British Columbia Hansard — Thursday, May 29, 2003 (37th Parliament, 4th Session) (H0529am-06) (H0529am 06)

H0529am-06

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Thursday, May 29, 2003 Morning Sitting Volume 16, Number 6 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 Thursday, May 29, 2003 Morning Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 7095 School Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 50) J.

Kwan Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 7095 School Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 50) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 7095 Teaching Profession Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 51) J. Kwan Hon. C.

Clark Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 7102 Teaching Profession Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 51) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 7102 Teaching Profession Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 51) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 7102 Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 58) D.

Jarvis Hon. G.

Collins Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 7105 Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 58) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 7105 Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 58) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 7105 Transportation Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 64) Hon.

J. Reid Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 7105 Transportation Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 64)

7095 THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 The House met at 10:04 a.m. [1005] Prayers. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call Committee of the Whole for consideration of Bill 50. Committee of the Whole House SCHOOL AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 50; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 10:07 a.m. The Chair: I call the committee to order. Members, pursuant to the motion that was passed on the 26th, we have a very tight

schedule today. We will adhere to that

schedule very closely. It is my understanding that there is a minimal number of questions on Bill 50. The opposition would like to spend the bulk of their time on Bill 51. J. Kwan: Yes, just as you stated, the opposition is only given one hour to do committee stage on both bills, Bills 50 and 51. Given that's the situation we're faced with, the opposition has chosen to spend the bulk of the time on Bill 51. Sections 1 to 7 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. C. Clark: I move that the committee report the bill complete without amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 10:08 a.m. The House resumed; Mr.

Speaker in the chair. Report and Third Reading of Bills Bill 50, School Amendment Act, 2003, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. Hon. G. Abbott: I call committee stage debate on Bill 51. Committee of the Whole House TEACHING PROFESSION AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 51; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 10:10 a.m. On

section 1,

section 1. J. Kwan:

Section 1 deals with the

definitions for the act and adds the definition of "authority" to the act itself. It is my understanding that the change here is that the definition of "authority" refers to a corporation appointed under the Business Corporations Act rather than the Company Act. Is this just a technical change because the Company Act is going to be replaced by the Business Corporations Act? Hon. C. Clark: Yes. When the Company Act is changed to become the Business Corporations Act, this amendment will come into force at that time. J. Kwan: Is there anything else substantive in terms of the change between the two acts?

Seeing as we actu- ally haven't had the opportunity to review the Business Corporations Act, is there anything substantive that the opposition should be aware of? Hon. C. Clark: I t i s s i m p l y a n a m e c h a n g e . O b v i - ously, the act will have its own effect when it comes into force, but for the purposes of this act this is just a name change.

Section 1,

section 1 approved. On

section 2,

section 5. J. Kwan:

Section 2 is quite significant in terms of the impacts of this act. It deals with the membership of the council and the changes associated with it. For- merly, the council was primarily made up of elected people. Now the change is going to be appointments virtually for all members except one. I'd like to ask the minister this question: why did the minister make the changes so that the membership of the council, instead of being democratically elected, is now going to be appointed in its majority by government? Hon. C.

Clark: We recognize that education is a broad public enterprise in which the public has more interest than, I think, anything else that government does. Education is the greatest investment that we can make as a society. We want to make sure that the board of the college reflects the diversity of our community, that it reflects the diverse number of points of view and that it is broadly representative of the public. That's the reason that we've chosen in this amendment to change the composition of the board. J.

Kwan: Actually, where the minister will be ap- pointing the majority of the council members under this act, I would argue that that actually limits diver- sity. You can actually ensure diversity through a num- ber of ways without it going through a political process — that being that the appointments are made by a par-

7096 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 tisan process through the Minister of Education and the government. Why didn't the government choose alternative means? If she thinks that the existing sys- tem now is not democratic and somehow is not repre- sentative, why didn't she change the system to allow that to take place in a democratically elected process as opposed to an appointment process? Hon. C. Clark: The legislation allows, first of all, for eight members to be elected in the traditional limited form of democracy that the college has used to select 15 of its members.

We want, though, to make sure that there are options open for more parents to sit on the board and for teachers who don't necessarily receive an endorsement to b e a b l e t o s i t o n t h e b o a r d . W e w a n t t o m a k e s u r e t h a t there's a broad public representation. We want to have avenues to make sure that there is always at least one person who speaks a second language on the board. We want to m ak e s u re t hat t he re 's al way s an o p p o rtu nit y to make sure there are aboriginal people on that board.

The changes in the legislation require that the minister consult with a number of representative, democratically elected groups, before she or he makes a decision about who will be appointed to the board in addition to the eight mem- bers that will be elected in the traditional way. [1015] J. Kwan: It is interesting, though, because the division is this. You have 11 people to be appointed by the govern- ment, and then you have eight people elected.

