H0526pm 02

H0526pm 02

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Monday, May 26, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Volume 16, Number 2 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 4TH SESSION, 37TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Claude Richmond EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council................................................................................. .........................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations.............................................................................. ..................... Hon.

Greg Halsey-Brandt Deputy Premier and Minister of Education ....................................................................................... ..................................Hon. Christy Clark Minister of Advanced Education................................................................................................. ...........................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries.................................................................................... ..............................Hon.

John van Dongen Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations.............................................................. .................... Hon. Geoff Plant Minister of Children and Family Development.................................................................................... ..............................Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of State for Early Childhood Development.............................................................................. .................................Hon.

Linda Reid Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services......................................................................... .................. Hon. George Abbott Minister of State for Community Charter........................................................................................ .................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Minister of State for Women's Equality ......................................................................................... .................................... Hon.

Lynn Stephens Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ................................................................................ ..................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Minister of State for Deregulation ............................................................................................. ............................................ Hon. Kevin Falcon Minister of Energy and Mines................................................................................................... ....................................... Hon.

Richard Neufeld Minister of Finance ............................................................................................................ ....................................................... Hon. Gary Collins Minister of Forests ............................................................................................................ .................................................. Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Health Planning .................................................................................................... ............................................ Hon.

Sindi Hawkins Minister of Health Services.................................................................................................... ................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Minister of State for Mental Health ............................................................................................ ...................................Hon. Gulzar S. Cheema Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care ............................................................................. Hon.

Katherine Whittred Minister of Human Resources.................................................................................................... ............................................Hon. Murray Coell Minister of Management Services................................................................................................ .........................................Hon. Sandy Santori Minister of Provincial Revenue................................................................................................. ................................................Hon.

Bill Barisoff Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ................................................................................ ..................................Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Skills Development and Labour...................................................................................... .............................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Minister of Sustainable Resource Management.................................................................................... ..................................Hon.

Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..................................................................................................... .................................................... Hon. Judith Reid Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection..................................................................................... ....................................Hon. Joyce Murray LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................. ..............................................................

John Weisbeck Leader of the Opposition ....................................................................................................... ...........................................................Joy MacPhail Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ........................................................................................... .............................................. Harold Long Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .............................................................................................. .........................................E.

George MacMinn Clerk Assistant ................................................................................................................ ................................................................... Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .................................................................................................. ........................................................ Ian D. Izard Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees........................................................................................ ............................................Craig H.

James Clerk Assistant/Committee Clerk................................................................................................ ............................................ Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms ............................................................................................................... .........................................................A.A. Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................... ........................................

Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian.......................................................................................................... ............................................................. Joan A. Barton Legislative Comptroller ........................................................................................................ .................................................................Peter Bray Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker by the Queen's Printer, Victoria.

Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636. Fax: 386-0221. www.leg.bc.ca/hansard In addition to printed transcripts, Hansard Services publishes transcripts on the Internet and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.

Party Standings: Liberal 75; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 2. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ....................................................................... Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L) .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)............................................. Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L).........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L).................................................................................

North Coast Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................... East Kootenay Bhullar, Tony (Ind. L) ................................................................. Surrey-Newton Bloy, Harry (L).................................................................................. Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).........................................Prince George–Mount Robson Bray, Jeff (L)......................................................................Victoria–Beacon H ill Brenzinger, Elayne (L) ...............................................................

Surrey-Whalley Brice, Susan (L) ............................................................................Saanich South Bruce, Hon. Graham P. (L)................................................ Cowichan-Ladysmith Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Cheema, Hon. Gulzar S. (L) ..........................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Chong, Ida (L)................................................................ Oak Bay–Gordon Head Christensen, Tom (L) .............................................................

Okanagan-Vernon Chutter, Dave (L) ........................................................................... Yale-L illooet Clark, Hon. Christy (L) ..................................................Port Moody–Westwood Cobb, Walt (L) ............................................................................. Cariboo South Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ........................................ Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L) .............................................. Fort Langley–Aldergrove Collins, Hon.

Gary (L).........................................................Vancouver-Fairview de Jong, Hon. Michael (L)....................................... Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................... Surrey-Cloverdale Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................... Comox Valley Halsey-Brandt, Hon. Greg (L) ..................................................Richmond Centre Hamilton, Arnie (L)............................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) .....................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Harris, Roger (L)......................................................................................Skeena Hawes, Randy (L) ............................................................ Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Hon. Sindi (L).......................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ................................................................... Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Hon. Gordon (L) ........................................................

Surrey–White Rock Hunter, Mike (L) ...................................................................................Nanaimo Jarvis, Daniel (L)...................................................... North Vancouver–Seymour Johnston, Ken (L)............................................................ Vancouver-Fraserview Kerr, Brian J. (L).............................................................. Malahat–Juan de Fuca Krueger, Kevin (L).................................................

Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ...............................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lee, Richard T. (L).......................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L) .......................................................................... Ch illiwack-Sumas Locke, Brenda (L) ...........................................................

Surrey–Green Timbers Long, Harold (L) ...................................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................... Bulkley Valley–Stikine McMahon, Wendy (L).............................................Columbia River–Revelstoke MacPhail, Joy (NDP) ..........................................................

Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) .............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ...................................................................................Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L) ........................................................... New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) .......................................... West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (Ind. L)..................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon.

Richard (L)...................................................... Peace River North Nijjar, Rob (L)...................................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Nuraney, John (L) ...............................................................Burnaby-W illingdon Orr, Sheila (L) ...........................................................................Victoria-Hillside Penner, Barry (L)....................................................................... Ch illiwack-Kent Plant, Hon. Geoff (L) ......................................................... Richmond-Steveston Reid, Hon.

Judith (L)............................................................Nanaimo-Parksv ille Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L) ................................................................ Kamloops Roddick, Valerie (L)..........................................................................Delta South Sahota, Patty (L).....................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Santori, Hon. Sandy (L)..............................................West Kootenay–Boundary Stephens, Hon.

Lynn (L) ........................................................................ Langley Stewart, Ken (L)...................................................... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Stewart, Richard (L) ...................................................... Coquitlam-Maillardville Suffredine, Blair F. (L) ................................................................Nelson-Creston Sultan, Ralph (L)....................................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Thorpe, Hon.

Rick (L) ..........................................................Okanagan-Westside Trumper, Gillian (L)................................................................Alberni-Qualicum van Dongen, Hon. John (L) ................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Visser, Rod (L).................................................................................North Island Weisbeck, John (L).........................................................Kelowna–Lake Country Whittred, Hon.

Katherine (L) ...................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wilson, John (L)........................................................................... Cariboo North Wong, Patrick (L)............................................................Vancouver-Kensington LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn....................................................... Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman ..............................................Hon.

Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum.......................................................................G illian Trumper Bulkley Valley–Stikine ..............................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North..............................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds............................................................................Patty Sahota Burnaby-Willingdon......................................................................

John Nuraney Burquitlam ........................................................................................ Harry Bloy Cariboo North ..................................................................................John Wilson Cariboo South .................................................................................... Walt Cobb Chilliwack-Kent ............................................................................. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas .................................................................................

John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke....................................................Wendy McMahon Comox Valley .......................................................................... Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville .............................................................Richard Stewart Cowichan-Ladysmith .......................................................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Delta North.......................................................................................... Reni Masi Delta South................................................................................

Valerie Roddick East Kootenay .................................................................................. Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin...................................................................Arnie Hamilton Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops ....................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ........................................................Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country...............................................................

John Weisbeck Kelowna-Mission ................................................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Langley ............................................................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Malahat–Juan de Fuca .....................................................................Brian J. Kerr Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................... Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows .............................................................Ken Stewart Nanaimo..........................................................................................

Mike Hunter Nanaimo-Parksville ...................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Nelson-Creston.......................................................................Blair F. Suffredine New Westminster ..................................................................Hon. Joyce Murray North Coast ........................................................................................Bill Belsey North Island........................................................................................Rod Visser North Vancouver–Lonsdale.......................................... Hon.

Katherine Wh ittred North Vancouver–Seymour .............................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head .......................................................................Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon .................................................................... Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside.................................................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North .............................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South .......................................................................

Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley ....................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................... Karn Manhas Port Moody–Westwood......................................................... Hon. Christy Clark Powell River–Sunshine Coast.......................................................... Harold Long Prince George North................................................................................Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................Hon.

Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................Paul Nettleton Richmond Centre......................................................... Hon. Greg Halsey-Brandt Richmond East .......................................................................... Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ................................................................ Hon. Geoff Plant Saanich North and the Islands ............................................... Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South...................................................................................

Susan Brice Shuswap .............................................................................. Hon. George Abbott Skeena.............................................................................................Roger Harris Surrey-Cloverdale ................................................................. Hon. Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Brenda Locke Surrey-Newton ............................................................................... Tony Bhullar Surrey–Panorama Ridge................................................. Hon.

Gulzar S. Cheema Surrey-Tynehead .......................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley ...................................................................... Elayne Brenzinger Surrey–White Rock ...............................................................Hon. Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard................................................................. Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview............................................................... Hon.

Gary Co llins Vancouver-Fraserview ...................................................................Ken Johnston Vancouver-Hastings .......................................................................Joy MacPhail Vancouver-Kensington...................................................................Patrick Wong Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Rob Nijjar Vancouver-Langara....................................................................Val J.

Anderson Vancouver–Mount Pleasant............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................... Hon. Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena............................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill.............................................................................Jeff Bray Victoria-Hillside.................................................................................. Sheila Orr West Kootenay–Boundary.................................................... Hon.

Sandy Santori West Vancouver–Capilano ..............................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ................................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Yale-Lillooet .................................................................................. Dave Chutter

CONTENTS Monday, May 26, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 6891 Tributes....................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 6891 Jack Radford J.

MacPhail Statements (Standing Order 25B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 6892 Aga Khan Foundation J. Nuraney Duke of Edinburgh's Award recipients V. Roddick Ronald Lou-Poy I. Chong Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 6893 Privatization of B.C. Rail J. MacPhail Hon. J. Reid Liquor sales and identification requirements M. Hunter Hon. R.

Coleman Privatization of B.C. Rail J. MacPhail Hon. J. Reid Management of Coquihalla Highway J. Kwan Hon. J. Reid B.C. Rail staff layoffs P. Nettleton Hon. J. Reid University college designation T. Bhullar Hon. S. Bond Regulation of floatplane landings B. Suffredine Hon. J. Murray Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 6895 R.

