Hospital ultimately converting from an

acute-care hospital to an extended-care hospital has been discussed. As

a matter of fact, it was discussed some two or three months ago in my

office between myself and the directors of that hospital. Of course, I

knew that Mr. McDermit was going to be meeting with the regional

hospital district and so on about this and other matters, I might say,

relating to Eagle Ridge Hospital, Surrey Memorial and the Royal

Columbian. All of these conversations took place. But no conversation

has taken place concerning the changeover from an acute-care facility

to an extended-care facility that I specifically know of. Certainly, it

may have taken place.

MR. COCKE: I have one more

question. Will the minister produce his own task force report, which

recommends that that first-class facility continue as an acute-care

facility?

HON. MR. MAIR: I think that question

implies more than I can answer without taking the question as notice. I

have really no objection to making that report available, except for

one thing. I read the report very carefully. It contains some things

therein on a personal basis which, I think, if the minister opposite

were the Minister of Health, he would have some doubts that it should

be put into the public domain. But I will look very carefully at the

report, and if I can present that report to the member or to the House

and still be consistent with the confidentiality that went into the

making of that report, I will do so.

VICTORIA-SEATTLE FERRY SERVICE

MR. LOCKSTEAD: I direct my question to the Minister of Transportation and Highways. Has the minister obtained information showing that the Victoria Princess

has suffered severe lack of patronage and is losing so much money that

its

schedule will have to be cut in half as an emergency measure, or

has the minister avoided getting a report at all on that matter?

[ Page 3226 ]

HON. MR. FRASER: I reported the traffic on the Victoria-Seattle run to the Legislature a week ago.

MR. LOCKSTEAD:

Has the load factor in the past few weeks dropped to one-third of the

ship's capacity, an average of 239 per trip? Were there six or more

trips last month in which the crew outnumbered the passengers?

HON. MR. FRASER: A meeting has been called for next week to look into the details that you're referring to, but I haven't seen those details.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: I do have those details, and I'll be pleased to make them available to the minister prior to his meeting.

On a supplementary, is it true that the ticket revenue is not even covering the full cost of fuel to operate the Victoria Princess , let alone the wages, charter fee, dock fees, insurance and other operating costs?

HON. MR. FRASER: I have no idea. Those are the figures we'll review next week.

MR. LOCKSTEAD:

Once again, I have these figures in my possession. I'll be pleased to

make them available to the minister so he can go to the meeting well

equipped.

MR. HANSON: On a supplementary, Mr.

Speaker, has B.C. Steamship Company had to borrow money to meet

operating expenses, and float loans to meet payroll?

HON. MR. FRASER:

For the member's information, they're constantly borrowing money. They

have a credit line, and it varies up and down. I wouldn't doubt that

they have borrowed money. I believe the credit line was originally

installed in 1975.

MR. HANSON: Would the minister confirm that the deficit for this present season will be in excess of $2.4 million?

HON. MR. FRASER: I certainly will not confirm that. The season is really only getting started.

HON. MR. MAIR: I would like, with leave, to answer a question asked of me yesterday in oral question period.

Leave granted.

EMERGENCY FACILITIES AT

VANCOUVER GENERAL HOSPITAL

HON. MR. MAIR: Yesterday

the member for New Westminster (Mr. Cocke) raised the question of the

closure of the emergency department of Vancouver General Hospital. This

type of closure is not new and it is related directly to the reduction

in the nursing workforce that happens every summer — among other

things, I might say. On top of that, there are about 600 vacancies for

nurses in British Columbia, and the demand for nurses is steadily

increasing because of additional services being provided in the

province by this government. The Vancouver General Hospital is acting

in a responsible, planned manner to allow for the nursing shortage by

reducing service in certain areas over peak holiday periods. For

example, elective surgery was suspended for one day to clear up

emergency patients requiring admission.

I don't think it

accurate to describe this situation as a crisis. However unhappy it may

be, it is a normal problem many acute-care hospitals encounter,

Vancouver General Hospital particularly. At least 60 percent of the

workforce are married and many earn enough to be able to take advantage

of the leave-of-absence benefit in their contract to fulfill family

commitments. It should be noted that any nurse is able to take three

months' leave of absence without losing seniority benefits. Above all,

the demand for nurses is also increasing because of the many increased

services being provided in the province.

It is interesting to note that in 1974 at the peak holiday period, up to 320 beds at Vancouver General Hospital were closed.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Who was the minister then?

HON. MR. MAIR: I believe the member for New Westminster was the minister at that time, Mr. Premier.

Every

year at this time we have the same problem. In 1974 the Minister of

Health of the day was no doubt faced with the same questions I am faced

with today and, as events proved, had no more control over the

situation than either his predecessors or his successors. I have every

confidence that the Vancouver General Hospital is acting responsibly in

every way and has made every effort to see that other arrangements with

other hospitals are made to handle the emergency requirements.

HON. MR. WATERLAND:

On a point of order, I would like to correct a statement made during

question period in reference to myself. During question period the

member for Prince Rupert attributed statements to me which are

incorrect. That member stated that the Supreme Court of Canada had made

a decision which allowed the pollution of salmon rivers in British

Columbia and that that decision of the Supreme Court of Canada was

welcomed by the Minister of Forests. On both counts the member for

Prince Rupert is, as is usual for him, absolutely incorrect. The

Supreme Court of Canada made no such decision. Had they made such a

decision, it certainly would not have been welcomed by this minister.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member was doubtless rising under standing order 42 for a correction.

MR. LEA: I think we can clear this up. I didn't say what the minister said I said.

DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Order, please. Hon. member, we are now clearly engaging in a debate.

The Minister of Forests rose under standing order 42, quite properly,

to correct a statement that had been attributed to him by another hon.

member. To seek the floor on a point of order, rather than under a

regular standing order, would be most inappropriate and would certainly

only lead to debate, which is very much out of order at this time.

MR. LEA: I would like to rise under standing order 42. The minister just now wrongly attributed a statement to me.

[ Page

3227 ]

The statement that he made is not true and I would

like to correct that. The statement that was made was: "The Minister of

Forests welcomed the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada reducing

the power of federal fisheries officers to prosecute polluters of

provincial waters."

HON. MR. WATERLAND: That's not what you said.

MR. LEA: That is exactly what I said. You check Hansard .

Orders of the Day

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

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAYS

(continued)

On vote 193: minister's office, $212,089.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: I am going to attempt to be very brief on this matter. [Applause.] They're not always like this, Mom. Sometimes they are nice.

hate to tell you this, Mr. Minister, discussing the Seattle-Victoria

route, but we told you so. Months ago the government announced that

horrendous decision to take the Queen of Prince Rupert

off its northern route to service the Victoria-Seattle route. My

colleagues in this House — the first member for Victoria (Mr. Barber),

the second member for Victoria (Mr. Hanson) and the member for

Esquimalt–Port Renfrew (Mr. Mitchell) — and I warned the public of this

province, this minister and this government what the end result would

be. The end result is exactly as we predicted — even worse. We are in

possession, as are people in the press gallery, of a confidential memo

from the manager of the terminal in Seattle to Mr. David Price of the

B.C. Steamship Company advising the minister that revenues are down,

the

schedule is a disaster and should be cut in half, and they now have

to borrow money to meet their financial commitments in the interim.

Are you aware, Mr. Chairman, that had the government in its wisdom left the Princess Marguerite

on that route — it is perfectly capable of sailing at this time and can

accommodate approximately 1,800 passengers — the projected revenue

increase — profit — for this year would have been in the neighbourhood

of very close to $1 million — over $900,000? Those are the government's

own figures. What do we have now? We have a projected revenue loss by

the operation of the former Queen of Prince Rupert , now the Victoria Princess ,

on this route of some $2.4 million, and that's not the total cost. My

own projections indicate that the loss to the people of this province

on that route due to government bungling is going to amount to close to

$5 million. But that is not nearly the worst part.

The worst

part revolves around the small business people in the city of Victoria

and lower Vancouver Island. How much revenue has been lost to these

people? How many of these people are going to go broke this summer

because of this government's bungling? A dozen? One hundred? Five

hundred? Who knows? We know that that vessel, the Victoria Princess ,

has only been utilized at 32.7 percent of capacity since it has been in

operation. If you project those figures over this one week and through

the busy 1st and 4th of July holiday weekends, the average daily number

of passengers has only amounted to about 33 percent of that vessel's

capacity. Shocking!

I recall standing up in this House

several months ago and warning the minister and the government of this

predicament. I warned the government, as did the first member for

Victoria and other members of this House. Did they pay any heed? Did

they take a second look? Did they ask for any information? They did

not. Do you know that border crossings in British Columbia are

generally up, in spite of the fact that this government says it's the

volcano, the bad weather, the recession, the opposition, their

mothers-in-law? They don't blame themselves. The blame lies with none

of those factors; it lies with that government over there, Mr. Chairman.

any event, I did say I was going to be short. I have made my point. The

government has been proven wrong, The very positive suggestions and

recommendations that have been put forward by me and this very

responsible and constructive opposition will be listened to in the

future, I hope.

MR. KING: Mr. Chairman, yesterday I

was raising with the minister quite a number of problems in my

particular riding that I wished the minister to have a look at and give

me some kind of response to. I hadn't completed that process. I have

four or five other matters related to the riding to raise.

The

minister has received correspondence from the city of Revelstoke

regarding the plans for improvement of the western access to the city

off the Rogers Pass highway. I would appreciate an indication from the

minister of what the precise plans are for upgrading the western

access. I understand that a need for some property acquisition is

involved in coming up with a better and safer access to the city. The

minister can appreciate that the traffic which has developed incident

to construction of the Revelstoke dam has created further congestion in

that particular area. It's a pressing matter on which the city has been

in touch with the minister's office. I would appreciate an indication

from the minister as to what we might expect in that regard.

Further,

again I would ask of the minister that he stay in very close touch with

the city officials in terms of developing the final plans for

improvement on that problem.

The new Highways portion

between the city of Vernon and the city of Armstrong has been received

with a great deal of satisfaction by residents in that area. But there

is a problem regarding the access road that exists on the south end of

Armstrong, to Highway 97 — I think that's known as Pleasant Valley

Junction — and I'm advised by the local ministry officials that, again,

there is a property acquisition involved in moving the location of that

junction somewhat further south. There is a tremendous increase in

traffic on that particular road. The existing access is not a

particularly safe one, and I would request that the ministry give

priority to completion of that new access at Pleasant Valley Junction.