Wouldn't you think that perhaps, if the minister is saying that she wants a broader representation in terms of parents and others, you would switch the numbers around and still actually hold a high regard for the people to be elected? Therefore, the numbers for the people to be elected should be higher than the people that are appointed Hon. C. Clark: This legislation recognizes that the way elections have been conducted is a very limited form of democracy. It ensures that a limited number of people with a limited number of views sit on the board.

W e w a n t t o m a k e s u r e t h a t t h e r e i s a b r o a d r a n g e o f views represented. It was difficult — and we certainly thought about it — to find a way that we could elect, for example, parents to sit on the board, given that parents are from such a diverse community and aren't necessar- ily organized into a group that bargains collectively. We decided that what we would do would be, for example, to consult with parents and then make ap- pointments based partly on their recommendations.

We've put the recognition into the legislation for the first time that those groups will be required to be con- sulted with. We will be expanding the representation from the public and from other kinds of educators who provide other kinds of educational services in our schools as well as continuing to allow for the limited kind of democracy that currently operates to choose eight of the 20 members on the board. J. Kwan: Isn't it possible, though, that a teacher could be a parent as well?

The minister talks as though somehow teachers are these evildoers and are not par- ents — t h a t t h e y h a v e n o r o l e a s a p a r e n t , t h a t s o m e - how they don't care about children. This is how this act is being perceived. Yet I know many teachers who are also parents and who actually care a lot about the chil- dren. Why would the minister take an approach that would actually pit, I would say, community against community? What's the purpose of that, other than to draw lines on the battleground so that one can fight? Perhaps the minister would want to fight with the teachers.

What's the purpose of such

an act that illus- trates an approach that is so divisive in its nature? It's almost as though, from the minister's approach and her words, that her intention is to simply segregate teach- ers from parents. Hon. C. Clark: As usual, I disagree with the mem- ber's characterization of everything in terms of war. I would say this: teachers don't just…. The member said: "How come, if the minister doesn't recognize that teachers are parents too…? If she recognizes that they're parents too, then she'll know that they care." I know that teachers care, whether or not they're parents.

I know that teachers care about kids in schools; otherwise, they wouldn't be teachers. People choose the teaching profession because they love kids and they love sparking imagination in kids, inculcating knowledge in them, helping guide them on their way to becoming full and healthy and participating citizens in our democracy. That is why teachers do their job. There is nothing in this act that would prohibit ei- ther teachers who are parents from becoming elected or parents who are also teachers from being appointed.

I also think, though, that parents who bring their role as parents primarily to the table sometimes bring a differ- ent viewpoint, as people who come at the system from a completely different perspective. It's healthy to have those perspectives there. One of the things that we've learned, through set- ting up school planning councils, for example, which is, again, something that I know the member was con- cerned about for exactly the same reasons she's talking about here…..

When we set up school planning coun- cils, she said that it was going to create division, that it was going to mean people didn't talk to each other. In fact, the opposite has happened. What we've found with school planning councils is that we've built a place in the school system where parents and teachers and principals are guaranteed to sit down and talk about what's important to them. What we've learned from that is that when we build in those opportunities for dialogue, people understand each other better. It's important that principals and teachers know what parents expect out of the system.

It's also important that parents understand what's rea- sonable to expect out of the system, based on their dis- cussions with teachers and principals. [1020] What we've done with school planning councils is take down some of the previous barriers that have ex-

THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7097 isted and built more discussion and dialogue between the various stakeholders and partners who care equally about education. I believe the changes to the college board will fur- ther enhance that dialogue and ensure that everyone who cares about education and everyone who has a stake in it, which is surely all of us in our society, gets a voice at the table and an opportunity to really dialogue about what education should look like. J. Kwan: It's interesting.

The minister likes to talk about dialogue and consultation, but the reality is this: the minister actually refused to meet with teachers. She hasn't consulted with the teachers. In fact, the act pre- cludes consultation with the teachers in terms of the appointments. Why is that? She talks the talk, but she doesn't walk the walk, and she illustrates it not only by her own actions every single day, but it is actually in the legislation, and it illustrates that as well. Hon. C. Clark: Actually, that's not correct.

We have discussed this college legislation very widely, includ- ing at the minister's Education Advisory Council, which includes the senior members from the teachers union. The proof of that, if the member doesn't want to believe me that they were consulted, is the fact that the B.C. teachers union actually made a submission on the legislation about what they thought it should look like. They certainly have brought their views forward, as did parents and many of the other people who care so deeply about education. We certainly had the benefit of their view.