Harris Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 6895 British Columbia Legislative Library, annual report, 2002 Ministry of Finance, notification of accounting policy change, 2002-03 Motions without Notice......................................................................................................... .................................................. 6896 Adoption of government business

schedule for May 26 to May 29, 2003 Hon. G. Collins J. MacPhail

Committee of Supply ............................................................................................................ ................................................... 6897 Estimates: Ministry of Health Services (continued) J. MacPhail Hon. C. Hansen Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 6911 Utilities Commission Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 40) (continued) Hon. R. Neufeld J. MacPhail P. Nettleton Forest (Revitalization) Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003 (Bill 45) Hon.

M. de Jong J. MacPhail P. Bell R. Harris R. Hawes B. Suffredine Hon. M. de Jong Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply ............................................................................................................ ................................................... 6935 Estimates: Ministry of Health Planning (continued) Estimates: Ministry of Health Services (continued) J. Kwan Hon. K. Whittred Hon. G.

Cheema Point of Privilege............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 6955 J. Kwan

6891 MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 The House met at 2:06 p.m. Introductions by Members Hon. G. Campbell: Unfortunately, this particular guest isn't with us today, but the press gallery has yet another member added to its tribe. The CBC TV re- porter Justine Hunter gave birth to a seven-pound, six- ounce baby boy on Victoria Day. Evidently, Justine and her partner Darrell Gittens are having difficulty com- ing up with a name, and I'm sure that the member from Mount Pleasant will be able to tell her what names she didn't use. That would probably be helpful to Justine. Mr.

Speaker, in the spirit of the Legislature, I think simply "Claude" would be good. Mr. Speaker: So I'm getting blamed again. [Laughter.] R. Harris: We are joined in the House today by a very good friend of mine down from Kitimat. She has served a large part of her life in municipal politics, in the municipality, but also on the federal scene. She is the past president for the Federation of Canadian Mu- nicipalities. Would the House please make Joanne Monaghan very welcome. Hon. S. Hawkins: I'm very pleased to introduce a special guest in the gallery today. Her name is Mrs. Nomalanga Makwedini.

She is the director of the HIV/AIDS, STI and TB control unit department of health at the Eastern Cape province in South Africa. In 1996 the Eastern Cape province and British Columbia signed an agreement on cooperation and governance under the aegis of the Canada–South Africa Provincial Twinning Project. Study and work exchanges are funded by the Canadian International Development Agency and administered by the Institute of Public Administration of Canada. This partnership has been an enriching experience in both provinces. In the next two weeks Mrs.

Makwedini and her colleague — and I hope I'm saying the names right — Dr. Buyiswa Mjamba will study best practices and share innovative solutions in prevention, treatment and research in the area of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis control. She will observe the roles and the structures of the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, the Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, the Ministries of Health Services and Health Planning and NGOs in the province. Please join me in welcoming to this House our guest from Eastern Cape province, and we wish her a pro- ductive and enjoyable stay in our Pacific province.

Tributes JACK RADFORD J. MacPhail: I'm reminded by the Premier's an- nouncement that in the Bible it talks about how as the seasons turn, there are ebbs and flows in life. As he announced a flow and a growing of life, I am sad to announce today that the MLA for Vancouver South from 1972 to 1975, Jack Radford, passed away in Victo- ria in hospice on May 19, 2003 — the same day the baby was born. He had a valiant battle with cancer and died at the age of 73.

He is survived by his wife Shirley, daughters De- nise, Cheryl and Brenda, two stepchildren, Susan and David, seven grandchildren and four great- grandchildren. He ran in Vancouver South — what was then called Vancouver South — for the NDP in 1972 and was appointed Minister of Recreation and Conservation in that government. He devoted all of his life to improving the conservation of wildlife, provid- ing parks, recreation and greenspace for people around the province. [1410] As we bless the birth of one, we mourn the passing of another very important person.

I hope that the Legisla- ture would send condolences to Mr. Radford's family. Mr. Speaker: So ordered. Introductions by Members D. MacKay: Today in the gallery we're joined by 16 grade 7 students from St. Joseph's Catholic independ- ent school in Smithers in the beautiful Bulkley Valley. They are accompanied today by two chaperons, Mark Adamson and Sally Toman, as well as their teacher, Elizabeth Creyke. I'd ask the House to please make them welcome. I. Chong: In the gallery today I am pleased to intro- duce some very special friends and community leaders who are here to watch question period.

We have amongst ourselves Ron and May Lou-Poy, who I will speak a little bit more about later, as well as Mr. Ben Low, who represents the Lung Kong Association here in Victoria; Mr. Eric Donald, who is a director on the board of governors of the University of Victoria; Mr. Paul Chan, who represents the Hoy Sun Association; Mr. Thomas Chan, who also represents the Chinese Freemason Society here in Victoria; and Georgina Wong, who is a winner of a Women of Distinction award as well as a founding member of the Victoria Chinatown Lioness Club. I hope the House would make them all very welcome. Hon. S.

Santori: I would like the House to welcome today Kristin Knutson from Castlegar, who is a student at Selkirk College in Trail. Kristen is working — for free, I might add — in the office of the Clerk of Committees for two weeks as part of her practicum studies. I would ask that the House make her feel very welcome. J. Nuraney: W e h a v e i n t h e g a l l e r y t o d a y s o m e o f my favourite people. I have my older brother Bad- rudin, who is here — who spared no rod as I was growing up — and his wife, Nabat. I also have my

6892 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 younger brother Salim and his wife, Yasmin, who have joined us today. I also have a friend in Rashida Haji, a member of a prominent family of my community. I would ask the House to please make them all welcome. J. Bray: Joining us in the gallery today is a Vic High student, Sarah Taylor. Sarah is a budding journalist who is spending some time with Times Colonist reporter Judy Lavoie.

I'm not sure if she'll find the experience here to encourage her to be a journalist or make her decide to take a different career, but I know that she's going to find it an interesting experience. I ask the House to please make her very welcome. H. Long: I want to inform all the members of the House that there are people out there who are out for our blood.

Due to the West Nile virus that is expected this way, in British Columbia, at some point this year, the Canadian Blood Services needs thousands of new donors to help build reserve blood should the agency require certain collection activities as a result of the virus. In light of the situation, I want to make all mem- bers aware of the blood drive with the Canadian Blood Services that we'll be having here in the buildings on Thursday, May 29, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. in the Birch Room, in 339. I encourage all the members to partici- pate in that important initiative.

For the public, I'd like to say that they can reach Blood Services through a 1-800 number: 236-6283. This is a very important initiative for British Columbia. Mr. Speaker: I note it's just before question period. Hon. R. Neufeld: In the gallery today is a lady from Fort St. John who came down to visit the capital. Her name is Dorene Callison, and she has worked with me in my office in Fort St. John since 1991. I'd like to make her welcome to Victoria today. [1415] Statements (Standing Order 25

B) AGA KHAN FOUNDATION J. Nuraney: Yesterday was the day when over 6,000 people walked across Canada to raise money for the Aga Khan Foundation Canada. The first report indi- cates that over $3 million was raised yesterday. Since its inception, the World Partnership Walk has raised more than $20 million across Canada, and more than 60,000 people have taken part. The Aga Khan Foundation has now become the leading philanthropic organization in the world serv- ing central and south Asia and East African countries. A full 100 percent of the sponsorship to the Aga Khan Foundation goes to the projects.

The World Bank and CIDA evaluate these projects and have concluded that the Aga Khan Foundation Canada's stewardship and utilization of donor funds is impeccable. The Aga Khan Foundation is one of the agencies under the aegis of the Aga Khan development net- work, which includes Aga Khan education services, Aga Khan trusts for culture, Aga Khan University and Aga Khan Fund for Economic Development. The Is- maili community around the world takes enormous pride in the work of their leader, His Highness the Aga Khan.

We in Canada derive much comfort and satisfaction in being able to contribute and make a small contribu- tion to this global trust to improve the lives of those in need. This is truly the Canadian way. Our Premier and my colleagues in this House have shown their contin- ued support for this worthy cause, and I would like to take this opportunity to thank them all. DUKE OF EDINBURGH'S AWARD RECIPIENTS V.

Roddick: The Duke of Edinburgh's Award, de- signed with great care by a small team in 1956, is a means to encourage and motivate all young people between the ages of 14 and 25 in areas of community service right through to physical recreation. In the words of our Lieutenant-Governor, these remarkable words teach the wisdom of toughening the body, in- spiring the heart, enlightening the mind and polishing the precious human spirit. This is not a competition but rather a test of the in- dividual's self-reliance.

The program includes children with special needs, providing them with a great oppor- tunity to reach for their best. On June 3 there will be a ceremony held in Tsawwassen at South Delta Secon- dary school to award bronze medals to young people from the lower mainland. I'm proud to say that Delta has had its fair share of Duke of Edinburgh achievers, including last year's gold medallists, Bren Farrish, Jessy Dhillon, Cole Anderson, Scott Fattedad, Blake Jamieson, Jeremy Lasell and Shafiq Vallani. Recent silver award winners include Ben Linkowich, Ian McLennan and Christina Chamberlain.

I would also to mention Clint Gurniak of the Tsawwassen first nation, who has also won gold and silver awards, and Ruthie Adams, a silver award winner — both from the TFN — who will be receiving their bronze award in June along with Vanessa Nielson, Lisa Hislop, Kirin Jacobson, Suzanne Pereira and Alyssia Premji. Con- gratulations to all participants and their mentors. Your contribution is exemplary. RONALD LOU-POY I. Chong: It is my pleasure today to introduce the University of Victoria's newest chancellor, Dr. Ronald Lou-Poy, QC.

Last November members of the Univer- sity of Victoria convocation, including alumni and fac- ulty, cast their ballots and elected Ron as their ninth chancellor, succeeding Dr. Norma Mickelson. Ron's three-year term began on January 1, and the official installation takes place next Tuesday morning on June

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6893 3. However, he has already been very busy attending meetings and many functions. Ron is a graduate of Victoria College, UVic's forerun- ner, and he is a senior partner in the Victoria law firm of Crease Harmon and Co.