Another

problem which I would like the minister to have a look at relates to a

safety problem — it would be west of the village of Falkland, where

there is a CNR railway crossing. It's just below a hill, and when

trains occupy that crossing the traffic is frequently backed up a

considerable distance.

HON. MR. CHABOT: How long do they stay in the crosswalk?

[ Page 3228 ]

MR. KING:

Well, my friend knows, Mr. Chairman, that railroaders always observe

the rules and vacate the crossing within the five-minute limitation —

that is CP; I can't vouch for CN.

In any event, Mr.

Chairman, the problem is that heavy logging trucks, of which there are

a great many on that particular road, experience difficulty in stopping

once they come over that hill and find a backup of traffic in front of

them, particularly in winter conditions, and it's a very dangerous

situation. It's mainly the logging truck operators in that area who are

complaining and very concerned about it. There have been a few minor

tail-end collisions there; but as one can appreciate, with a very, very

heavy load of logs we could be looking at a very serious disaster

unless something is worked out to try and alleviate that problem.

I'm

not in a position at the moment to make any recommendations to the

minister about what precisely the solution may be, but I would be happy

to discuss it with him privately later on. He might wish to comment on

it, and he may have some plans in that regard.

The other

problem of long standing is Adams Lake Road from Squilax up to the

Trans-Canada Highway, and the negotiations with the Neskainlith Indian

band for an exchange of land. The current

section 6 road traverses

Indian land, and they have been in dispute with the Ministry of

Transportation and Highways regarding payment or an exchange of land

which they would be prepared to negotiate. The upshot of it was that

the native Indian band placed a blockade on the road, which resulted in

a family of permanent residents being blockaded from access to their

home. I met with the native Indian band and persuaded them that it was

a rather dangerous situation to have a family isolated at any location

in the province of British Columbia where there could be a delay — not

only in the provision of foodstuffs, but also in the delivery of health

care, particularly for emergency situations. Chief Jules and his band

council were sensitive enough to that kind of human problem that they

agreed to remove that blockade and give access to the family involved.

was a little bit disconcerted, Mr. Chairman, that the Highways ministry

took a rather bland, standoffish position on it. I submit, with all due

respect, that the Highways ministry has a responsibility to ensure that

access is provided for all citizens of the province, and I urge the

minister to sit down with the native Indian band and negotiate a

property exchange. I know that that negotiation process will not be

easy, but I think with good faith and with a willingness — indeed, an

eagerness — to find a permanent solution, something can be worked out.

Once again, on that particular issue, if the ministry feels that I as

the local MLA can be of any assistance in the process, I am more than

willing to do what I can in terms of organizing the meetings and

sitting down or trying to assist in some compromise solution to a very

difficult problem.

Lastly, Chase Creek, Mr. Chairman. The

minister is familiar with this, because that one is the creek across

which the famous bridge runs; the minister made a small grant to it.

There is an erosion problem with that creek and it creates a bit of a

safety problem for some of the senior citizens' housing, which is

located very close to it. I know it's not precisely the Minister of

Highways' responsibility, but it does occur to me, Mr. Minister, that

from time to time the Ministry of Highways is involved in fairly heavy

construction involving the movement of rock and so on. I think that if

the opportunity arises it would be useful and very beneficial to have

some of that rock placed along the river for the short portion where

the safety question and erosion problem are involved as a form of

rip-rapping, which provides a location for the Ministry of

Transportation and Highways to get rid of their waste material and

which would serve a very useful function as well for solving that local

problem.

There are the issues I wanted to raise. I would

appreciate it very much if the minister could respond and give me an

indication of what's happening — a status report, as it were, on all of

those issues.

I want to congratulate the minister on the

improvement of the Trans-Canada Highway at that very difficult location

of Kay Falls, west of Revelstoke, where there have been numerous bad

accidents over the years. A new bridge is well on the way to

completion. It straightens out the curve at that particular location

and is going to be a very significant improvement both in terms of

driving enjoyment and, mainly, safety.

Finally, I would like

to make a suggestion to the minister about an issue I raised with him

once before — that old road around Shuswap Lake, the Celista-Angleniont

road. It bears a heavy flow of traffic, particularly in the summer, for

it's a choice tourist area. We don't expect a first-class, wide highway

there — you can't do that for all the areas of the province — but I

think the minister could consider trying to develop some passing lanes

there where traffic, particularly local traffic, could get by once in a

while. The tourist flow and the congestion around there is so heavy in

the summertime that the same matter which my colleague from North

Island (Mr. Gabelmann) talked about happens — where you have local

people trying to get into town to shop or to get to work. Many of them

live permanently around the lake and are tied up by tourists travelling

at a leisurely pace around the lake. Then the frustration level becomes

exceedingly high, and that is a formula for accidents in the province

of British Columbia. So I think the minister might look at some

temporary solutions there by trying to develop a passing lane every few

miles at least along the way so the local traffic can get out of the

way and go about their business without interfering with the right and

the opportunity of tourists, who enjoy the beautiful scenery in that

location, too.

HON. MR. FRASER: First of all I'd like

to try to reply to some observations and questions that were directed

to me last evening just prior to adjournment.

The member for

Nanaimo (Mr. Stupich) brought up the Gabriola ferry. The note I have on

that is that the Gabriola ferry does wait for the CPR ferry and is in

radio contact with it to check and see if it is on time. If someone

missed the ferry, it must have been an individual incident. I think his

questions were about radio contact and trying to meet each other.

Regarding the Ivy Green....

Interjection.

HON. MR. FRASER: I'm not aware of that position, but it could well be in and it will be replied to, Mr. Member.

Mr.

Chairman, the member for Nanaimo also asked about Ivy Green Road and

the fountain. The widening of the highway does not disturb the spring,

but our ability to continue to give a pull-off for access will require

more land from the Indian band. Negotiations for land in the Indian

reserve

[ Page 3229 ]

are

not completed at this time. In other words, we're trying to protect the

spring, but we would like better access and we're dealing to get that

better access from the Indian band.

Some of the second member for Surrey's (Mr. Hall'

s) questions were not answered and I'll just quickly go through those.

Regarding the crosswalk at 96th Avenue and 176th street in Surrey,

during the last year there was a joint project between the ministry and

municipality to make improvements for pedestrian safety. We understand

that the widening has been done and a guardrail installed. Recently a

signal was suggested for this intersection, but signal warrants are not

met. In other words, by that we have guidelines to go by and there

isn't a quantity of traffic to warrant that. Presently there is a

four-way stop at the intersection, which is safe for pedestrians.

Street

lighting on King George Highway was another question of the second

member for Surrey. When the highway was being designed the ministry

indicated we'd be installing lighting at the intersections and areas

where there are islands. The ministry asked the municipality if they

wanted the rest of the lighting installed at their cost, as this is a

municipal responsibility. The municipality declined the offer as they

do not intend to install lighting.

Regarding King George

Highway landscaping, we are presently placing topsoil and seeding

behind the sidewalks. We have no further plans other than this.

The

second member for Surrey also asked what the standards were for freeway

on and off ramps. All freeway exits and entrances were constructed to

North American standards. Where extra storage or length is needed, we

are making improvements as required. There is no overall program to

lengthen all the entrances.

Mr. Chairman, the member for

North Island (Mr. Gabelmann) — I believe I answered this, but I'll

clarify it further — asked about the proposed road from Tahsis to Woss

Camp. The ministry has discussed this with the municipality and is

presently working with Forests to have a joint road project where the

ministry would pay towards the logging roads which would be built to

highway standards and could be used by everyone.

The

Campbell River bridge. We have discussed the suggestion with the city

of Campbell River of constructing that portion of the future bypass

first to provide an early crossing of the river. This looks to be

feasible, but we're waiting for the consultant's report.

want to quickly get to items that are a little larger, that seem to get

our citizens interested and certainly the fourth estate. I'd like to

comment on food services, which I feel have had detrimental remarks

made about them that were not all warranted. I'm referring to the B.C.

Ferries food service. The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Cocke)

commented yesterday on remarks made to the press by my colleague from

Omineca (Mr. Kempf) regarding the possible removal of food services

from the ferries and consideration of providing liquor on board. The

hon. member for New Westminster also stated that I had received this as

a suggestion. Mr. Chairman, if I was responsible for responding to

every comment that is made to the media, you wouldn't believe some of

the subjects that I would have to comment on. The member for Omineca, I

believe, made his remarks outside of this House and at no time had he

ever mentioned them to me as the minister responsible for the Ferry

Corporation until after they were made.

Mr. Chairman, the question of whether or not food services on board the ferries

are to be removed, decreased or increased is a matter for the board of directors

of the Ferry Corporation, and I can tell you, as chairman, that such changes

have not been discussed or considered since I've been a member of the board.

Secondly,

I would have to agree with the comments made by my colleague and

friend, the Minister of Health, the MLA for Kamloops (Hon. Mr. Mair),

that it would certainly not enhance the many programs my ministry and

others have become involved in regarding highway safety if we were to

serve liquor on board.

Mr. Chairman, the member for Omineca

is certainly not alone when he suggests that a certain amount of liquor

should be served on board our ferries. I have listened to lots of

citizens who feel it would be nice to be able to sip a little wine or

whatever during the one and a half hour sailing. I suppose that if you

could restrict everyone to possibly one glass of wine there might not

be any difficulties whatsoever.

The bottom line is that this

item is also one that would require the board of directors' full

support as well as the approval of other government agencies, and I can

tell you that the board has not issued any instructions to staff to

research the feasibility of such service, nor has it been discussed at

the board level, nor do I anticipate that it will be in the foreseeable

future.

Mr. Chairman, as the minister responsible for the

motor vehicle branch, I can tell you that our staff and I are

constantly concerned over highway safety, and I don't wish to initiate

any action, service or programs that in any way would detrimentally

affect this situation.