They were certainly aware of the changes, and we certainly did consult with them. J. Kwan: No. The point is this. The minister didn't meet with the teachers at their request, and she refuses to meet with them on this piece of legislation. To date there have been no meetings. In the legislation, under subsection (3), it reads: "Before making a recommendation under subsection 2 (b), the minister must consult with persons who the minister considers are representative of (

a) authorities, (

b) public school principals and vice principals, (

c) su- perintendents, and (

d) parents." It's interesting. In the legislation itself, teachers are not mentioned. They're not an important enough com- ponent to actually be itemized in the legislation as a group that the minister would consult. I think that speaks volumes for the minister to say that she cares and that she values the work of the teachers, and so on and so forth. Those words ring very hollow when her actions don't match up — her actions outside of this House and her actions inside of this House. What garbage she purports she's…. Anyway, maybe that's unparliamentary.

She can talk about how she values the teachers, but her actions simply demon- strate otherwise. The act shows that as well. It's a com- plete disregard to include teachers in terms of the changes related to this bill. The bill also deals with the notion… Actually, the minister likes to put forward the notion of a self- regulated component to this profession. Would the minister consider the changes under this council would deem that the teaching profession be self-regulated? Hon. C. Clark: The college will continue to regulate itself. In answer to that question, it will continue to be an independent body.

In response to the first point that the member has made, I do want to make sure that she's correct in her

interpretation. She made reference to

section 5(3), where she talked about the minister's obligation to consult with authorities — public schools, principals, vice-principals, superintendents and par- ents. I draw her attention to the

section just before that, which is 5(2), which specifically talks about "members," who are teachers. It talks about how eight of them will be elected. So there is a specific reference in there to teachers. It provides for eight to be elected — the larg- est single group that will, undoubtedly, sit on the col- lege. I would argue her point that teachers are unrepre- sented in this legislation. In fact, they get the plurality of representation. [1025] J. Kwan: No, actually.

If you read the council makeup in its entirety, here's what it looks like, so there's no misinformation or misinterpretation of the act and intention of this government. It reads — the council composition: "The council consists of the fol- lowing: (a) 8 members elected to serve on the council as the representatives of the zones; (b) 11 persons ap- pointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council on the recommendation of the minister; (

c) one person, nomi- nated jointly by the deans of the faculties of education in British Columbia, who is appointed by the minister t o ho l d o f f i c e d u ri ng p l e a s u re . " S o t he m ajo ri t y o f t he council membership is appointed by the minister, therefore making the minister in control of the makeup of the council. That's one point. How is that self-regulating when the majority of the people are appointed by this minister through a politi- cal process? That's not self-regulation.

That's one point I want to make, and I'd like the minister to explain the difference between self-regulation versus appointed members of a council controlled by the minister and how that is self-regulating. When you look at other colleges, other professions, if it's truly a self-regulating profession, the majority of the membership is made up by elections from their own profession — members from their own profession — not by appointments by government. That's virtually in every single profession that is self-regulating. So this, in my view, is not self- regulating. There is a fundamental difference.

Second, when you go to the third subsection of the act, it deals with the consultation process. Explicitly, teachers are left out of the consultation process. Let me read that

section of the act in its entirety. It states: "Be- fore making a recommendation under subsection (2) (b), the minister must consult with persons who the minister considers are representative of (

a) authorities, (

b) public school principals and vice principals, (

c) su-

7098 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 perintendents, and (

d) parents." No teachers are men- tioned there. You would think that the minister, who says she could appoint people who are also teachers under this section, would actually engage in a consultation process and include them in this

section of the act. Yet it's obviously clear, because it's excluded. It's not included in this act. The minister can't have it both ways. Either the council is self-regulating or not. If it is self-regulating, how is it that the majority of the members are ap- pointed by the minister and, therefore, controlled by the minister and not by the profession? Hon. C. Clark: Well, not only do the eight members that are elected represent….

Not only does that represent consultation by the minister, it also, under the act, will mean that not only do we consult, but we accept that gov- ernment will accept those recommendations from the teachers. Not only that, it is a plurality, as I said, of mem- bers on the board — two important points I think the member is deliberately trying to ignore and minimize. There is a special prominent place for teachers in this act and on this board. That is very clearly pre- sented in the legislation, which is why the reference to teachers gets its own entire subsection.

That's going to be a very, very important part of making sure that this board functions well. J. Kwan: Maybe let me ask this question. I know that we can probably argue for quite some time, and I am noting the time. There's only half an hour left to debate this bill. I'd like to actually go into this point and argue with the minister some more. But I see it is a waste of time, because the minister's not going to see the issues that are being raised.

Let me ask the minister this question: does she know of any other professions that are deemed to be self-regulating where the majority of their membership is made up of appointments by government? [1030] Hon. C. Clark: Our purpose in changing this act is to make sure there is broad public representation on this board. It is recognition in this act that the public has a very broad and passionate interest in education. Therefore, it's important that we reflect those views in the governance of the college. That's why we have made these changes.