He has had extensive involve- ment with the university and the broader community, including two terms on the UVic board of governors from '72 to '74 and from 1992 to '95, and as an original director of the UVic Innovation and Development Corp. [1420] Under Ron's direction, the Lou-Poy family has been instrumental in spearheading many local fundraising efforts. In particular, their support in the construction of much-needed child care space at UVic led to its be- ing named the Harry Lou-Poy Infant and Toddler Child Care Centre, named for Ron Lou-Poy's father.

Within the broader community, Ron has held various positions with the Kiwanis Club, the United Way, Victoria Crime Stoppers, the Victoria McPherson Foundation and the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association. He is a Queen's Counsel, an honorary citizen of Victoria, a recipi- ent of the community service award from the Canadian Bar Association, B.C. Branch, and last year received the Queen's Golden Jubilee medal. Almost three years ago Ron Lou-Poy was granted an honorary doctorate of law from the University of Victoria.

While Ronald Lou-Poy credits much of his success to the example set by his father, he has certainly distin- guished himself through many selfless years of com- mitment to the community to help make Victoria a better place to live. Ron assumes the role as the ninth chancellor for the university, but he represents much more. He becomes the first-ever Chinese person to be bestowed this honour at this university.

As the titular head of the university who confers degrees and as a m e m b e r o f U V i c ' s s e n a t e a n d b o a r d o f g o v e r n o r s , w e are privileged to have such a distinguished gentleman serve as chancellor, and we wish him much success. Mr. Speaker: That concludes members' statements. Oral Questions PRIVATIZATION OF B.C. RAIL J. MacPhail: Just days ago the opposition released documents from B.C. Rail that indicated that selling this profitable Crown corporation to Liberal campaign backers could have potentially dire consequences for the economy of this province.

Today we see even more implications of the Premier's now thoroughly broken promise to not sell B.C. Rail. It was revealed today in a newspaper that thousands of well-paid jobs will be sent to other provinces. That's a really innovative eco- nomic strategy, isn't it? Can the Premier tell us why it's good for the taxpay- ers to export more than a thousand jobs and millions of dollars of profits to Alberta and Quebec? Hon. J. Reid: Our B.C. Rail initiative is all about jobs. It's all about prosperity. It's all about sustainabil- ity. It's all about the heartlands. It's about the industries in the heartlands.

Right now we have industries that are trucking their product to Alberta to put on rail in Alberta instead of jobs here in B.C. We want sustainable…. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Let us hear the answer, or we will terminate question period right now. Hon. J. Reid: We want sustainable, long-term rail service in British Columbia, and we are looking at the private sector to be an operating partner to be able to service our industry and service our communities. LIQUOR SALES AND IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS M.

Hunter: As the Solicitor General knows, pub and bar owners in Nanaimo and in other parts of the prov- ince are unhappy with new identification requirements that were introduced last December. Although the le- gal drinking age is 19, licensees must request two pieces of identification if a patron appears to be under the age of 25. Can the Solicitor General explain why these regulations were introduced and what enforce- ment of them has achieved? Hon. R.

Coleman: Last December when we brought in the new regulations for liquor and eliminated 2,500 to 3,000 silly regulations in the liquor sector, we told industry and we told the public that we were going to concentrate on four public safety issues: service to mi- nors, over-service, overcrowding and illegal liquor in our establishments. Part of that is an initiative to ask our operators to ask for two pieces of ID, which was done in consultation with the industry. What we have found, through test- ing, is that we weren't getting the compliance rates we were looking for.

We have not done any more than warn the industry to improve its role and do its job better. We make no apologies for having rules that say we will now enforce minors in licensed premises. We will go forward and work with the industry so that compliance goes up and the need for inspections goes down. [1425] PRIVATIZATION OF B.C. RAIL J. MacPhail: The exporting of good jobs isn't the only new piece in the Premier's broken promise puzzle that came out today. The leaked briefing document also shows that after this government hands over B.C.

Rail to its campaign backers at CN, customers who now ship their goods through B.C. Rail will pay more — lots more, more than 600 percent more — when this government privatizes and gives it away to CN.

6894 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 It's starting to become even clearer why there's so much interest in scooping up B.C. Rail from the Liberal campaign backers: eliminate the competition and be able to charge 600 percent more. Who wouldn't sign up for such a deal? Will the Premier commit today that he will stop the sell-off of this vital provincial asset to Liberal campaign backers and actually keep the promise that he made in the last election to keep B.C. Rail in public hands? Hon. J.

Reid: It's unfortunate that the member oppo- site has not been paying attention to the process we're involved in with B.C. Rail. We have been working with communities and we have been working with shippers to develop an RFP document that is public. The RFP document clearly states that what we're looking for is a proposal that would address competitiveness, sustain- ability, growth opportunities and community-specific issues. We have not received any proposals to date. This has just gone out. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question. J.

MacPhail: Well, this is becoming a theme of this government: "Oh, it's just an idea we're floating. Relax." Isn't it interesting? Maybe the government would like to say that all these leaked documents are wrong. Just stand up and say it. Here's a chance, because the big- gest customer that B.C. Rail has right now is the forest industry. We may have known, in our absence last week, that several mills shut down in the province, to add to other mills that shut down in the weeks previous.

It's the forest industry, which is already reeling from this gov- ernment's inability to solve the softwood lumber dis- pute, that will pay the vast majority of the 600 percent increase in shipping costs if this goes to CN Rail. Is there any MLA from the north or the interior that will stand up for their forest-dependent communities? Can the Premier tell this House what analysis he has done to determine the effect of this more than 600 per- cent increase on the forest industry? Will he release that information — that economic study that I'm sure he's done — to the House today? Hon. J.

Reid: The nonsense that is being discussed h e r e i s f r u s t r a t i n g t o b e a b l e t o a d d r e s s . W e w a n t i n - vestment in B.C. Rail that will be sustainable, that will meet the needs of industry and that meets the needs of communities. It is the industry and communities that are saying that the status quo is not acceptable. It is the industry and communities that we have been working wi t h i n o rd e r t o c o m e u p wi t h t hi s R F P , and i t i s t hi s RFP that is our basis for evaluating proposals. MANAGEMENT OF COQUIHALLA HIGHWAY J.

Kwan: Thousands of people in the interior are attending meetings and organizing against the gov- ernment's sell-off of the Coquihalla tolls. The Kamloops and Kelowna Chambers of Commerce are just two of the voices of business who have condemned the plan. Ron Cannan, president of the Okanagan mainline mu- nicipal association, says the sell-off is "totally unfair and discriminatory." Even Paul Mitchell, head of the Coquihalla coalition and a Liberal who gave $4,600 to the Liberal election machine, is asking: "Where are the MLAs?

They should be pounding their fists on the ta- ble." Today the mayor of Kamloops stated that the sell-off of the Coquihalla tolls doesn't meet "the heartlands test." To the Minister of Transportation: will she admit today that the sell-off is a bad idea for the interior of B.C. and cancel her plan to impose a permanent toll on the Coquihalla? Will she tell the Minister of Finance to go somewhere else to find the money to pay off his record-breaking deficits? [1430] Hon. J.

Reid: When I travelled around this province for the first year, I heard, from all those people who were mentioned as well as all the communities, that investment in transportation infrastructure was critical for economic development around this province. I heard from all the MLAs representing all these areas that transportation infrastructure in their area was ab- solutely necessary. We have taken steps to be able to look at an increase in fuel tax that is only partially the solution.

We are looking at being able to provide investment in infra- structure, and in this area alone — in the central area of the province — we're looking at $350 million worth of infrastructure improvements over three years. The Co- quihalla provides benefits if we are able to get the op- erator to maintain and rehabilitate the highway. We have benefits for greater use of the highway, better rehabilitation and investment in that highway, as well as frequent-traveller passes. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J.

Kwan: The mayor of Kamloops has identified a simple heartlands test where a government initiative must "be in keeping with the expressed aspirations of the heartlands." Community and business leaders throughout the interior say the sell-off of the Coqui- halla tolls does not meet the test, but the government isn't listening. There might be hope, though. In a letter to the local paper, the member from Kamloops begs readers to try to get past the emotion — that it is a proposal only. The letter makes every effort to put the government's plan in the best light and attacks the previous administra- tion.

But it does raise the following question. To the Min- ister of Transportation: given that she isn't prepared to listen to municipal leaders and business leaders, will she commit today that if the local MLAs tell her that the sell-off of the Coquihalla tolls to pay for the Finance

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6895 minister's record-breaking deficit doesn't meet the heartlands test, she will kill it? Hon. J. Reid: As we look at investing in transporta- tion infrastructure — which is what this is about; as we look at being able to provide benefits to areas, to users, to local residents, to frequent travellers; as we look at the fact that 81 percent… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Reid: …of the people using the Coquihalla are not from the local area; and as we look at the return to the taxpayer…. We have a bottom line.

If we do not exceed our bot- tom line, we will not be going ahead with this deal. It will make sense, and it will provide the benefits we need. B.C. RAIL STAFF LAYOFFS P. Nettleton: Back to B.C. Rail. I'm eager to read the Prince George newspapers tomorrow to see what kind of empty assurances the member for Prince George North will give this one. CN Rail's briefing note would see this private opera- tor cut 70 percent of B.C. Rail jobs. That comes out to more than 1,200 jobs — hundreds alone in Prince George. That's a huge blow for rail-dependent commu- nities, including Prince George.

To the minister: does her government support this gutting of B.C. Rail jobs? Or will she disqualify CN Rail from winning the bid, since her own request for pro- posals — to which she made reference earlier — states that any private operator must show how employees in communities would benefit and not be adversely af- fected by this form of privatization? [1435] Hon. J. Reid: There has been no proposal that's been received by CN. There's been no proposal received by anyone. We've put out the RFP, and interested parties will seek to be qualified.

From there they'll put propos- als in, which will be evaluated according to the criteria outlined in the RFP request. UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DESIGNATION T. Bhullar: M y q u e s t i o n i s t o t h e M i n i s t e r o f A d - vanced Education. Many of the educational institutions around the province bear the name "University Col- lege." Would it not make more sense to designate them as one or the other, as they were previously desig- nated? Hon. S.