While I'm on the subject of highway

safety and driving, I would like to take this opportunity to bring

certain information to the attention of the committee. Recently

accident statistics issued by Stats Canada regarding incidents on B.C.

highways caused quite a stir in the media, and our citizens were led to

believe that they were some of the worst drivers in Canada. We have

some serious problems on our highways and with many of our drivers, but

I don't like scare tactics, and I feel that our citizens should not

receive a report card that does not represent the facts.

Before

the motor-vehicle branch established its new incident reporting system

in January 1977, many minor accidents were unreported by drivers who

had the responsibility to report the incidents. Now, with the police

making out these reports, we have a more comprehensive reporting

system. Again this is since 1977. Other jurisdictions in Canada do not

have this type of reporting system, nor the same reporting criteria, so

it isn’t accurate to make comparisons based only on the number of

incidents. Since 1977 the incidents per thousand vehicles licensed and

deaths per hundred million kilometres in British Columbia have dropped:

of course this is very encouraging. We must all be concerned, but I see

no evidence to conclude that B.C. drivers are in any way different from

drivers in other areas. I think our citizens would wish to know that.

[Mr. Hyndman in the chair.]

would like to now deal with another matter for a moment, while I'm on

my feet, regarding food services on B.C. ferries. I refer you to

remarks made last Wednesday by the hon. member for

Maillardville-Coquitlam (Mr. Levi) and the second member for Victoria

(Mr. Hanson) — I'm unhappy to find they're not in their seats.

[ Page 3230 ]

AN HON. MEMBER: They're paired.

HON. MR. FRASER: That's a cosy arrangement.

The

second member for Victoria stated that the food is terrible, that it's

not nutritious, not pleasant, and that it's poor throughout. He stated

that the B.C. Ferry Corporation should be utilizing more locally

produced products, such as vegetables, fruit and marine foods. May I

remind you that both these members referred to the food on B.C. ferries

as "Social Credit goulash." It is in Hansard , Mr. Chairman.

They called it Social Credit goulash and I think they owe us an apology

for just that wording alone, with those adjectives.

What I'd

like to say on behalf of the 800 hard-working people on the B.C.

ferries who prepare this food on behalf of the producers from British

Columbia.... I'd like to set the record straight. The B.C. Ferry

Corporation spends approximately $6 million for food products to be

served on board our ferries, and these products are purchased through

the B.C. Purchasing Commission. It is the policy to purchase as many of

the products as possible from British Columbia producers. As a matter

of fact, B.C. producers are provided with a 10 percent bid-differential

advantage. In other words, the B.C. Ferry Corporation will purchase

supplies from the B.C. agricultural producers if their products are

compatible with the appropriate standards.

AN HON. MEMBER: Shall the vote pass?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye!

HON. MR. FRASER:

Mr. Chairman, if that member wants to make observations on my remarks

would you send him back to his chair, which is the only place he can

speak from. Send him back to his own chair or give him a crossword

puzzle to work on while he's sitting there.

As a matter of

fact, Mr. Chairman, the B.C. Ferry Corporation has a special program of

cooperation with the marketing branch of the B.C. Ministry of

Agriculture. This program does not only utilize B.C. agricultural

products but promotes them. If you think I'm just giving you a lecture,

here it is. Here are the signs that are up on the B.C. ferries. If

you'd get on there and sail home, as fast as possible.... Those

are examples of the program to promote fresh strawberries and B.C.

potatoes. These products are not only being sold on the ferries but are

being actively promoted to those people travelling with us. Lo and

behold, when I asked where these strawberries originate — the second

member for Victoria called them goulash and the Maillardville-Coquitlam

member said.... Actually they come right from the area they have

the honour to represent. I think the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam

and the second member for Victoria owe the agricultural community that

they ran down an apology, not necessarily for calling these products

Social Credit goulash but for stating that the food is not pleasant,

not nutritious, and that the food is terrible.

The second

member for Victoria also mentioned marine foods. I am pleased to

provide the catering service on board B.C. ferries with a little

additional advertising. I'd recommend the seaburger, which consists of

sole, and where do we see that from? Prince Rupert. Where's the member

for Prince Rupert (Mr. Lea)?

In concluding my remarks on this item I would state that this month the 800

catering staff on B.C. ferries will serve 1.5 million people. I believe they

do an excellent job when you consider the number of people they will serve on

a one hour and 20 minute voyage — getting them into the cafeteria, serving them,

and cleaning up before the next sailing. To put it in some perspective, this

month we will serve 1.5 million people, and I understand the average McDonald's

restaurant serves 1.25 million people in a year. So I think they should be given

a big hand for the quantity and quality of food they serve. I'm proud of

them. I just wanted to get those remarks on the record. I know the "goulash"

remark made three-inch headlines in the paper. I only hope the fourth estate

is awake. I don't think they are; they're not around. If they would

print some of the facts now, it would be greatly appreciated.

Now,

Mr. Chairman, back to other items in our responsibility, and to reply

to the member for Shuswap-Revelstoke (Mr. King). Cape Horn Bluff and

the Selkirk van lines, which you brought up last evening: I have notes

on that. Bus service from Mica to Slocan Valley: all businesses are

being interviewed as part of the planning for construction. Closure

will be four to six months during the winter. It will not be possible

to provide for any vehicle use of the road during this time. We are

investigating the feasibility of foot-passenger transport around the

work area. The best possible arrangements will be made. In closing my

remarks on that subject, I think I could say that we are quite a long

way yet from this happening, as the member probably knows; I believe it

is about a year away, if I recall. But they are doing all the planning

for the necessary closure of a main road in our....

MR. KING: You provide the bus for the other side.

HON. MR. FRASER:

The member says we supply the buses. The Highways ministry usually gets

stuck with all the costs. I don't see that this is different. You know,

at the expense of the Highways ministry we transported the people out

of Stewart just a week or ten days ago. We're glad to help the

motorists and other citizens wherever we can.

The Mara

bridge. The present timber bridge, 583 feet long, was built in 1929.

You should make a note of this, Mr. Member. It's in poor condition. The

load limit is 15 tons. Because of its advanced age, it's not possible

to repair it. A new structure is estimated at $2.25 million. The

completion of the road system on the west side is intended to give an

alternate route, particularly for trucks. No decision has been made as

to the future of the bridge.

Grindrod railroad crossing. The

alternate routes were selected to reduce two sharp curves. One was

approved by the B.C. Agricultural Land Commission. The next step is to

undertake final survey and design. The survey is proposed for this

fall, with the design work in the winter. But I'm not saying when

construction will start. It sounds like we're not even ready for a

contract call until at least the spring of '81.

Enderby

Bridge. This is a bridge that badly needs replacing, as the member

pointed out. We're aware of this, but we have what I like to refer to

as right-of-way problems, which are not solved. To be right up to date,

a meeting of the ministry with the Indian band and their lawyer is

scheduled for next week.

Revelstoke, west access. Currently

this city is proposing improvements on Victoria Road which will require

us to undertake some drainage work to meet this. It is proposed to do

this this year, and that we commence right-of-way negotiations this

fall for the revision of the intersection.

[ Page

3231 ]

Enderby — Mabel Lake. More work is scheduled to be done this year, commencing

in the next two weeks. Completion of the project will cost about $1 million,

and it will take several years to complete. I just want to point out to the

member.... He seemed to make some remark that the only time we work on this

very important road is around election time. I'm not aware of any imminent

election call, and I'm announcing that the work will be starting in two

weeks.

The

road from Chase to Tod Mountain. To the member for Shuswap-Revelstoke,

the distance from Chase to Tod Mountain via Kamloops is 60 miles. If it

were a direct route, the distance would be approximately 30 miles. The

cost to upgrade the forest roads on the direct route to winter

maintainable standard is estimated at $2 million. This is necessary due

to steep grades, switchbacks and a narrow road. Considering that this

is a second route to Tod Mountain, we do not place its priority as high

as other ski areas which do not yet have one good access road. So I

agree with the staff report on that road, that they are very fortunate

to have two accesses. One might not be up to the standard they would

like, but our government has spent a lot of dollars on ski access roads

all over the province — it’s our policy — and we still have ski areas

that haven't got one good access route. So what I'm saying in the case

of that access is that it has a low priority.

Enderby, south

access. This work was partially completed last year to assist an access

to a developing area. We do intend to complete this routing beyond the

development, but no definite

schedule is available.

The

member for Shuswap-Revelstoke asked about rock for erosion control at

Chase. We will look into this and we will provide material as available.

Again,

in the Shuswap-Revelstoke riding, there is the Adams Lake road access

problem. We have been in touch with the Indian band, without too much

progress. We will contact them again. The road beyond the reserve has

been ruled private by the courts, and this requires further

investigation and negotiations.

Falkland railway crossing. I

am aware of this one. It has been there for a long, long time. We have

nothing under design on this at the present time, but we will certainly

look into that. On the Anglemont-Celista road: we will look at this for

passing areas. It is a very low-volume road.

I think that cleans up most of the questions I have so far.

MR. KING:

Just very briefly, further to the minister's answers: that junction was

not Enderby, Mr. Minister, but rather Armstrong — the Pleasant Valley

junction. The minister's response wasn't too clear. Is that slated for

completion this year?

The other thing is that the road

around Shuswap Lake to Celista is a low-volume road at normal times,

but the minister can appreciate that during the summer months it is

extremely congested because of the very heavy tourist flow. That is the

problem there.

On the low priority for the second access road to Mount Tod, all I can say

to the minister is that I promise not to tell his colleague the Minister of

Health (Hon. Mr. Mair) what he said, because I don't think he is going to

take too kindly to that. I agree that it is not the highest priority, but I

think that some work may be looked at on a day-labour basis from time to time

to improve it and a little bit of maintenance in the way of snowplowing during

the winter months.

HON. MR. FRASER:

To the member for Shuswap-Revelstoke, I referred to Enderby south

access; it should have been Armstrong south in the notes I have here on

this, This work was partially completed last year to assist in access

to the developing area. We do intend to complete this routing beyond

the development, but no definite

schedule is available and it probably

won't be this year.

MR. BARRETT: I have just a few

brief comments. First of all, I want to tell the minister, on behalf of

the official opposition, that there will be no support over here for

any attempt to push any booze on those ferries. Let's get that

straight. The idea of selling beer and wine on a sailing of an hour and

30 minutes is absolutely absurd. I know government revenues are

falling, but that is going too far. If any one person came off any of

those sailings and got into an accident as a result of consuming liquor

sold on that ferry, it would make a mockery of every single statement

peddled by the former Minister of Health and other cabinet ministers.

Let's have it clear. You can't have the selling of booze on a ferry

ride of an hour and 30 minutes and at the same time go around

advertising, telling people not to drink and drive.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: What do you think the Minister of Transportation and Highways just told you?

MR. BARRETT:

Well, there he is; he's not listening again. The Minister of

Transportation and Highways just told us he didn't see what was wrong

with one glass of wine on the ferries. That is what he said. Is that

what you believe in too?

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: What a liar!

MR. BARRETT: Would you ask the member to withdraw, Mr. Chairman?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the Minister of Energy kindly withdraw his imputation of lying attributed to the Leader of the Opposition.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: I withdraw, Mr. Chairman.

MR. BARRETT: I tell the minister clearly that as far as we are concerned, no wine and no beer on the ferries, period.

HON. I MR. WATERLAND: Didn't you ever have a drink on the ferries?

MR. BARRETT:

No, as a matter of fact, I have not and I think it would be the most

stupid thing in the world to go on the ferry with any citizen, cabinet

member, opposition member or anyone else on an hour-and-a-half ferry

ride and go up and pack away some booze. It would be irresponsible and

stupid. Now if some people are doing that on the ferries, I hope that

it is discouraged, but the idea of selling booze on the ferries and

agreeing with the consuming of liquor on an hour-and-a-half ride and

then coming off that ferry is absolutely stupid. The member who made

the suggestion was flying on his own, and I hope that further cabinet

ministers don't leave any impression that somehow we're going to move

in that direction here in the province of British Columbia.

[ Page 3232 ]

Interjection.

MR. BARRETT:

Now look, Mr. Minister, if you want to run around accusing members of

drinking in the stateroom, have the guts to stand up here and name

people. If you think this is funny, I don't. I think those stupid

remarks across the floor indicate that this government has absolutely

no concern about statements made by backbenchers and indications given

by the minister that somehow they are in favour of that kind of program.

will tell you this: there are enough families in this province who have

suffered the consequences of irresponsible drivers who have been

drinking and getting behind the wheel of a car and driving. Any attempt

by the government to give the impression that it's a funny little

matter or something to joke about across the floor of the House, or to

leave a backbencher the idea that it is something to fly, is totally

irresponsible. I challenge you as a government to state categorically

that there will be no liquor sales on the one-and-a-half-hour ferry

crossing between Vancouver and the Island.

The chairman of the Crown corporations committee, which is just examining

the ferries, gets up and says: "Well, maybe one glass of wine." Nonsense.

Absolute nonsense!

Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about friendlier things with the minister.

Interjection,

MR. BARRETT:

Mr. Chairman, if that minister is attempting to leave the impression

that it's some kind of joke to talk against liquor on ferries, then let

me go on record as saying I don't consider it to be a joke; I can't

think of anything more serious that this House should take a stand on,

and that is in opposition to selling beer and wine on the ferries. If

you don't agree, the least you can do is shut up about it and go and

promulgate it somewhere else. Don't sit in this House and somehow leave

the impression that it's some kind of joking matter, because as far as

I'm concerned it is no joking matter to even contemplate selling liquor

on a government ferry service between the mainland and Vancouver Island.

want to go on record as supporting the statements made by my colleague

the second member for Vancouver East (Mr. Macdonald) about the Cassiar

problem. I just want to ask one question. My colleague has outlined

that problem very clearly, and two days ago you indicated that you'd be

in touch with the mayor for a further study. I'd like to know whether

or not you have been in touch with the mayor of Vancouver, and if a

further study will take place on this problem.

HON. MR. ERASER:

Mr. Chairman, to reply to the Leader of the Opposition, I want to

apologize to the members in the House that I didn't make it abundantly

clear — I guess, wearing my hat as chairman of the B.C. Ferry

Corporation I thought I'd done it before — that we have no intention of

putting one glass of wine or any liquor on the ferry system, now or in

the future, that I'm aware of. I thought I made that abundantly clear

when I spoke. I referred to it to clear up any misconceptions that

maybe we were considering it. After all, as I said in my remarks, it is

up to the B.C. Ferry Corporation board of directors to make those

decisions; it's never been discussed, and I hope it never will be as

long as I'm around there.

Regarding the large project of

trying to do something with the bad traffic problems raised by the two

members for Vancouver East, Mr. Chairman, specifically from the end of

the freeway to the Second Narrows Bridge, I reported to the second

member for Vancouver East the other day. But in reply to the Leader of

the Opposition, the first member for Vancouver East: yes, a meeting has

been set up with the mayor of Vancouver. I can't give you the exact

dates, but I believe it's sometime next week. Because the member for

Burnaby North (Mrs. Dailly) asked the question in the House, I've asked

my staff to invite the mayor of Burnaby as well, as the member for

Burnaby North felt that they were affected, and they certainly are,

indirectly. No decision has been made about a second study, but that's

what the meeting is all about: to try and come to some conclusions

about that.

MR. BARNES: Mr. Minister, I would like to

ask if you would be good enough to share with the House your

government's policy with respect to the use of the bicycle as an

alternative method of transportation, especially in the urban areas of

Vancouver, New Westminster and Victoria, and lesser populated areas,

where the automobile is becoming an increasingly expensive and

cumbersome method of transportation. In the past, one would get the

impression, the government hasn't considered the bicycle as a serious

alternative mode of transportation, in light of the lack of initiative

in respect to accommodating the bicycle in terms of regulations,

training programs, safety programs, licensing and incentive programs to

industry in terms of benefits that would encourage them to provide some

of the means of making cycling safer and more dependable. I don't know

if the minister is aware of it, but in the last several years bicycles

have been outselling automobiles by a substantial margin in the United

States and in Canada. In fact, if I recall, there were something like

ten million bicycles sold in the United States last year. Just a few

years ago, I think, bicycles outsold automobiles in Canada by about 10

percent. So the bicycle is not a new mode of transportation, it's just

coming into its own by virtue of the extremely heavy financial burdens

that are placed upon people who are using other modes of transportation.

The

problem that I would like the minister to address before the assembly

today is what initiatives the government can take to give the cyclist

the kind of security when using a bicycle on the public thoroughfares

and roadways that automobiles have. In other words, I would like to

have the minister explain some of the problems that he has encountered

through assessing the problem, taking a serious look at some of the

briefs that have been put forward indicating to the House just what the

future of the bicycle is in this province.

I'm of the

impression that it has a very real future if for no other reason than

the fact that the bicycles are here. Perhaps we're not sure just how

they will be accommodated and whether or not some of the studies that

have been suggested are in fact applicable in this area in British

Columbia, but we know that in some other areas bicycles and automobiles

mix very well. I wouldn't suggest that they will mix absolutely in this

province, but certainly there are circumstances in which the bicycle

does have a legitimate role to play. For instance, Vancouver traffic

that leaves the North Shore in the morning for downtown Vancouver and

the West End would do well to be encouraged to use their bicycles.

However, no one in his

[ Page 3233 ]

right

mind is going to mount a bicycle and go across the First Narrows Bridge

without risk of losing life and limb. They could travel from most

places in North Vancouver and West Vancouver to their offices downtown

in about 10 or 15 minutes,

whereas it takes about half an hour to 45

minutes sitting in their cars fuming because of the heavy traffic

congestion. The distance that they would be travelling is probably less

than three miles. So there's every incentive and reason why the

government would want to encourage and develop facilities that would

accommodate those people who are prepared to experiment with a system

that the Highways department might introduce that would be safe.

Obviously,

going back to past performance, the government didn't show that much

interest in bicycles when they permitted the SeaBus to come into

operation without accommodating bicycles, although the Minister of

Municipal affairs did experiment briefly in an ineffective way with

permitting bicycles under certain circumstances, on weekends and what

not, but did not seriously take a look at bicycles as a serious

alternative during business hours, during the time when traffic is most

onerous.

[Mr. Lauk in the chair.]

I notice the

minister was pointing at the member for Burnaby-Willingdon (Mr.

Lorimer), the former Minister of Municipal Affairs, who introduced the

SeaBus concept, but I should remind the Minister of Highways that I

happen to have approached that member when he was a minister and he

gave the directives for the engineers to make the alterations to the

SeaBus in order to permit bicycles, and your government slipped in

through the back door and formed the next government and cancelled

them. So as far as that goes, it wasn't a case of us not being prepared

to adjust to and be flexible about something as obvious as the need for

bicycles on the SeaBus; we were victims of a shortage of votes at the

time.

Mr. Chairman, we're not talking about history; I'm

concerned about the future. I'm concerned about bicycling as a serious

alternative mode of transportation. I would like this government to

address itself to a comprehensive program that would not only look at

cycling from its recreational and health standpoint — its traditional

role in the community — but as a serious alternative to using the

private automobile, especially on short runs and in congested areas. I

think it wouldn't take much to calculate. The savings to the taxpayers

would be tremendous and would certainly take a burden off the highway

budget in terms of road repairs, trying to expand roads, having to go

through the whole problem of getting rights-of-way and doing a number

of other things. Most people are very interested in riding bikes. In

fact, I'm sure many automobile operators would be more than willing to

use their bicycles — purchase bikes or get them out of their basements

or wherever they are — if this government took the serious initiative

to do something. But it has to happen through legislation. There's no

point in telling people to go out and run the risk of getting run over

by an irate automobile operator who doesn't understand that cyclists

have a right to the road the same as automobile drivers. So the

campaign has to start from here. There has to be a sincere desire to

give the bicycle its proper place along with rapid transit, light rail

transit, automobiles, buses and other modes of transportation.

I would just like to indicate that I'm a little concerned that the government

wants to play politics rather than seriously address the problem. When it brought

in, for instance, its shuttle service through the Massey Tunnel, which allowed

two trips in the morning and two trips in the afternoon, north and south through

the tunnel, in a restricted period of five hours, which is hardly sufficient

to really accommodate anyone who seriously wants to mount his bicycle, say,

to go to work or to go home.... Those hours from 9 to 2:30 are just not

adequate. There should be a dawn-to-dusk type of system set up, and it should

certainly not be for just two months in the summertime: it should be, at the

very least, year-round, depending on weather. The information should be well

publicized. I would challenge the minister to find his way himself — and he's

the Minister of Highways — through the tunnel on a bicycle. Because if you were

to leave Tsawwassen, heading for the entrance to town, you wouldn't get

any information: you'd just be riding along and you would go right past it,

because there's no indication that you can get through. It doesn't give

any information on schedules or anything of the sort.