Bond: University colleges in this province provide a broad spectrum of opportunities for students — everything from career and trades training to uni- versity degrees — and now under the Degree Authori- zation Act, university colleges have the ability to grant applied master's degrees. They're outstanding institutions in the province. They provide a broad opportunity of choice for our students, and we think they have an important role to play in post-secondary education in this province. REGULATION OF FLOATPLANE LANDINGS B.

Suffredine: Floatplane operators in this province have concerns about why it is difficult to access lakes in B.C. parks. Those pilots have traditionally provided observations for free that help park officials monitor activities in the parks and protect the environment. Now they have to negotiate landings on a region-by- region basis. This is inconvenient, it discourages explo- ration of our parks and back country, and it increases risk to the environment. Can the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection tell us why we have this rule and what's being done to make floatplane landings more practical? Hon. J.

Murray: I had the opportunity to meet with representatives of the B.C. Floatplane Association last month, and they raised this issue, which relates to a regulation dating from 1990 that hasn't been amended at this point despite ongoing discussions between the association and government over the past decade. I'm pleased to report that in that meeting, we did agree on a process and a time line for reviewing the regulation and addressing those concerns by the end of the year.

I'd like to reassure the member that I'm very aware that responsible floatplane owners can be extra sets of eyes and ears that help to protect our parks. I, as well as the rest of government, appreciate that role that they do play. [End of question period.] Petitions R.

Harris: I'd like to take this opportunity to present a petition to the House, signed by 5,000 people from the Terrace-Kitimat area, requesting that the Ministry of Transportation put in place a stronger regime of highway maintenance that is more proactive and has greater monitoring and enforcement requirements so that our highway system is maintained at the highest and safest standards. Tabling Documents Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, I have the honour to present the annual report of the British Columbia Leg- islative Library for the year 2002. Hon. G. Collins: In accordance with

section 11(2) of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act, I'm announcing a change in accounting policy for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2003. In fiscal year 2001-02 the province qualified for and received federal equalization payments of $226 million.

6896 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 This receipt was recorded on a cash basis because de- tailed information was unavailable at budget time to record it on the accrual basis. This was the first federal equalization payment made to British Columbia since 1962. Equalization payments are based on a complex eco- nomic model and calculation, including changes in population and economic conditions for the previous three-year period.

During fiscal 2002-03 additional de- tailed information became available to us from the fed- eral government, which now permits the recording of the federal equalization funds using the accrual method of accounting, consistent with other types of provincial revenue and generally accepted accounting principles. Estimates of the accrual basis for equalization pay- ments were first disclosed in the quarterly reports of the Ministry of Finance in the fiscal year 2002-03.

This change in accounting policy is made public in accor- dance with the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act as described in the document I'll table momentarily. [1440] The effect of the change is that the bottom line for 1999- 2000 will be increased by $125.286 million, and the bottom lines for 2001-02 and 2002-03 will be decreased by $67.533 million and $57.753 million, respectively. It's important to note that this change in accounting policy does not affect the results reported under the Balanced Budget and Min- isterial Accountability Act.

The Balanced Budget and Min- isterial Accountability Act reporting must be based on the accounting policies used in the estimates of the same year. Therefore, the current

summary bottom line in the public accounts will be $57.753 million more than that reported in the ministerial accountability report and will include a reconciliation. All future federal equalization receipts will be recorded on the accrual basis according to generally accepted accounting principles. Additional information about the federal equaliza- tion program may be obtained from pages 45 to 48 of the first quarterly report for April to June of 2002, which is published by the Ministry of Finance. That quarterly report is also available electronically on the ministry website. I table the report. Motions without Notice ADOPTION OF GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

SCHEDULE FOR MAY 26 TO MAY 29, 2003 Hon. G. Collins: I move that the

schedule in the hands of the Clerk, as well as the opposition, be adopted for the conclusion of the government business for the week of May 26 to May 29, 2003. [That the following

schedule be adopted for the conclusion of government business for the week of May 26 to May 29, 2003. Monday: 2:45-4:45 Health Services Com. Of Supply 4:45-9:00 Bills 40, 45 2nd Reading

Section A: 5:00-9:00 MOS Mental Com. Of Supply H e a l t h M O S I n t . , L o n g T e r m H o m e C a r e Tuesday: 10:00-12:00 Bills 50, 51 2nd Reading 2:45-3:45 Bills 64, 66, 58 2nd Reading 3:45-4:30 Bill 61 2nd Reading 4:30-6:00 Bills 40, 45 Committee

Section A: 10:00-6:00 Health Services Com. Of Supply Wednesday: 2:45-4:30 Bills 61, 66 Committee 4:30-9:00 Office of the Com. Of Supply P r e m i e r V o t e 1 a n d F i n a l S u p p l y ( 1 - 7 ) Thursday: 10:00-11:00 Bills 50, 51 Committee 11:00-12:00 Bills 58, 64 Committee 2:45-6:00 Bills 29, 39 Committee] Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition wishes to speak on this. It's not a debatable…. J. MacPhail: I just want to make sure that this is not unanimous and that we'll be able to call a vote on it. Mr. Speaker: Yes, we'll call a vote on the motion. The motion in front of you is the

schedule of bills to be passed for the remainder of this week. I'm sure all members have a copy. Hon. members, the question before the House is adoption of the

schedule of busi- ness for the week of May 26 to May 29 inclusive. [1445] Motion approved on the following division: YEAS — 69 Falcon Coell L. Reid Halsey-Brandt Hawkins Whittred Cheema Hansen J. Reid Bruce Santori van Dongen Barisoff Roddick Wilson Masi Lee Hagen Murray Plant Campbell Collins Clark Bond de Jong Nebbeling Stephens Abbott Neufeld Coleman Chong Jarvis Anderson Orr Harris Nuraney Brenzinger Belsey Bell Long Chutter Mayencourt Trumper Johnston Bennett R. Stewart Hayer Christensen Krueger McMahon Bray Locke Nijjar Bhullar Wong Bloy Suffredine MacKay Cobb K. Stewart Lekstrom Brice Sultan Hamilton Sahota Hawes Kerr Manhas Hunter

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6897 NAYS — 3 Nettleton MacPhail Kwan Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call Committee of Supply for con- tinued debate on the estimates of the Ministry of Health Services. [1450-1455] Committee of Supply The House in Committee of Supply B; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:58 p.m. ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF HEALTH SERVICES (continued) On vote 29: ministry operations, $10,038,097,000 (continued). J. MacPhail: We left off going through health au- thority by health authority, and we were just about to deal with the Fraser health authority.

I have a question to ask the minister — maybe a couple of questions — about the recent court decision regarding health au- thorities. As the minister knows, last week while we were in our ridings working, Justice Macaulay of the Supreme Court of B.C. issued a ruling on whether health au- thorities were meeting their obligations in being pub- licly accountable. The complaint was brought forward by the Hospital Employees Union, and it was ruled upon last week when we were absent.

It is timely now in the context of us trying to find out information from health authorities from the minister, but also the public accessibility of the minister of the health authorities. [1500] Let me read the key quote from this decision. The PHSA, or provincial health services authority…. Even the judge is using the short form. It is the sixth — for lack of a better term — health authority that covers all tertiary care services in the province. Here is what the judge said: "The functions of the provincial health ser- vices authority are administrative and advisory.

The minister remains legally and politically responsible. The minister" — and he means the Minister of Health Services — "sets the applicable provincial guidelines, not the provincial health services authority. The pro- vincial health services authority was required to de- velop its redesign plan in accordance with guidelines provided by the minister." Essentially, Mr. Chair, this decision would counter any of the Health minister's claims that he can avoid a question or dodge answers by placing responsibility on the health authorities.

Clearly, this decision says that the minister is responsible for guidelines, approves their plans, and as the judge pointed out, the govern- ment — the minister — remains politically and legally responsible. This, I think, warrants some clarification when the following quotes are considered from the ministry website, so this is advice that I'm giving to the minister and asking him how he reacts.

Here's what the Ministry of Health Services website says: "Health authorities have the responsibility for de- livering health services for their overall populations, including acute, continuing care, public health and men- tal health." Second quote from the ministry website: "Within the regionalized system of health care in the province, the Ministry of Health Services is responsible for the requirements, conditions and policies within which health authorities manage their services and sup- ports. Health authorities are responsible for determining how best to provide a range of services and supports….

Health authorities are responsible for outcomes." I would argue, given this court decision of last week, that the description on the website is now inaccurate and that it should change to reflect what the court deci- sion said, which is that the minister is accountable le- gally and politically. Will the website be changed? Hon. C. Hansen: First of all, to address the issue of the open board meetings that was included in that. All of the health authorities have had open board meet- ings. It is a requirement in the legislation, the Health Authorities Act.

Certainly, the Attorney General minis- try as well as the Ministry of Health Services are re- viewing the court decision so that we can learn from it with regard to what an appropriate

interpretation of the requirement is, and we will be following up on that with the health authorities. On the other point that the member raises around the accountability of the minister, what is on the web- site and what is in the judge's ruling are certainly not in any way inconsistent. I have made it quite clear — in fact, we had this discussion when we were in the mid- dle of Health estimates about two weeks ago — that I take responsibility. I am responsible for the activities that fall under my ministry and flow from my ministry, and some of those responsibilities are, in fact, delegated.

We have dele- gated the operational and management responsibilities to our various health authorities, but that in no way diminishes the overall accountability of the Minister of Health Services. J. MacPhail: What about what the website says? The two quotes I read out from the website are in contradic- tion to the court decision. Hon. C. Hansen: I don't see them as contradictions. We have set up a framework whereby the health au- thorities are responsible for management and opera- tions, but we do hold them accountable.

We've put in place the budget controls around how they spend moneys, but we have also put in place the accountabil- ity and performance measures so that we can ascertain

6898 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 that they are, in fact, achieving the desired outcomes with the way they are managing their affairs. At the end of the day, we want to let the managers manage — we will get much better results if we do that — but that does not diminish the accountability I have for the overall operations of the health authorities. I think it's fair to say that in this very complex organiza- tion known as health care delivery, with a $10 billion budget and 100-plus staff that work to make this system work, the Minister of Health Services can't do every- thing.