So I would say that that's the kind of attitude that.... Maybe the minister himself is not projecting it, but that's the attitude

the public gets — that you're not serious. If you're serious, then come

out with a comprehensive policy statement — a program that involves licensing,

education and programs, the same as you do with the automobile. There has to

be a comprehensive program rather than one where people are confused — where

youngsters get on their bicycles without being properly trained and run the

risk of being run over by a father who is backing out of the garage, or they

get a bicycle at Christmas and they go out onto the highway and get into an

accident. That bicycle is a serious contraption. It's not a toy. It can

be used for recreation and fun, but it's a very serious and a dangerous

vehicle.

need to take a look at the definition of vehicles and the definition of

roadways and start to look seriously at options other than the

automobile, which in 20 years will be outdated. I know most of you over

there have a large investment in the automobile business, but let's not

just think of our own personal financial futures. Let's take a look at

the rest of British Columbia's future and take a look at the escalating

costs, through taxation, that we're going to have to pay for these

short-sighted schemes.

Certainly, If you do go ahead with the

Annacis Island crossing, at least begin there to do something for

cyclists and also pedestrians. Allow the option of being able to ride

your bike or even walk. People who walk can't even get through the

tunnel — not even on that shuttle service you have.

There

are many issues related to the bicycle that shouldn't be done in a

makeshift way. I don't intend to stand here and hit on the odd point. I

think what I'm suggesting to you is that you instruct your ministry to

come up with a comprehensive policy. Involve it at the planning level,

amend your Highway Act so that engineers must include the bicycle, at

least as a consideration, before any action is taken. There's no reason

why you shouldn't have at least an extra two-or-three foot strip along

roadways rather than cutting them off with a white line on either side

and no room for cyclists. Expand it just a bit and encourage people.

say this without playing any politics, because I'm sincerely interested

in the future generations. I think that you're going to find that we'll

have quite a few white elephants on our hands with these roadways that

are totally incompatible with the future, as we begin to move into

other modes of transportation.

[ Page 3234 ]

With that, Mr. Chairman, I'll save my remaining remarks until about 5:30 or 6 and maybe tomorrow.

HON. MR. FRASER: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to say a few remarks. First, I want to congratulate you on your elevation.

the second member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Barnes) on bicycles and

bicycle policy, you raised some really good questions. I hope we take

them seriously, but there are problems. I would like to spell out our

current policy on bicycles.

Our policy for bicyclists is to

provide paved shoulders at least six feet wide on the provincial trunk

highway system. We are carrying out that policy. It's being

progressively implemented with priority assigned to highways which are

being reconstructed or reinforced in the vicinity of urban areas.

Presently there are 2,000 miles of trunk system with either paved or

stabilized shoulders. We are either paving or stabilizing 300 miles per

year. I take it from my notes that this is to a six-foot width outside

the outside strip. So we've had a policy for a while, and we're

expanding it as construction takes place.

The senior staff

of the ministry have examined the possibility of bicycle pathways

separated from the highway roadway. There are difficulties with the

design of these separate bicycle-ways where they intersect with busy

cross streets. Considering these difficulties the ministry recommends

in urban areas that emphasis be placed on providing bicycle routes on

major municipal network streets rather than arterial highways. To

facilitate this process the criteria for 50 percent sharing of costs on

major streets through revenue sharing were changed last year to include

bicycle-ways adjacent to network streets as part of projects which met

other qualifying criteria.

So what I'm saying is that this

is another part of bicycle policy that is new. We will share 50 percent

through revenue sharing on the major municipal networks or the adjacent

network streets with municipalities. I don't think that's really common

knowledge so I'm happy to say that we've progressed some there. What

we've been saying in the past is that we should build the bicycle paths

with municipalities but we never put our money where our mouth was. Now

we are putting our money where our mouth is and sharing 50 percent when

this is agreed on.

I have a few other observations on

bicycles. The B.C. Safety Council observation brought to my attention

recently has advocated that bicyclists use less busy routes and attempt

to avoid busy arterial highways. That is apparently an observation

they've made.

I have a few other observations on bicycles

for the benefit of the committee. Bicycles are free on B.C. ferries;

there's no charge for bicycles on B.C. ferries.

MR. BARNES: Publicize the fact; it's a good idea. Let the people know.

HON. MR. FRASER: That's a good idea; maybe we should say bicycles are free. But they are free on B.C. ferries.

I'm

sorry to hear again — I think we're talking communication, Mr.

Chairman.... We have a bicycle transport for the Massey Tunnel

crossing, as the member is aware. It's a costly item. You were saying

that it should be expanded further.

MR. BARNES: And publicized. so you can prove that you can make the people use it.

HON. MR. FRASER:

Yes, and publicized; I certainly take your observations there. I agree

that in that very busy lower mainland area we could add that to highway

information that we're using. I'll see that something is done along

that line right away.

MR. BARNES: That would increase the use and therefore cut down the cost.

HON. MR. FRASER:

Right. But it is a costly item and that, I guess, is what restricts

what it is. If we step it up.... I think we're talking $50,000 to

$60,000. I don't know. I've asked for the actual cost; it's a contract.

I might be wrong there; I want to clear that up.

MR. BARNES: It can't be.

HON. MR. FRASER:

What I'm trying to say is that we can expand the service if we supply

the additional money. But I'll clear it up, because we have a contract

there. I might be wrong on that.

The other thing regarding

bicycles, Mr. Chairman, is that we are encouraging the use of the

bicycle; we're making grants to the safety councils now for learning to

ride bicycles. That's mostly, of course, for children.

Two

more observations and then I'm finished. The government of British

Columbia doesn't have any licensing structure or anything for bicycles,

and we're not anticipating it. But municipalities have a licensing

structure, I think. Some municipalities have; they can do it under the

Municipal Act. But as far as the province is concerned we're not

looking at it as a revenue item at all. We have never had it and we're

not looking at it now.

I assume from your remarks, Mr.

Member, that if we provide a combination for bicycles on Annacis Island

you'll vote in favour and will support Annacis Island. I really

appreciate that.

MR. BARNES: I just have to say that I'm not going to vote for the Annacis Island crossing.

MR. COCKE:

Just in case Hansard wasn't clear on what the second member for

Vancouver Centre just said, he said that under no circumstances will he

support that Annacis Island crossing. I just want to congratulate that

member for taking a very responsible position with respect to that

crossing.

Mr. Chairman, there is a major transportation

corridor that the Annacis Island crossing is proposed to cross. That

corridor is the main arm of the Fraser River. This minister, being the

Minister of Transportation, would be very interested, I'm sure, and I'm

sure it's been brought to his attention, that the federal department of

public works are proposing to make the river much more dangerous to

transportation. The way they are going to do that is they are pulling

the Samson out of service. Now everyone knows that the Samson is a

snag-puller. It gets the deadheads out of the river. It also tends the

buoys which make the channel significantly safer.

[ Page 3235 ]

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

For instance, the minister has a ferry called the Albion Ferry ,

and it, from time to time, has called upon the Samson to come and get

snags out of the way. The federal government are using as an excuse

their boom at Laidlaw. It's called a coffer dam. They put $10 million

into it as a one-time grant. The coffer dam is maintained by

the provincial government on a one-third basis; the federal government

pays one-third and the Council of Forest Industries pays one-third

because they are the main contributors to the floating debris in the

river. The problem that we have in that river is deadheads and snags.

It's a major problem. As our Albion Ferry captain will tell you, from

time to time they've called on the Samson . There is no way that the coffer dam is going to get rid of the snags.

The

north arm of the river has never had the Samson service, and that's

regarded as one of the most dangerous transportation channels in the

province. It's full of deadheads, snags and all that sort of thing. I'm

wondering if this minister along with his colleagues will put a strong

word to Ottawa on maintaining the Samson , regardless of the historic

significance of that.... It's the only waterwheel left on the

river, or in B.C. for all I know, that is actually operating. It's a

super machine in terms of its inspection. Last year it was inspected

and the inspector said it was good for another 30 years. It burns not

bunker C but the next grade, which I think is bunker 5 or 6, which is

very crude oil. Therefore it is not a huge burner of refined fuel. It

is a very productive machine. I'll tell you right now, people seeing it

on the Fraser are always impressed, and it's always working. It's

always got something to do and that is a very positive contribution

that it has been making.

The federal government bailing out

of that service is, in my view, making a very bad move. What's going to

happen is that it's going to be finally lodged onto the provincial

government and be their responsibility to do the job. I think that this

minister along with the other ministers should get on to Ottawa, along

with the rest of the negotiations that are going on, and say: "For

heaven's sake, leave it alone unless you've got something that's

compatible and something that will do the job.'' Now there are those

who say: "For heaven's sake, let's make a restaurant out of it" or,

"let's do this or that. You know it has historical significance and so

we'll maintain it." That's not the way we should maintain that Samson .

It should be maintained to look after the waterway. It's done a

credible job over the years — 14 jobs incidentally, as well, for B.C.

citizens.

It's done a first-class job of keeping that south

arm of the river — that is the main channel of the river — clear of

underwater debris. There's no way it's going to sweep the river in

terms of the floating debris. You know, they are still dumping logs in

that river and some of them are still sinking or partly sunk, and those

are the things that are required to be taken out of there. Mr.

Chairman, I would suggest very strongly to the minister that he says to

the federal government: "For heaven's sake, continue spending that

measly $300,000 per year that it costs them to maintain the Samson ."

There

is absolutely no reason for this to be taken out. As I said, the last

time the Samson V was inspected, they gave it 30 years. One of the

reasons why it is so important is that there are very few boats that

could do this work. You see, it is a low draft; it is a stern wheeler.

If you pull a vessel in there with a relatively deep draft, then it

can't get into some of the areas where the Samson can. It is a very

practical consideration. I think that the feds are absolutely crazy

taking that very productive Samson V out of service. I would just like

to know what the minister has to say about the whole situation.