You know, he or she has to delegate, and that's exactly what we've done in this case. Therefore, the wording in the website I don't think is inconsistent. [1505] J. MacPhail: All right. I'm not going to pursue this. I f t h e m i n i s t e r s a y s h e ' s c o m p l e t e l y u n a f f e c t e d b y t h e court decision, that's very interesting.

But the first quote I read said: "Health authorities" — t h i s i s f r o m the website — "have the responsibility for delivering health services for their overall populations, including acute, continuing care, public health and mental health." The quote from the judgment is that the minis- ter remains legally and politically responsible. That's directly contrary to what the website says. The minister shakes his head.

I guess we'll leave it up to the public to decide whether he's going to be unmoved by the decision, but certainly it seems to me that a statement saying health authorities have the re- sponsibility for delivering health services is directly contradictory to what the judge said. Hon. C. Hansen: I was waiting for a specific ques- tion there. We will certainly take advice from the ruling, but I don't see it as inconsistent in any way that I will not shirk my overall responsibility for the way the health system works.

The policy framework is certainly dic- tated by the provincial Ministry of Health Services, so the health authorities have to operate within that framework, but we have to allow the managers to manage those affairs and deliver a good health care delivery system in this province. Mr. Chair, before I turn it back to the Leader of the Opposition, I ask leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members Hon. C. Hansen: I'm actually very pleased to wel- come a group of students here today from Crofton House School in the riding of Vancouver-Quilchena.

There are 40 grade 4 students from the school, along with five adults. Their teacher, Mrs. McGrath, I think, is here. I hope the House will make them very welcome. Debate Continued J. MacPhail: Well, one of the reasons why I'm pursu- ing this so vigorously is exactly because of the discus- sions we've had in the Health estimates. To date, this is perhaps one of the few, if only, places where any light can be shone on what goes on in the Ministry of Health Services.

I'm pursuing this with the minister because just the very last discussion that we had, which was in the hours prior to us going to our ridings for a week, here's what the Minister of State for Mental Health said: "If this member or her colleague is concerned about missing funds, they should report to the CEO of the appropriate health authority." I would hate to suggest how many times in this Leg- islature we've been told that the health authorities are in charge.

That was the most recent example of it, on Thursday last, when the Minister of State for Mental Health shirked his responsibility to the health authori- ties. I would also quote from a decision…. Actually, this is a very interesting decision from Justice Macaulay. It says over on page 30: "In my view, the minister has not delegated any of his duties." The justice goes on to say that the reason why there needs to be…. "While

section 8 specifically limits closed meetings to circumstances where the board considers it desirable to avoid disclosure of information 'to protect the interests of a person or the public interest….'" That statement shows, in my view, a cynical favouring of the interest of the bureaucracy over that of the public as well as a stunning disregard for the legislative intent behind

section 8. "Mr. Bruce" — I'm sorry; Mr. Bruce, I think, is coun- sel for the health authorities — "proffered his opinion mainly on the question of public consultation, an issue not addressed by

section 8, I note that he referred ex- pressly to the presence of the public in the passage quoted." [1510] This whole decision is rife with the fact that (1) the Ministry of Health Services, and therefore the provin- cial government, cannot shirk its responsibility as be- ing the authority, both politically and legally, for health services — it is their responsibility and their responsi- bility alone — and (2) that there has to be public disclo- sure of these matters.

How would the minister respond to what the Minis- ter of State for Mental Health told my colleague from Vancouver–Mount Pleasant and me to do — that he's not going to answer the questions and that we should go to the health authorities? The health authorities aren't here. They're not legally or politically responsi- ble, according to this court decision, and they're under questionable disregard of the law for lack of public meetings. Hon. C. Hansen: First of all, I think we just have to go back a couple of years.

The legislative requirement for public meetings by health authorities is something that was in place going back probably to when this member was Health minister in the province. That hasn't changed. If you look at what we inherited when we formed government, it was a very mixed approach across the

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6899 province when it came to public meetings. Some health authorities did them regularly. Some did them very, very infrequently. I think the issue is that it was never tested before the courts. It's now been before the courts. We have a deci- sion that we can certainly take some guidance from.

As I mentioned earlier, we are certainly reviewing that court decision, as is the Ministry of Attorney General, to determine what course of action we should take in the future to make sure that our health authorities are, in fact, in compliance with that legislative requirement. I guess the other thing is the amount of detail. We could go into the detail of how each of the health au- thorities is spending its respective funds. We have health authorities that have budgets in excess of a bil- lion dollars each.

We have to rely on their professional- ism and their expertise to make sure that the health care delivery system is structured in a way that meets those concerns. Actually, I could refer the member back to Hansard on May 27, 1997, when she herself said in this House that the health authorities will decide what their priori- ties are. I think that relationship between the health authorities and the ministry has not changed. We still rely on the health authorities to ensure that there is proper delivery at the health authority level.

I may not have all of the answers for every minute detail about how the health authorities are meeting that challenge, but I can certainly try my best to get answers for her to any of her questions. If they're not something we can readily answer with the information we have at our fingertips, I would certainly undertake to get that information for her. J. MacPhail: Isn't it interesting what a difference a legal decision makes.

All of a sudden now the minister is standing up and saying: "Well, nothing's changed since the 1990s." In fact, when he's on the defence from a court decision, he says: "Everything's happening ex- actly the same as it did in the 1990s." What the hell was the big announcement about, about how they were going to do things differently and about how awful it was in the 1990s — how awful, how chaotic it was and expensive?

Now, when faced with a court decision that claims his government isn't being responsible, he says: "Oh, we're not doing anything differently." I don't know why the minister keeps insisting on q u o t i ng b ac k f ro m a t i m e wh e n I was i n g o v e r nm e nt . I've lost a lot of my big memory, but I haven't lost one iota of the excruciating detail of my responsibility. Let me tell the minister that every single health council, every single regional health board, held open, public meetings regularly — painfully so, I might add. They would go on for hours. They were held regularly.

They heard delegation after delegation until there were no more delegations to be heard. In fact, it was his mem- bers in opposition that claimed that was a waste of time. That's what I remember. The difference between 1997 and 2003, six years, is this: at no time did the then government ever claim they were no longer responsible for health care in this province.

What this government has done until now, caught out by a decision, is to say: "Oh, that's the health authorities' problem." In fact, as we ask for detail after detail about mental health, we can't get any details about mental health because that's the regional health authorities' issue. That's what we're told. That's just one example. Is the government examining whether to appeal this decision? Hon. C. Hansen: As I mentioned earlier, this court ruling is being reviewed both by my ministry and by the Ministry of Attorney General, and no decisions have been made. [1515] J.

MacPhail: But the minister's not ruling out an appeal? Hon. C. Hansen: At this stage we certainly have no intention to appeal, and so far no one has come for- ward to me with any reasons why we should. J. MacPhail: Mr. Chair, we were on Fraser health authority when we left last time. Since then there has been a very tragic event, and I know everyone joins in sending condolences to the family of the Herons — both the in-laws and the immediate family — for the murder of two people in Mission Hospital. I do not want to explore the particulars of that inci- dent — not at all.

I think it is a matter that is too fresh and too grievous and too tragic for it to be used in any way in a forum that is a partisan debate. What I do have is all of the articles at the very be- ginning related to that event, but only to bring atten- tion to this — it was actually my first item under the Fraser health authority prior to us leaving — and that is the whole issue of hospital security and privatization o f s e rv i c e s . S o I 'm g o i ng t o p ro c e e d o n t hat b as i s .

B u t it's about the Fraser health authority and the privatiza- tion or contracting-out of security, and in no way am I relating this to the Mission Hospital incident.

It's been my understanding that health authorities around the province for the last six or seven years have had a mix of publicly delivered security and privately delivered security, but that there is a change afoot in the Fraser health authority, that there is going to be a substantial expansion of privately delivered hospital security, that the recommended company to take up the expanded privatization of security is a company called Intercon Security Ltd. and that they are on the verge of getting a five-year contract.

Perhaps the minister could use this as an example of explaining to me how decisions are made around pri- vate delivery of security services in a hospital. What are the qualifications necessary? Hon. C. Hansen: I think the most important point is that when we ensure there are proper security services at any of our facilities, we have to put the interests of the individual patients and the staff first. There is noth-

6900 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 ing that says an in-house security staff provides a bet- ter service in that regard than contracted services. Cer- tainly, when the Fraser health authority went out with their RFP, they set out in that RFP the experience and security benchmarks that would have to be met. In no way does the contracting-out process lead to any com- promise or reduction in the quality or effectiveness of security that our patients and our health care profes- sionals rely on. J. MacPhail: Well, I'm asking for the details behind that assertion.

This is the time to actually provide the details. Does a security company have to have previous health institution experience? [1520] It would be my view that there's a difference be- tween providing security at a data centre and a hospi- tal — that there are many, many different concerns.

I can think of the vast number of people entering and leaving the institution on a regular basis, the arrival of people with mental health disorders who may need to be treated differently than those without mental health disorders, people who are highly medicated, people who should be medicated and aren't, families who are frantic with the urgency of the situation and crime vic- tims coming to the hospital. What are the standards that are set for security at hospitals? I would also think just this, Mr. Chair.

My other area of concern is that people, by virtue of being admitted into a hospital and being in a bed, are in a vulnerable position themselves. Hon. C. Hansen: As I think the member indicated, over the last number of years we've had a mix of both in-house employed security staff and contracted secu- rity staff at our facilities. Just within the Fraser health authority alone, they have private security at Hope, at Chilliwack and at Mission. There are other, much lar- ger hospitals in B.C. that use private security service, including the Children's and Women's Hospital, Rich- mond General and Kelowna General.

Companies that provide private security are re- quired to have comparable training to in-house secu- rity staff used at other facilities. I think what's impor- tant from that is not whether it is an in-house service or whether it is a contracted service. What is important is the training each of those security officers undertakes to make sure they are sensitive to the unique needs of our hospital system. That is true whether it's an in- house service or a contracted-out service. J. MacPhail: What is that training? First of all, has the contract in Fraser health authority been awarded to Intercon security?