HON. MR. FRASER:

I want to correct something I said to the second member for Vancouver

Centre (Mr. Barnes) regarding the cost of bicycles. I wasn't right but

I now have something closer to the facts. The deal we have in the

Massey Tunnel under contract for bicycles costs $92 per day. In the

month of May 1980 we transported 116 bicycles; in the month of June,

251. Based on eight bicycles per day, which would be roughly June's

case, each bicycle we transport in the month of June would cost the

ministry $11.50. I did use a different figure and I just wanted to

clarify it. The gross cost for the season when we transport bicycles,

from May 17 to September 28, will be roughly $13,500.

The

member for New Westminster (Mr. Cocke) brings up a good point. I don't

want to get into an Ottawa-bashing discussion, but they are pulling out

in so many areas. I will take this up and write the Minister of

Transport. I didn't catch whether they had already withdrawn or warned

they are going to but we will look into it in the transport

section of

our ministry and get word to them. I agree with you, it is a safety

measure and helps to clean up the water. It is a good vessel. We will

look into it and urge them to continue this good service.

MR. COCKE:

Oddly enough, the Ministry of Transport doesn't run the Samson V . It is

being run by the Ministry of Public Works for some obscure reason.

However, it does a lot of the work of the other. For instance, there

are 56 lighted buoys on that river and the Samson tends the buoys as

well, pulls out each of them at least once a year, scrapes the

barnacles and puts them back in and so on. I just don't know what they

are going to do but they are probably going to spend a great deal more

money. I think that they should be alerted against doing something that

is actually going to do them out of pocket in the long run. Certainly

if it is not them then it will be us. I am with you. I am not

Ottawa-bashing or anything else. I am just suggesting that there is a

very serious, foolish mistake being made by the Ministry of Public

Works federally.

MR. SKELLY: I just have a few

questions to ask of the minister on highway problems. Before I do that

I would like to follow up on the comments the minister made about food

on the ferries. While I can understand the feelings that my friend from

Victoria had on the quality of food, I think a lot of people see the

quality of food tied up with the quality of service. When you take away

the food service that we had before on the B.C. ferry system — I am not

just saying under the NDP government but under previous governments —

where the food was served by waiters and was on dishes and you had

silverware and that type of thing.... When people see that quality

of service go down, they think the quality of food is going down. That

has certainly been the case in terms of the quality of service. I am

not saying that the people doing the work on the ferries are not

serving the customers well. They are, under some pretty tough

circumstances, attempting to put that many people through a

cafeteria-type of service during an hour and a half crossing. But it

brings up another problem and that is, when you get rid

[ Page 3236 ]

dishwashers and busboys and dish-handling people, then you end up

looking like McDonald's. You have a whole pile of paper and plastic

garbage which you have to remove from the ship at both ends of the

passage. That is where the quality of the service really appears to

have deteriorated, whether or not the service itself has deteriorated.

I am just wondering how much money the ministry spends on that type of

plastic containers for soup and sandwiches and all the paper that goes

into the wrappings of these things and just what happens to that stuff

at the end.

Whenever you sit at the ferry terminal — and you

do that for three or four hours during the summer — and watch the cubic

metres of garbage coming off the ferries, you wonder where it all goes.

I wonder what means of disposal the ministry has developed to take care

of all the garbage that comes off the ferries. In terms of employment,

I also wonder if it might not be better for the minister to look into

the cleaning of dishes at the terminal rather than doing it on the

ferries. I realize it's a problem of space and accommodation. If the

dishes could be removed from the ferries and cleaned at the terminal,

similar to what the airlines do, rather than using all this paper and

natural gas-derived plastic junk which ends up probably going into a

landfill or incinerator somewhere and causing problems down the line,

maybe we could gainfully employ people and improve the appearance of

the service on the ferries by using dishes and silverware as we did in

the past. I'd like the minister to look into that and possibly come

back with an answer later, or else comment on how all that junk is

ultimately disposed of when the paper and plastic comes off the ferries.

HON. MR. WATERLAND: The seagulls will eat it.

MR. SKELLY:

Seagulls don't eat plastic. I know the seagull used to be the kind of

bird of the Social Credit Party; maybe it has something to do with that.

I'm

a third-generation family from New Westminster. For all the years that

my family lived in New Westminster, the Samson I , II , III , IV and V , I

guess it is now, used to ply the Fraser River and pick the snags out of

the river. I think the federal government's desire to do away with the

Samson is, in part, a desire to give the river a little more functional

engineering style. They plan to channelize the river, using jetties and

directing the water to make the river run a little faster so that the

bottom will be self-scouring. This has a serious environmental impact

on the river and on the life that river sustains. I think you have to

tie the federal government's desire to do away with the Samson V into

the plans they have to channelize the Fraser River and have the bottom

self-scouring. It seems that the engineers in the Ministry of Public

Works and in the National Harbours Board are more concerned about the

river as a ditch or a seaway than they are about its potential to

sustain life, particularly the salmon and the fish for which that river

is renowned around the world. I hope the government of British Columbia

will take a position against that type of management of the Fraser

River. All of this would be done under a joint agreement between the

federal and provincial governments. If the government took a strong

stand against channelizing the river, then we would probably be keeping

the Samson V and maintaining the Fraser River in its present state.

During

the last several years I've been in almost constant contact with the

Minister of Highways about highway problems in Port Alberni. The

citizens of the Alberni valley are getting pretty frustrated with this

Minister of Highways, especially when they hear the statements from the

second member for Victoria (Mr. Hanson) and from the member for

Mackenzie (Mr. Lockstead) that an under-utilized road in the Cariboo

seems to get any amount of treatment it wants. It can get all the

maintenance it requires or all the pavement it requires. Yet a road in

Port Alberni that's used by people travelling to and from work, which

is a fairly highly utilized road, doesn't get any treatment at all.

When we write to the minister about it and when the citizens of the

Alberni Valley approach him directly, they get nothing but delays and

excuses and rationalization. The Minister of Lands, Parks and Housing

(Hon. Mr. Chabot) knows that, because one of the roads we are

constantly writing about to the government is under his jurisdiction.

Because we get such a small amount of activity from the Minister of

Lands, Parks and Housing, we would prefer that the Minister of Highways

handle this one, thank you very much. In almost every case, we get

nothing but delays, excuses and rationalization.

I'd like to

bring to the minister's attention some of these problems that I've been

writing to him about and about which my constituents have been

contacting him time after time. I know the minister has been out to

Ucluelet and he's visited other parts of the riding. I'd just like to

bring this list to his attention while he's listening — hopefully, he's

not listening to the member for Cranbrook. I'd like to talk about some

of the roads in my riding that need help and improvement. Constant

contact with the minister has done very little to get some support on

these roads.

I'll start from the western end first — that is

the Spring Cove road in Ucluelet. I see the member is aware; I see the

member is reading the briefing notes from his staff. When the

municipality of Ucluelet expanded to take the Spring Cove area into its

boundaries, one of the promises they received from the provincial

Ministry of Highways was that the Spring Cove road would be improved

and paved so that the people who use that road daily to drive to work

at the vessel traffic management service out there at Spring Cove could

drive over an improved road. Yet I'm still receiving letters and

communications from Ucluelet that the road has yet to be paved, and I'm

wondering just why there is delay in getting to work on that road this

year. We have a very short construction season out in Ucluelet, and

we'd like to see some activity on that road.

While we're in

Ucluelet, the minister has promised year after year that some attention

will be paid to the road between the Ucluelet-Tofino highway and the

Ittatsoo Indian Reserve road. Something between 500 and 800 people live

at that reserve. This year they planned an accelerated housing program

to improve housing conditions on the reserve. Because of load limit

restrictions on a bridge that's rotting away on the present New England

Fisheries road, they couldn't get concrete out and they had to curtail

their housing program. What they want now is for the minister to finish

the road that he's promised them year after year, to take that road

right up to the reserve boundaries so that they can get on with the job

of improving the Ittatsoo Indian Reserve and putting in new housing and

facilities. I'd like to know at what stage of planning this road is, or

whether we can see some construction on the Ittatsoo Indian Reserve

road within the next short period of time.

The minister also

visited the Ucluelet–Port Albion chamber of commerce a few months ago.

It was good to see him in the riding for a change. They brought to his

attention the poor

[ Page 3237 ]

condition

of the highways right at the village boundaries of Tofino and Ucluelet

— those winding roads that go into each of the communities — and the

fact that a great deal of work needs to be done to straighten out those

roads and improve their safety. As the minister is aware, thousands

upon thousands of people are visiting the national park each year. It's

been a decision of the parks service that no commercial facilities will

be located inside the park, so that users of the park now have to go

into the two villages. Those roads present a real problem to the

travelling public. I'd like to see some work done on those roads in the

very near future.

It was also brought to the minister's

attention at that chamber of commerce meeting that only half of the

Port Alberni–Tofino Road had been improved in the last construction

period. The western part of the road is still in pretty bad shape.

There are some 20 and 30 kilometre per hour curves on that road that

need to be upgraded. I realize that the terrain is difficult, but

really, a lot more work needs to be done on that

section of the road

than is being done. It would be appreciated if the minister would go

out and take a careful look at it, have his staff appraise the

possibilities for upgrading that road, and get to work as soon as

possible on that section.

The last time the minister was in

Port Alberni was at election time, and that's when he told all my

constituents that I hadn't been in to see him. He said he never saw the

member for Alberni. Yet when I went into his office just before the

election he was pleased to see me, he said, because I was the only

member of the opposition who had been in there for a long time. So I

really don't know what to expect from this minister, Mr. Chairman.

Interjection.

MR. SKELLY: Possibly it was just a short memory. I'm hoping that's it.

But

actually something good did come out of that meeting. The minister got

to work on a number of the problems that I had had up to that point and

he resolved them in short order. So I'm beginning to think that there

is some point in going to see the minister, as there isn't with some of

the other ministers of this government, Mr. Chairman.

that time we discussed the Cumberland road, and I believe we also

talked about it during debate on Bills 5 and 7. We can't seem to get

any kind of firm policy out of the Ministry of Highways on the

Cumberland road.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, having been to

Port Alberni many times yourself, the Alberni Valley has only one

entrance and egress. It is Highway 4, the highway that runs between

Port Alberni and Parksville. If there's ever any problem on that road,

then people in the Albernis are pretty well stuck with transportation

problems with freight in and out.