What's the value of the contract? What's the nature of the training? Hon. C. Hansen: The Fraser health authority is in the final stages of that particular process of securing a security supplier. That has not yet been finalized, although my understanding is they're fairly close to it. J. MacPhail: Did the RFP require a certain wage level for either management of the services or the em- ployees themselves? Hon. C. Hansen: It would be highly unusual for us to dictate a wage structure to a contractor when we go out for an RFP. J.

MacPhail: It wouldn't be highly unusual to dictate a proportion of administrative costs. That's what I was driving at. What would management be paid versus what the people on the ground would be paid? Will the contract provide the training the current staff now have in non-violent crisis intervention? That's a standard requirement of Workers Compensation Board and health care facilities prior to this contract. Hon. C.

Hansen: The RFP and the final contract which would be signed would specify that the training would have to be comparable to the type of training that is in place for in-house security staff currently. [1525] J. MacPhail: I asked a specific question about non- violent crisis intervention training. Is that required? The reason why I'm asking these questions is that if a com- pany has no previous experience in health care institu- tional security, they may not have experience in non- violent crisis intervention. There are different types of security. So that's why I ask about that specifically. Hon. C.

Hansen: I think the same would be true of an in-house program where individuals may be hired to provide an in-house security service. They, too, would have to go through the kind of training that would be necessary to meet those kinds of circum- stances that might be unique to hospitals. What I've said is that the training that would be required for these contractors would have to be comparable to the kind of training that would be provided to security staff working in an in-house environment. J. MacPhail: Okay. I'll take that.

I asked specifically about the non-violent crisis in- tervention training, so I assume — given the minister's comments and the fact that all health authorities do now directly provide that training — that when this service is contracted out, the training will be expected to be provided by the new security company. Who does the training? When a new company comes in, who does the training of the new guards? Hon. C.

Hansen: It is my understanding that there is a requirement — spelled out in the RFP and the con- tract — that there has to be comparable training and that the supplier would have to ensure that those par- ticular terms are met. But there is not a requirement, necessarily, that it be done in-house. J. MacPhail: What happens when a new security company comes in? What's the training for staff other

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6901 than the security guards in terms of contacting the se- curity company? What procedures are in place for that? [1530] Hon. C. Hansen: That turned out to be a bit more complex than I would have originally thought. Basically, within the security staff in the hospital, they would have supervisors who would be responsi- ble for making sure there is an ongoing relationship with the hospital generally and with the other supervi- sory staff in the hospital.

When it came to emergency situations that had to develop, then obviously there would be an interaction to make sure those needs get met on the urgent basis that may be required, depend- ing on the particular situation. J. MacPhail: Is there any review given to the con- cerns raised by the BCNU last week? I was busy with other things, but I think the B.C. Nurses Union raised some general security issues. What review, if any, is being conducted as a result of those concerns raised? That's why I asked the question. I was just thinking about this.

In our general lives, we have to come into contact with security systems even outside of our health care. But there is always a transition period when there is a new security system put in place, whether it be at your house or your strata council or your kid's school. One has to learn new sys- tems. What happens for that transition period? What, if anything, is the ministry doing to ensure a safe and secure transition? Hon. C. Hansen: I know the member indicated that she didn't want to get into the specific incident that happened, and I think the BCNU's response was with regard to that specific incident.

That is going to become the subject of a coroner's investigation, I believe, and clearly those issues will be looked at as part of that investigation. We want to make sure we learn from that. But I think it's fair to say, if I can speak generally about the level of security we have at different facilities, that if someone is at one of those hospitals that I men- tioned earlier, where there are currently and have been for some time private security firms, they should feel no less safe in those facilities than they should feel in a facil- ity where there is a security service that is provided in- house.

The fact that there are some contracted-out mod- els and that there are some in-house models is not a f a c t o r w h e n i t c o m e s t o m a k i n g s u r e p a t i e n t s a n d health care providers are safe when they're in those facilities. J. MacPhail: I apologize. I didn't realize that the BCNU's concerns were related specifically to that hos- pital. I only leave the minister with this.

While there is a mix now of publicly delivered security services and privately delivered services, my question is about change and how, when there is change — particularly in the area of security services, where notification pro- cedures and alert procedures vary from company to company — the overlap, the transition, is extremely important for the staff of the hospital, the patients in the hospital and the training model as well. I'm not in any way discussing this in the context of whether it's public or private. It's about the change and not falling through the cracks.

Did the minister give me what the surplus or deficit is of the Fraser health authority at the end of fiscal '02- 03? Hon. C. Hansen: Their projected surplus as of March 31 is $25.083 million on a base budget of $1.3 billion. J. MacPhail: Let me just put the minister on notice that I'll be asking a series of questions about contract- ing-out as a result of the proposed settlement not being ratified by health care workers. But I'll do that gener- ally and outside of Fraser health authority. In terms of the targets for the Fraser health author- ity….

I think Riverview Hospital has got its own board and reports to the PHSA, but because the Fraser health authority encompasses geographically the same area as Riverview Hospital, they have a higher target — I as- sume that's the reason — for residents moving from Riverview into selected locations in the communities of the Fraser health authority. That means we're now two months into this fiscal year, where that Fraser health authority is going to have to produce 114 units for Riverview residents. What's the status of that? [1535] Hon. C.

Hansen: When we were discussing the per- formance agreements for other health authorities, the member may recall that there were several health au- thorities that had targets to achieve in the '02-03 year. In the case of Fraser, they had to make progress last year towards achieving their target this year of 114 beds. My understanding is that they are on target, and they expect to be able to meet that objective. Actually, this was just handed to me, and it's…. The allocation of the 114 units in '03-04 is shared with the Vancouver coastal health authority, so it's not specific to Fraser health authority. J.

MacPhail: When they're well on target, like where…. Let's see. We've got ten months left. Are places being built? Are they subsidized units? It will be very interesting to see how those 114 units are pro- duced, given — I would assume, and experience tells us this to be true — that the vast majority of people who leave Riverview want to stay in the lower mainland. So how is that target being met by the shared responsibility between the Vancouver coastal authority and the Fraser health authority? Hon. C.

Hansen: My understanding is that they're now in the final stages of working out their operational agreements between the health authorities with regard to where these beds would be allocated. I am told that

6902 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 in the case of Fraser, they are in the process of develop- ing new facilities and that those facilities will be opera- tional and able to accommodate those requirements within this fiscal year. J. MacPhail: Are they group homes, or are they mini-institutions? Are they subsidized housing with support? [1540] Hon. C. Hansen: They will be achieving their targets through a mix of community beds as well as facilities along the Connolly Lodge model that was recently opened at Riverview, which will ensure they meet their targets. J.

MacPhail: I'm moving to the interior health au- thority now. The last four times I have been into the geographic area covered by the interior health author- ity there has been a discussion, both in the media but also with people I've been meeting at community meet- ings, about the low morale. It started, I think, when there was what some might have determined — this was about a year ago, not quite a year ago — a communications gag put on inte- rior health authority employees so that they were not allowed to speak to the media, and that ran through the system.

There have also been surveys done — granted, it's been done through the unions, the union representatives — about low morale at the interior health authority. The other issue that I heard from the interior health authority was that casual employees were no longer able to access the benefits or that the benefits which would have allowed them to access psychological sup- port services had been eliminated for casual employ- ees. Let's start in reverse order.

Have the benefits for casual employees that would allow them to access up to ten visits a year to a psychologist or a therapist on a family basis been eliminated? Hon. C. Hansen: I'm told that those provisions would be set out as part of the collective agreements and that those provisions within the collective agree- ments would be followed. J. MacPhail: As the minister may know, and we're going to get to this in a minute, there were lots of seg- ments of the collective agreement that were made null and void by Bill 29.

I was told that as of November of this past year, casual employees, including nurses who sometimes work more hours than regular ones but who are classified as casual, no longer have access to employee assistance. Employee assistance is the term I'm using. Is that true? Hon. C. Hansen: I think the member's very much aware of the changes that were made as a result of Bill 29 from a year ago. It's my understanding that there is nothing in those changes that would affect these types of benefits for casual employees. J.

MacPhail: Well, maybe I'll have to ask a question in question period after we hear back from the employ- ees who brought this to our attention, then, if the min- ister…. I'm not in any way suggesting the minister is misleading the House. He may be giving the informa- tion that he has available, but it was pretty much a given, when I was up there last December, that those benefits had been cut. Here's why they were con- cerned.

It was because there is, as you know, stress in change, stress in a shifting workload, and the casual workers — particularly the casual nurses — no longer had access to any sort of employee assistance benefits and therefore were quite troubled by that. What is the status, then, of the interior health au- thority in terms of employee relations? Can the minis- ter describe for us what labour relations are in place, particularly in the interior health authority where mat- ters such as what employees would call a communica- tions gag are on and there is also low morale? [1545] Hon. C.

Hansen: I would like to address this issue that she raises about instructions to the staff regarding their relationship with the media. There is no gag or- der, and there never was one. What happened at a fa- cility in Salmon Arm, I believe it was, was that some of the front-line staff made a decision to go directly to the media rather than talking to their own supervisors about a concern they had around patient care.

The message that was sent out to all employees is that they had a professional obligation to make sure that issues around patient care were, in fact, discussed with their supervisors before they talked to media. I think that's a fair request, and I certainly stand by the instructions that went out from the interior health authority in that regard. On the other area with regard to just general morale issues, I think we have been through some change.

As I have travelled through the interior health authority myself over this last two years, I get great feedback from front-line staff, who tell me the changes that were being made are long overdue and that, in some cases, they're getting more job satisfaction because they can focus more on the areas of specialty they were trained for. I also appreciate the fact that some staff may be troubled by those changes, because I think it's part of human nature to be anxious about change.

But as we know, in the health care system, change is absolutely essential if we're going to restructure the system in a way that's truly sustainable and does a better job in the future of meeting patient needs. J. MacPhail: Actually, I understand. I know the in- cident the minister is talking about — about a gag. That was in April of this year, but that's only the latest inci- dent. I actually first heard about the gag…. I'm just raising the issue. I have no idea whether it's accurate or

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6903 not, but I first heard about the media gag order in No- vember of 2002 from the interior health authority, and it was while I was visiting the Royal Inland Hospital in Kamloops. The latest incident that the minister right- fully describes as the Salmon Arm matter in April was just the latest incident. Is there any ranking of best practices amongst the health authorities? The reason why I ask this is that there are certain areas, it seems to me — just anecdo- tally — where there are troubled practices and best practices.

For instance, I would say that in the interior health authority, there are troubled labour relations practices. In the northern health authority, the physi- cian relationship, physician–health authority, seems troubled. By virtue of other areas not being mentioned, they have better practices. What best practices are shared amongst health authorities on matters…? Let's start with matters of personnel. Hon. C. Hansen: First of all, I think some of her in- formation may be a little bit out of date when she talks about relationships with physicians in the northern health authority.

I would say that today, we have probably the best working relationship between the health authorities and the ministry and our northern doctors that we've ever had in the last five or six years. It's not to say there are not still some challenges and some issues we have to resolve, but I'm getting great feedback from doctors across the north with regard to the new rural subsidiary agreement we announced in February. When it comes to employee relations generally, there is a council of VPs of human resources that gets together on a regular basis.

I think this is one of the advantages of having the six health authorities — that those officials that have responsibility for different as- pects can actually meet on a regular basis and learn from one another's experiences and innovations. There is also a leadership council that meets on a regular ba- sis, including senior ministry staff and the CEOs of the health authorities. [1550] The work of the HEABC has changed fairly signifi- cantly over the last little while because of the fact that there are now just six of the health authorities they have to relate to.

I know when we had our discussion two weeks ago with regard to nursing, I talked about the council of senior nurses in the province that meets on a regular basis. I think we talked then about the work that's be- ing done around the recommendations of the CNAC, the Canadian Nursing Advisory Committee. I think there's a lot that's happening at different lev- els, including the ongoing relationship between shop stewards and supervisors and managers at the local level.

I know we canvassed some of that previously, but there's certainly a lot of work that's being done to try to make sure that human resources, in a very large and complex health care organization, are managed and that we can ensure that the issues that are of con- cern to staff get brought to the forefront. J. MacPhail: What role does the Health Employers Association of B.C. play in all of that? Hon. C. Hansen: As the member knows, the HEABC is there to provide collective bargaining services to a range of health employers, which includes the six health authorities.

They are obviously by far the largest employers within the health sector. They have ongoing training that is provided both provincially and regionally to VPs of human resources and other managers who have human resource respon- sibilities throughout the province. They monitor for best practices around the province so that we can cer- tainly learn from experiences in one region and apply those to others to ensure that those get met. In addition to that, HEABC serves on the OHSAH board with re- gard to occupational health and safety. That's just a few of the areas they're involved with. J.

MacPhail: I heard something last week. Is Gary Moser, the head of HEABC, retiring? Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, that's correct. J. MacPhail: I want to just take a very brief moment to go on record about Mr. Moser and to wish him a happy retirement. I assumed he was younger than me, so I'm upset he's retiring. He and I started out together. He was my nemesis, and I'm hoping he'll say the same thing. We were to- g e t he r whe n I was a re p at t he B . C . G o v e rnm e nt E m - ployees Union and he was with a group that was then called GERB, Government Employee Relations Bureau. He was an extremely tough nemesis.

The problem was that he was also fair, which made us upset as well. Also, he had an ability to negotiate and couldn't be bamboozled, which made us even more furious. We will miss Mr. Moser. I hope I'm not ruining his retirement by praising him — but I'm damning you with faint praise, Gary, I want you to know — and I do wish him all the best in his retirement. Will the HEABC continue to play a strong role in assisting…?

Well, let me ask this question: what role does the HEABC play in these coming days after the collapse of the recent round of collective bargaining that led to a rejection vote by the health care workers? [1555] Hon. C. Hansen: I think the HEABC has an ongoing responsibility around assisting with the evolution of collective agreements and the management of collec- tive agreements and providing advice to the 400-some- odd different employers that bargain under that um- brella. That work goes on.

I think the agreement that went out for ratification by the health facilities sector unions was a proposal that was brought to us initially by the unions. They then took it out for ratification. My understanding is that the unions recommended accep- tance of it. Their membership voted it down by 59 per- cent. So from our perspective, we have some responsi-

6904 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 bilities to get costs under control in the health sector, and we're back to plan A. We have to move on. So there is certainly nothing now…. Now that the union membership themselves have rejected that, the HEABC goes on with its normal business, preparing for the next round of collective bargaining and dealing with some of the collective bargaining

interpretation issues that are before them on an ongoing basis. J. MacPhail: Y e s . I d i d n ' t m e a n t o l e a p f o r w a r d . I actually have a couple of questions about that. The m i n i s t e r i s m e r e l y r e p l y i n g t o m y q u e s t i o n s , b u t I didn't mean to leap forward out of order. I just wanted to know about the overall policy of the interior health authority. I have one other area to explore on the inte- rior health authority, and then we'll return to that issue of collective bargaining.

The interior health authority has a consultant, as I understand it, that's looking at surgical services. The consultant will report on where best to spend funds on surgical operations. What's the status of that, please? Hon. C. Hansen: This actually goes back to a dis- cussion that we had, I think, two weeks ago around the whole surgical review for the province that is be- ing led by the PHSA.

But each of the health authori- ties is involved in that, and the interior health author- ity is in fact probably further ahead than some of the other regional-based health authorities on moving forward with that surgical review.

The way it's described to me here is: "The review will examine the effectiveness of the present system, develop an integrated system of surgical services across the interior health authority, review the level of self-sufficiency in hospitals and develop a physician supply plan." So each of the health authorities, I'm sure, is taking a different approach to how to achieve that end objective. Some are using the services of out- side consultants, and some of them may be developing that with their own in-house staff. J. MacPhail: And is it completed? Hon. C. Hansen: Not yet. J. MacPhail: And the time frame?

The minister says it's being done under the auspices of the PHSA, so will that study be shared with other health authorities? Hon. C. Hansen: There are in fact six processes un- derway here. Each of the five regional health authori- ties has its own independent surgical reviews that it's undertaking. They're obviously talking to each other, and the different executive members — team members — are comparing notes as they move forward on that.

The PHSA is looking at the entire province to make sure that is consistent and integrated across British Columbia and that we can meet those challenges across health authority boundaries. The goal is to have the PHSA's surgical review completed by the end of this fiscal year. [H. Long in the chair.] J. MacPhail: I'm moving to the northern health au- thority now. It was the northern health authority that got coverage…. It was the first time I noticed about their closed meetings.

When the minister says that all health authorities have had open meetings, the northern health authority did all of its business behind closed doors except to allow for public delegations to come and present. But there was no business conducted in the open — none of it. Has the northern health authority changed that? [1600] Hon. C. Hansen: Every board meeting held in the northern health authority has had a public component. There have been meetings held in May, June, September and November.

There was a board meeting with a public component in Prince George in January of 2003, and there is one taking place in Dawson Creek today, May 26. As I mentioned earlier, we are certainly reviewing the judge's ruling with regard to the

interpretation as to what's required. We will certainly be learning from that. J. MacPhail: But Mr. Chair, come on. The minister has to be a little bit more forthright than that. The pub- lic component of the northern health authority's meet- ings has been to finish all of their business in camera and then open up the door and say: "Hey, public, if you want to make a presentation to us, come on in and you can make a presentation, and we'll listen." That's the public component of the meeting. Virtually everything e l s e i s d e c i d e d b e h i n d c l o s e d d o o r s , i n c a m e r a .

T h a t ' s what the court case was about. It's disingenuous — I will say nicely — of the minis- ter to somehow suggest there's a public component to the meeting, and therefore any requests for open meet- ings are not needed. I think what the public wants is to observe the business being conducted by the health authority. Has the NHA…? Well, it's in Dawson Creek now, so will it have its business meeting in public? Hon. C. Hansen: As I indicated earlier, the court ruling is one that we are reviewing and trying to make sure we have an

interpretation of that provision in the Health Professions Act that reflects the advice that has come from the justice. We wish to make sure that hap- pens. I can't tell you exactly today whether or not that has led to changes in tonight's meeting. That ruling obviously was very current. Health is a very large and complex structure in this province. We have to make sure that there is an oppor- tunity for appropriate business to be conducted in public and appropriate business to be conducted in camera. As I mentioned, we will be reviewing the judge's decision to make sure our

interpretation of the act properly reflects the advice that comes from that ruling. J. MacPhail: What's the review mechanism for de- termining whether the geographic size of a health au- thority is appropriate?

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6905 Hon. C. Hansen: In the fall of 2001 we set out with a fairly extensive review both of where population-based centres were and what was an appropriate critical mass to constitute a health authority. In the past we had some health authorities that had as few, I believe, as 3,000 people in them, which didn't really provide for effective oversight and governance. In the case of the north, we looked at both the geo- graphic expanse as well as the population density.

One of the solutions to try to get the best of both worlds in there was to structure the health service delivery areas. Each of these very large regions is also broken down into regional components to make sure that we don't lose sight of the regional interests as well. J. MacPhail: Is there any review of that, or is it now carved in stone? Hon. C. Hansen: We actually undertook review. There have been some slight amendments to bounda- ries since they were first announced, particularly around the area in Bella Coola and Bella Bella, which had originally been in the interior health authority.

We started looking at referral patterns specifically and ge- ography. It made more sense for that to be tied in with Vancouver coastal, which was where that move was made. [1605] We're certainly open to suggestions from individu- als around the province as to how we can make sure that those health authority boundaries best meet re- gional needs. To date, there are no changes that are under active consideration But certainly, if there were i s s u e s t o b e b r o u g h t f o r w a r d , I w o u l d g i v e i t m y f u l l attention. J.

MacPhail: The last general question on health authorities: what's the status of the aboriginal health councils? Hon. C. Hansen: This is one that I may need to get some specific advice on, which I don't have right here in the chamber with me. If the member would like to go on to another question, I'll be pleased to come back to it as soon as I get that information. J. MacPhail: Yes. Well, let's turn, then, to the gov- ernment's recent proposal with the health care workers unions — and it's not just the HEU; there are other un- ions at the table as well — and the rejection of that proposal by those members.

I had looked at that closely. I only talked to a couple of members, working people, who actually participated in that vote, so it was mostly through the media that I followed that. I think, certainly from the media commentary, there's general consensus emerging that one of the reasons the gov- ernment's recent proposal was rejected by health care workers was that there wasn't enough trust the gov- ernment would keep the word and hold to any agree- ment.