Now you can go out on a

few dirt roads. There's the road to Cumberland, which is in pretty

shabby shape. There are also the roads out through the Cowichan Valley,

but most of those are industrial roads, and it's pretty difficult for

people to go in and out with 14- and 16-foot-wide logging trucks using

those roads from day to day. It's hazardous for the loggers and it's

hazardous for those unfamiliar with industrial roads. So we need more

roads in and out of the Alberni Valley.

The policy or the

messages we are receiving from the Ministry of Highways vary. At one

time the minister says he's going to put money into the Cumberland

road, and at another time he says no, it's a forestry responsibility,

What we're hoping is that the Minister of Forests (Hon. Mr. Waterland)

and the Minister of Highways can get together on a plan to upgrade that

road. I know that the minister is going to have some difficulty,

because once he puts some money or work into the road, then it becomes

a public road and he's committed to it forever and a day,

whereas if

the Forest Service does it, it's a different story. But we would like

to see more work done on that road to make a tourist circle road. It

opens up that whole central area of Vancouver Island, the Della Falls

area at the west coast north of Tofino, and also the southern end of

Strathcona Park, and also makes it possible for a tourist to do a

complete circle between the Cumberland–Comox Valley area and the

Alberni Valley west coast. So it has some economic value for the

citizens of northern and western Vancouver Island, and we'd like to see

a lot more financial commitment to that road from the Minister of

Highways.

The thing that I've been discussing with the

Minister of Highways time after time through letters and correspondence

and petitions and telephone calls and whatever is the maintenance on

the.... Perhaps the minister is dealing with some health matters

now. Mr. Chairman, and I should move that you leave the chair and get

back to his estimates later. Oh, no, sorry.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you making a motion?

MR. SKELLY: Oh, no. I was going to move a motion that the Chairman leave the chair and we come back to Highways estimates later.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, have you made a motion?

MR. SKELLY: No, we haven't made a motion yet, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member continues on vote 193.

MR. SKELLY:

But I would like to talk to the Minister of Highways about the

reconstruction and the maintenance of those suburban and rural roads in

the Alberni Valley; I think the minister knows the names of those roads

by heart right now, with all the petitions and all the letters he's

been receiving over the last little while. When my constituents hear

statements made by the second member for Victoria (Mr. Hanson) or the

member for Mackenzie (Mr. Lockstead) that all of the money seems to be

going into Cariboo constituency and none of the money seems to be going

into Alberni. and when they hear from the staff in the Ministry of

Transportation and Highways that it would take over $1 million a year

in additional funding just to bring those roads up to the shape they

were in before without improving those roads substantially to the

standard that they should be at, then they get concerned that the

minister might be handling the public's money on a political basis, so

that some of it is going into Social Credit ridings,

whereas the NDP

ridings are being deprived of those funds. You know, when citizens in

the Alberni Valley — this is one of the major forest products

production areas of British Columbia, with some of the highest-quality

timber and some of the highest-quality timber growing sites anywhere in

North America, and some of the

[ Page 3238 ]

most

productive mills and the most productive forestry labour force anywhere

in North America — see that the tremendous amount of resource revenue

funds they produce for this provincial government and the tremendous

amount of income tax funds from their labours is going to other

constituencies,

whereas they have to make do with substandard roads and

substandard highway service, then they get pretty angry, and they've

asked me to bring this matter to the attention of the Minister of

Transportation and Highways. I'm telling you right now, Mr. Chairman,

these people aren't all that happy with the Minister of Transportation

and Highways. I'd like the Minister of Transportation and Highways to

give me some idea today just what his plans are to upgrade those rural

roads in Alberni provincial constituency and to do some construction

work on some of the roads that's been sadly lacking over the years

since 1975.

I see that the minister is planning to do a

study of the transportation requirements for Vancouver Island — at least

I read this in the paper — and it's going to cost a considerable amount

of money, and it should be completed by the end of the year. Well, I

would like to support the minister. I think it is a good thing that we

should have an overall assessment of the transportation needs on

Vancouver Island. Once we have the results and the recommendations out

of this study, we should act on the basis of those recommendations and

on the basis of need; that's the way we should be dividing Highways

funds in this province, Mr. Chairman.

I also see that he's

doing a special study in Nanaimo on how to bypass the Nanaimo area and

serve the highway needs of the Nanaimo area, and that's going to cost,

possibly, another $100,000. I think that's $100,000 well spent; in

fact, we'll probably have it back in the first day if that study will

find for us a good route through the Nanaimo area that will save funds

and property acquisition and obviate the need for new bypasses at some

time in the future. So I support this kind of study being done by the

minister and hope that he will act in a non-political way based on need

once he has the results and the recommendations of the study.

But

I would also like the minister to come into my area and bring some of

his staff — and I know he's done this in Courtenay and I know he's done

that in the Qualicum Beach area — and come to my constituency and

listen to some of the grievances on highways that these people have in

the Alberni Valley and on the west coast of Vancouver Island. I know

that the minister will do it in a non-political way and listen to the

complaints and to the needs as expressed by local governments and by

the citizens of Alberni provincial constituency. I would invite him to

do it. First of all I would invite him to spend money along the same

lines of what he's doing in Nanaimo. I realize that the need isn't so

great, because we don't have that need to bypass the Nanaimo area and

the problem of finding land and good routes, but I'd invite him to

spend money to do a study of transportation needs in the Alberni Valley

prior to coming there and doing an accountability session there, and to

let the people look at the results of that study or finance the

regional district. I know the regional district is in the process of

releasing their transportation study. But produce the whole thing at

the same time — the regional district study and Ministry of Highways

plans and projections — and have the minister come there himself and do

an accountability session in the Alberni Valley. I'd like to hear the

minister's response to those suggestions.

HON. MR. FRASER:

To the member for Alberni, he raised a lot of issues in his riding, but

I'll try to reply to most of them. First of all, the access to your

community. My version of it.... I know that it's not in your

riding, but we have upgraded the Island Highway considerably and, in

fact, for your information, this time next year it'll be four lanes

from north of Nanaimo right to the Parksville bypass. You can see them

working there. Again, for the citizens out of Alberni coming back — I

always think of that side — not too far out they have a two-lane road

becoming a four-lane road, and they can go to Nanaimo and get a ferry

and go where they want. So much for that.

The local roads in

the area. Yes, I was in there and I enjoyed the trip. I visited the

community of Ucluelet as well as.... I didn't get to the community

of Tofino, but I got within three miles of it. I saw Long Beach and so

on and got a general idea. My impression of the road from Alberni to

Ucluelet was that we have sections of good road there, but we have some

sections there of very inadequate road and very expensive road to fix —

that is rock work. I think one request I had when I made the trip was

that we could at least put some guardrail up as a safety measure in

some of the higher points there. I believe that's happened and probably

some other work has been done, but not of a major nature.

have a few notes here from staff on the pavement conditions of Highway

4 east of Port Alberni. The condition of the pavement from Port Alberni

to 25 kilometres east is not good. It requires a recap. The recap has

been delayed, since the Cameron Lake–Angel Rock

section is scheduled

for reconstruction. The Angel Rock design is complete, but we still

haven't decided on when to call the tender. But we seem to be getting

closer. In other words — and the member knows — that's a substantial

rock job. I certainly would like to see that out of there. I guess it's

not too far away from a tender call — I'd say within 12 months. The

pavement has been extensively patched this year, according to the

engineers. That's one of the reasons....

Interjection.

HON. MR. FRASER: Right, patching on patches.

believe the MLA complained about the Cherry Creek road. Part of this

road is in the city limits and is not ours. The

section in the city is

in bad condition and, as a city street, maybe they can.... If

they've got financial problems, and it's a collector street, they might

get into a revenue sharing. I don't know just where that's at. The

section outside the city, which Highways looks after, is in good

condition, according to the notes I have.

The MLA has

complained about the condition of Beaver Creek Road. It's ten miles

long and five miles are in good condition and five miles need

rebuilding. Half a mile at the bridge approach has been rebuilt and

paved this year.

The MLA for Alberni requested $30 million

for the upgrading of the west end of the highway from Alberni to

Tofino. The notes I have here on that say we're designing some

four-lane passing sections for construction; that will be done on a

repaving job. Then we'll be doing a repaving job at the west end. So

they're moving up to getting some permanent improvements done there.

The

note on the Cumberland road.... I've never heard so much about a

road that doesn't belong to the Highways system as I have on the

Cumberland-Alberni road. It's a Forests road. The notes I have here say

that in the last two years Highways has supplied $50,000 to upgrade

locations

[ Page

3239 ]

where

it was difficult for passenger cars. I know that both Cumberland and

Alberni really want to see this road. We're helping in a small way, and

we will continue to help with giving funds so they can upgrade the road

to a better standard.

MR. SKELLY: How much this year?

HON. MR. FRASER:

I can get the figure. I don't know what the figure is for this year,

but I'll get it. It's not large, but I don't know what it is.

The

observation I want to deal with here. Mr. Chairman, is that this is a

forest road. There are complications regarding taking it over. This is

my understanding. If we're to take it over and bring it up to a more

decent grade, we're going to affect jobs in the area, I understand.

That is, logging trucks are now allowed to run with wider bunks than

they would be allowed if we took the highway over. They would have to

come to legal highway width, and I don't think the logging companies

want that to happen.

So what we're doing is a band-aid

approach to the Cumberland-Alberni road. I think the community of

Cumberland wants the road even worse than Alberni, but both communities

are in full support of it, and I realize that it certainly would be a

nice alternative access for both of them. I say there are problems, but

we move to do it properly. In the meantime we're making minor grants to

get it upgraded.

I think I've covered most of the items.

MR. SKELLY: What about the food service on the ferries? All the junk — wrappers and stuff.

HON. MR. FRASER: I haven't got an answer to that. I don't know where the garbage from the ferries goes, but I'll get that answer.