I actually think that's probably a safe assump- tion, given the fact that the executives of the unions negotiating with the government recommended accep- tance and the members rejected that recommendation. Some also said that health care worker layoffs were inevitable even if the now-dead deal had passed. Here's why.

The proposal said — and I'm quoting from the proposal or, at least, how it was reported in the paper — "the number of FTEs reduced as a direct result of contracting-out of services or programs shall be lim- ited to 3,500 FTEs." Bill 29, which we've talked about here and we assume the public remembers, was intro- duced at the end of January of 2002. It's called the Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act. It, as legislation, expressly prohibits any such agree- ments which limit contracting-out.

Section 6 of Bill 29, the Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act, says — this is legislation, Mr. Chair: "A collective agreement between Health Employers Association of B.C. and a trade union repre- senting employees in the health sector must not contain a provision that in any manner restricts, limits or regu- lates the right of a health sector employer to contract outside of the collective agreement for the provision of non-clinical services." That's the legislation; that's the law. [1610] I asked earlier what role HEABC plays with the gov- ernment, and it still has its current role.

It's not like HE- ABC is gone. The legislation exists, HEABC exists, and the legislation specifically says there can't be any agree- ment that in any way interferes with the government contracting out. So the now-dead deal that was put to the health care workers membership for ratification w o u l d h a v e b e e n v o i d a n y w a y , i n m y m i n d .

I t c o u l d have been ratified, and any health authority could have said: "Well, sorry, we have to live by the law of the land, which doesn't allow such deals to be made." I'm wondering whether the minister or his advisers at the cabinet table or his staff have had a chance to discuss the conflict between the actual act, which pro- hibited such an agreement, and the actual agreement that was presented, because that would have an effect on trust. Hon. C. Hansen: One thing I want to put on the record right off the top.

The member, in posing the question, referred on two occasions to the govern- ment's recent proposal. This was not initiated by gov- ernment. It was actually initiated by the unions. They came to government asking for us to consider that pro- posal. It did wind up with an agreement that was sup- ported by both parties at the end of the day, but it was certainly not something that government initiated. The

section 6 that she refers to in Bill 29 was looked at very carefully by lawyers prior to that interim agreement being concluded. It was felt that the agree- ment was not inconsistent with the wording of

section 29, and therefore it was appropriate for the govern- ment to proceed on that basis. J. MacPhail: How could it not be inconsistent? There was a limitation on contracting-out, and I find that in-

6906 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 teresting. I wasn't trying to target the government at all in terms of the government proposal. Yes, the union, as I understand it, initiated talks to get back so that the contracting-out could be eliminated — absolutely. But I wasn't in any way trying to say: "Oh, it was the gov- ernment that wanted this." I find it curious that the minister immediately leaps to that in times when there is going to be such turmoil. How is it that a proposal — whoever initiated it — that limits contracting-out isn't in violation of

section 6(2), which says: "A collective agreement between HE- ABC and a trade union representing employees in the health sector must not contain a provision that in any manner restricts, limits or regulates the right of a health sector employer to contract outside of the collec- tive agreement for the position of non-clinical ser- vices"? Hon. C. Hansen: I don't want to avoid the member's question, but I do want to make sure she understands that Bill 29 is not my legislation and that when the un- ions came forward to talk to government, those discus- sions took place with the Deputy Minister of Labour.

We certainly were obviously vitally interested in it because it could have profoundly affected the way in which support services would be provided in the health sector. [1615] But as I understand it, I think the member in quoting that particular

section referred to changes to a collec- tive agreement. My understanding is that the legal ad- vice we got was that these were not changes to a collec- tive agreement but were rather around an agreement that was separate from the collective agreement. I'm not a lawyer. I can't pretend to understand all of those unique features, but the advice that we got from law- yers at the time was that the way this particular agree- ment was structured would not be inconsistent with that clause. J.

MacPhail: Well, I appreciate the minister wanting to say that it's somebody else's responsibility, but the fact of the matter is that the deal went down the tubes. It would have saved $500 million over the course of the agreement to the health care system. Theoretically, the minister should be interested in that in terms of allocat- ing of funds for patient care. I'm sure the minister, as the person responsible for that money, should have been intimately and integrally involved in the outcome of that.

Well, what I understand is that the people who were asked to vote in support of this agreement outside of the collective agreement looked at Bill 29 and said: "We don't have any protection." Even their own union lead- ership, with the best of intentions, couldn't convince them of that. I guess it's a situation where legislation that's draconian and seems to override everything else can't be dismissed. It can't be dismissed by the people whose trust with the government has been broken.

Can the minister tell us, then, what measures he's taking either to get the parties back to the table or to deal with the lack of access to the $500 million in sav- ings that the proposal, if accepted, would have gener- ated? Hon. C. Hansen: I know I was asked during that ratification process what would happen if it was re- j e c t e d , a n d I s a i d : " W e l l , w e g o b a c k t o p l a n A . " Y o u know, it was not part of our agenda to start down the road of contracting-out as a way to somehow get the unions to come to the table. That came out of the blue, and that was their initiative.

Our agenda is to make sure that we get the most cost-effective delivery of support services in the health sector. So, to answer to the member's question — what measures am I taking to get the parties back together? — the answer is: none. There was an opportunity there, and they voted it down. We've now got to go back to our initiatives around contracting-out. I'll tell you, when I heard that the ratification had been voted down by a 57 percent vote, I was really of two minds on that. On one hand, I do sympathize with the families who wind up being displaced as a result of contracting-out initiatives.

I know that is really diffi- cult, and I've talked to some of those families. On the other hand, we need to make sure we get costs under control in the health sector, and we need flexibility to deal with not just the budget pressures of next year and the year after but the budget pressures of five years and ten years from now. I believe the direction we were heading in, to look to outside suppliers of those support services, was the right way to go to make sure that we met our cost ob- jectives and we had flexibility there for the future. J. MacPhail: So there's no alternative.

The govern- ment's not going to try to get people back to the table. Well, aren't negotiations going to have to start at the end of this year anyway? The contract expires the spring of 2004, so perhaps the minister could outline what's going to happen from now until the expiry of the collective agreement in terms of contracting-out of services. Are the health authorities ready to go — that there's going to be contracting…? Are the RFPs in the pipe? What's happening? Hon. C. Hansen: The various health authorities have been looking at initiatives for contracting-out.

While there was this discussion and ratification process un- derway, we asked them to hold off. We've asked them to get on with the job and make sure they achieve the cost savings that are necessary using the tools given to them in Bill 29. Yes, we are going into contract negotiations. My understanding is that those negotiations will be un- derway, I believe, in early October. It will, hopefully, lead to a successful collective agreement that will take effect on April 1 of next year.

It's our hope that it can be negotiated through mutual agreement, but the bottom line is: we've got some big cost pressures in British Co- l u m b i a i n t h e h e a l t h c a r e s e c t o r . W e h a v e t h e c o s t o f support services in this province, which is 30 percent

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6907 higher than the national average when it comes to the wages and about 20 percent higher than the next most generous province. [1620] That's just the wages. If you start looking at the structure that's in place around benefits…. I know when I've talked to people who are working in re- source industries in this province, who are in union- ized environments, and you start talking about a maximum of nine weeks' vacation a year and some of the other benefits that are there…. You know, their first reaction is disbelief.

Their second reaction is anger, because that's their tax dollars. It's their tax dollars that are being turned away from meeting some of our pa- tient care needs to paying salaries and benefit costs that are considerably higher in the support sector in this province than in any other province in Canada. J. MacPhail: You know, I actually thought that per- haps the minister would have been a little more calm in his rhetoric.

We had a discussion around the rhetoric he's putting forward right now, where he was forced to admit that much of that differential is as a result of pay equity coming forward for women in the system. Yet he still stands up, knowing that the system now is in a very fragile state. It isn't just people in the union that I'm hearing from. It's managers in the system who are very concerned about the coming months. I'd even…. Well, no. I'll get people in trouble if I say exactly how high those people go. Yet the minister stands up, and he wants to say that the union is the problem.

He stands up right now — just like his boss, the Premier, likes to do — to take a big stick and poke them in the eye. I'm not quite sure why. I really am not quite sure why he has to stand up there with the rhetoric when he's actually facing a po- tentially very unstable and fragile time in the delivery of patient care in British Columbia.

He may think it's to his advantage to stand up and spout the Liberal rhetoric that people are angry at those LPNs who are getting that money; people are angry at those housekeepers who are washing that dirty linen in their hospitals; people can't stand those dietary aides, and they're angry. Well, I don't hear that. I'm not sure where the minister hears that at all. I didn't hear it when I was in government, and I don't hear it now. What I do hear is that people are concerned about whether our health care system is sustainable.

Yes, I do hear that — not that it isn't sustainable but whether it is sustainable or not. Here's a government that's getting a billion bucks over the next three years from the federal government — a gift from them — and they're still wanting to attack the little guy and gal who are deliv- ering the services that many of us simply wouldn't deliver. So here we are in a situation where it's brinksman- ship once again. The minister stands up and attacks them, when I merely asked him for an opportunity about what plans he would have to avoid the conflict. Of course, October is — what?

June, July, August, Sep- tember — four and a half months away, when the par- ties will be at the bargaining table with perhaps, de- pending on what happens in the ensuing four months, as rigid a position on either side as we've ever seen. There's no leadership coming from this government on this matter. The minister wants to characterize it that somehow…. I guess maybe he thinks he can humiliate the union by saying it was they who reached out to the government and saying: "It wasn't our idea. We're the big tough guys.

We're going to carry on." Well, the fact is that at least three of the health au- thorities are in a surplus situation right now — a sur- plus situation. This government is getting $1.3 billion from the federal government for health care alone over the next three years. He wants to say that because health care workers rejected a $500 million wage cut, we're going to march on. Is there nothing in between — nothing? Hon. C.

Hansen: The member may know that part of the federal-provincial discussions around allocation of the additional health dollars were specifically aimed a t m a k i n g s u r e t h a t w h a t h a p p e n e d w

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0526pm 02
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0526pm 02
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	3b1b82fdc1005d65f63714e9705285d0c2e8e1ac

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).