MR. PASSARELL:

I'll be addressing a number of questions to the minister concerning air

services, out of the latest brochure report that we have. I'd like

clarification from the minister concerning the following figures. On

page 159 of the report it says the total number of passengers carried

on the four daily flights between Victoria and Vancouver was 10,545;

unscheduled service 4,217; for a total of 14,762. This excludes the

air ambulance service. I'm asking the minister why 14,762 passengers

yearly go on a government aircraft between Victoria and Vancouver when

there are quite a few commercial flights available out of Pat Bay to

Vancouver.

On the air ambulance service — an excellent

facility and project — there were 507 patients on 356 flights — that's

on page 158 — for a total of 528 hours, while the aerial photography

section took a total of 739 flying hours. Why were 210.4 more hours

spent on photographing trees and land than on flying sick people to

hospitals? Where are the priorities?

MR. KEMPF: Are you suggesting we should have more sick people?

MR. PASSARELL: We certainly know that the member for Omineca is against the air ambulance service, as his statement just made....

On the travel recording centre located in the legislative building, to quote

from page 158: "The purpose of the centre is to coordinate and record all

commercial and government air travel by members of the executive council."

Why were 36,847

travel warrants charged back to ministries for a total of $430,000?

Almost half a million dollars were charged back to ministries for

government travel. We find that $430,000 are spent on that aspect while

communities such as Dease Lake go without a first-aid station.

Another

question to the minister is, why was the Beechcraft Turbo flown only

3.9 hours in the last fiscal year? What was the matter with this

aircraft? The member for Dewdney (Mr. Mussallem) says it was dangerous.

Isn't this a tremendous expense, to have a government aircraft flying

3.9 hours a year? What's happened to this aircraft? Is it in storage

somewhere or is it in operation this year?

Interjection.

MR. PASSARELL: Sell it.

Just

to switch off of the air ambulance and air services branch, since I've

asked the minister a number of questions, one aspect concerns

maintenance for the Atlin electoral district, which makes up roughly 20

percent of the province in area — $3,709,776, compared to over $11

million for the Cariboo, the constituency of the Minister of

Transportation and Highways; $10 million for Prince George North, the

constituency of the Minister of Labour (Hon. Mr. Heinrich); $9 million

for the constituency of the Minister of Health (Hon. Mr. Mair); $4

million for South Peace River, the constituency of the Minister of

Industry and Small Business (Hon. Mr. Phillips); and $4,692,000 for

the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Hewitt). I'm wondering why so

little is spent on maintenance up in the Atlin constituency. If you

took it in priority listing, starting with the top and working down,

the Atlin maintenance budget is fifteenth behind the Cariboo, and

fifteenth for a maintenance budget for a constituency as large as Atlin

should.... I would hope the minister could bring that fifteenth up

a little bit more so we could get a little bit better service on the

roads. I certainly hope that the minister can and will make the Atlin

constituency maintenance budget a bit higher.

Snow removal

in the Atlin constituency is $1,383,000, compared to the Minister of

Agriculture's constituency in Boundary-Similkameen of $1,167,000 — a

big snow belt down in that area. Almost as much was spent on snow

removal in the Minister of Agriculture's region of the Okanagan as is

spent up in northern British Columbia. There was over $3 million spent

in snow removal in the Cariboo as compared to only $1,300,000 in Atlin.

There was $2 million spent in Fort George: $1,953,837 was spent on snow

removal in Kamloops. There was more money spent on snow removal in

Kamloops than on the entire northwest of British Columbia. The sum of

$2,039,000 was spent in Yale-Lillooet, another big snow belt of this

province located in the southern regions.

HON. MR. WATERLAND: I'm just cleaning up the snowjob Hartley did.

MR. PASSARELL: Well, if there is anything to know about snowjobs, that Minister of Forests would certainly know about it.

There

is more money spent on snow removal in Yale-Lillooet than on the entire

northwest of British Columbia. There is another interesting aspect

about snow removal from the minister's report here. The total lower

mainland snow

[ Page 3240 ]

removal

budget for West Vancouver, Vancouver East, Vancouver Centre, Surrey,

Langley, Richmond, North Vancouver–Seymour, North Vancouver–Capilano,

Delta, Coquitlam, Chilliwack, Burnaby North, Burnaby-Willingdon,

Burnaby-Edmonds amounts to the grant total of $1,300,000. This compares

to the exact same amount of area for snow removal in all of

northwestern British Columbia.

MR. KEMPF: Did you check the snowfall?

MR. PASSARELL: The member for Omineca, once again, is interrupting. Could you bring him to order please, Mr. Chairman? Thank you.

to some constituency problems concerning the bridge into Greenville.

There were some conflicting reports concerning the bridge into

Greenville. One of the federal members had made a statement — he said

he was in conjunction with the Minister of Highways — that it would

take four years to build that bridge into Greenville. The minister, I

saw in a press release I think it was, stated two years. Is that

correct, Mr. Minister?

HON. MR. FRASER: I'll reply to you, but I would remind you that if the federals would put their money where their mouth is, it would sure help.

MR. PASSARELL: Terrible, Mr. Chairman — more of this Ottawa-bashing.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. All remarks should be addressed to the Chair, hon. members. The member for Atlin continues.

MR. PASSARELL:

I think the children of Greenville who have to walk across the ice to

get to school across the Nass River aren't really concerned that the

Minister of Transportation and Highways is getting into a petty

argument with Ottawa concerning the bridge.

HON. MR. FRASER: It's not very petty.

MR. PASSARELL:

It's not petty. That's right. Why isn't there a bridge in there? It's

been too long. A child almost died this summer going across.

HON. MR. FRASER: Are you relying on Ottawa for the answers?

MR. KEMPF: I think he almost does.

MR. PASSARELL:

There goes the minister, or the member — he would like to become maybe

the minister of booze — once again putting down the poor children of

Greenville who must go across the Nass River to get to school because

there is no bridge. They have to walk across the ice.

Once

again, Mr. Minister, there is a need for ferry service into Stewart. I

know it will take a while. It is good for the community, good for

northern British Columbia, being the most northern ice-free port on the

coast.

On Highway 37, I was up there this weekend and there

is some very good construction going on between the junction and Good

Hope Lake. Definite improvement is still needed on the junction between

Cassiar and Highway 37.

There is one question I would have the minister answer. Can

the minister clarify if the Good Hope Lake maintenance camp is

transferring from its present location to a location about three

kilometres from Cassiar? Quite a few people in the area are concerned

about this. If the camp does move, could the structure remain there for

some kind of training centre for the people of the area, specifically

in Good Hope Lake?

There is a need for local contractors.

I've written the minister concerning a problem which was brought up

through the constituency. I will wait for the minister's response to

the letter that I contacted him with on this.

The member for

Omineca once again has something the matter with him. He's jumping up

and down. He's spending too much time talking about the new program

that he has underway; I think it's something like the Floating Unified

Canteens of Kempf's Under Progress — something of that nature. But

we'll continue, Mr. Chairman, on some highway estimates.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please, back to vote 193.

MR. PASSARELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for protecting me against this wild man from Omineca.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, that remark is unparliamentary. Will you please withdraw it.

MR. PASSARELL: Certainly. I will withdraw "wild man."

MR. CHAIRMAN:

Thank you. All members are reminded that we are on vote 193, the

estimates of the Minister of Transportation and Highways, and if we

could contain our debate to that and address our remarks to the Chair,

the debate can proceed in a courteous and orderly manner.

MR. PASSARELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I would appreciate that.

MR. KEMPF: I would appreciate you being right for a change.

MR. PASSARELL:

There he goes again, Mr. Chairman. There's something definitely the

matter with that man. But I will address my remarks to you, Mr.

Chairman.

There is the need of local employment on Highway

37, Mr. Minister. Some of the small communities located along Highway

37 were under the impression they would get more summer employment

projects out of the construction aspects. Since there is much

construction going on in the area I would certainly hope the minister

could help out a bit with the summer employment program for residents

living in the area.

The earth receiver programs I talked

about last year with the minister are very good programs. They are very

helpful to the many rural communities along Highway 37 — the

maintenance camps where the minister put in the receiving dishes that

are very welcome and appreciated by the communities.

Finally,

on the aspect of the Stikine bridge, if the possibility exists that

that's going to be flooded over, the bridge would be 600 feet under

water. Can the minister give any assurances that the bridge won't be

left under water by Lake McClelland? If the bridge is left under,

before it's flooded

[ Page

3241 ]

over, could it be taken down and maybe moved into Stewart which

could benefit from the Stikine bridge? Those are a few questions I'd

like some answers on, if possible, from the minister.

MR. KEMPF: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. to correct the member for Atlin.

MR. PASSARELL: Point of order, Mr. Chairman.

MR. KEMPF:

I know he's very seldom correct, but he's certainly incorrect in

saying, as he just did in that debate, if in fact it was debate, that I

am not in favour of air ambulances in this province. I want to tell

you, Mr. Chairman, if that member had been in the House on Monday last

he would certainly have heard me when I was on my feet speaking

vehemently in favour of the air ambulance system, telling the people of

this assembly and of the province of British Columbia what has been

done in my constituency in regard to airport improvement to facilitate

the air ambulance service.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to correct that incorrect member.

MR. CHAIRMAN:

The Chair will recognize the member for Atlin, but the Chair will also

point out that in committee there is really not any need to rise under

standing order 42 to qualify a point, because, in fact, debate in

committee is allowed to any member who wishes to speak. In second

reading, where a member is only allowed to speak once, standing order

42 does offer the privilege of a member standing to correct a statement

that might have been in appropriate or in which the explanation or

material part of his speech might have been misquoted or misunderstood.

So the member for Omineca has simply risen in debate, and the Chair will now again recognize the member for Atlin.

MR. PASSARELL The member for Omineca is once again making statements

— stating that I was incorrect as something. I would like him to withdraw that

statement....

MR. KEMPF: You weren't libelous this time, just incorrect.

MR. PASSARELL: I find it unparliamentary, Mr. Chairman, and offensive, as he usually is.

MR. CHAIRMAN:

Oh! Hon. member, I will caution you that courtesy in debate is always a

function of this House and of the committee. The word "incorrect" is

not unparliamentary. If the member deliberately imputed a falsehood

against another member, then the member would have to withdraw it. But

the Chair has not heard any....

MR. PASSARELL Mr. Chairman, he was referring to the truthfulness of

my statements, just like you found it offensive when I called him a wild man,

which he is.

MR. CHAIRMA