We know that education is the most important pub- lic enterprise we will embark on as a society. If we are going to take that responsibility seriously, we need to make sure that we reflect broadly the views of the pub- lic. Teachers certainly bring a strong expertise to the board, but so do principals and vice-principals, super- intendents, members of the public and certainly par- ents. As I've said many times in this House, parents are their children's first teachers, and they will be with them, teaching them the longest, throughout their lives. J.

Kwan: I'm not refuting the notion that perhaps there should be other people involved in this stage in the act, but the issue is this: all other professions have self-regulating boards or councils. All other profes- sions' self-regulating boards or councils are made up in this majority by their own profession, not appointed by government but by their own profession, for it to be truly self-regulating. Yet in the teaching profession we have something different. Now, the minister says in the teaching profession we all care about children. Of course we do.

I just be- came a mother, and I'll be the first to admit that parents play a significant role in the lives of their children and want to spend every single moment with them to teach them, to guide them, to provide support for them and to care for them — absolutely. I completely understand that. If I didn't understand that before I became a par- ent, I do now. I do now because I have a ten-week-old baby, so I completely understand and accept that. Now, let's just switch gears for a moment. Let's say the health profession, the College of Physicians and Surgeons…. Health care.

We would all argue that each and every one of us cares about our health as well. We want to make sure that we get the best health care available and that the physicians and the surgeons are operating in such a manner that is appropriate and if there's misconduct, it is being reviewed by their own peers and disciplined by their own peers. That is the system that we have with the College of Physicians and Surgeons: ten members elected, five appointed. I think we stand in the same place when we say that health and education, in terms of how we all care about these two issues, are probably equivalent in measure.

Yet how is it that the College of Physicians and Surgeons have a self-regulating body made up of ten elected people and five appointed people and then in the teaching profession we have eight people elected and 11 people appointed by the minister? Why is there a difference in terms of that approach to these two dif- ferent professions? Hon. C. Clark: Well, a couple points. First of all, education is, I think, the most important public enter- prise we can engage in. It is important that there be broad public representation on the board. I don't make any apologies for that. I think that's tremendously im- portant.

I also think, though, that one of the things the member is ignoring, perhaps because she hasn't thought about it yet — I'm not suggesting she's delib- erately ignoring it — is that the other members, like, for example, school authorities that will be consulted — principals, vice-principals and superintendents, most of whom hold teaching certificates…. It's not as though there won't be a lot of members in addition to members who are elected through the auspices of the democratic process that goes on in the teachers' zones. There will be a lot of people who hold teaching certificates on that board.

I don't think it's fair or accurate to suggest that if more than half of the board is appointed by govern- ment, then that means more than half of the board won't be qualified to teach. I don't think that's true at

THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7099 all. I think, in fact, given the groups that the legislation will require the minister to consult with, we will in all likelihood see many more people on that board who hold teaching certificates in addition to the eight that are elected. I think that's important to ensure the exper- tise of the board. [1035] I am interested in the member's view that she, on the one hand, would like to make sure we continue with the old process.

We have a big majority of people elected in this sort of limited democracy we've had for the past many years, where what it has yielded is a vast majority of people on the board who are active teachers and who have been endorsed by the teachers union, leaving five spots for all the other people who are in- terested in education. If she wants to go back to that, how does she pro- pose we would structure the system so that there would be broader public representation? I also hear her saying she's interested in making that happen too, and I think that to some extent, she's making conflicting arguments there.

I'd be interested to know what kinds of amendments she might propose to this legislation that would ensure there is broad public representation on the board, given that she's taken quite strongly the position that we should carry on with the status quo, which hasn't yielded broad public representation so far. J. Kwan: You know, this is a classic debate that the Minister of Education would like to engage in. When pushed to answer questions — questions she has diffi- culties dealing with — she'll say: "Well, gee, how wo u l d y o u d o i t ?

" T he n s he m i x e s i t a s t ho u g h s o m e - how the opposition likes nothing to change. Nothing could be further from the truth. The issue I take with this minister, this act and this

section of the act is this. The government and the minister claim the teach- ing profession is going to be self-regulated. The reality is that it is not self-regulated, because the majority of the appointments are appointed by the minister. In every other profession — and you cannot deny this — when it is a self-regulating board or council, the major- ity of those council members are elected from their own profession. That's how every other profession is being conducted in terms of a self-regulating board. Now we have a first — a first — in the teaching profession.

Somehow this minister deems that teachers should not have a self-regulating body. Somehow peer regulation is no longer applicable for the teaching pro- fession. She has changed the structure of the council to do that, and then she claims she's doing it to provide for broad representation. You can still provide for broad representation without taking away the self- regulation component of the council and the makeup of the council. The minister refuses to do that.

She refuses to see the fact that she is setting the teaching profession into a completely different place, a place where it is no longer democratically elected by a majority of its membership from its profession, where it is no longer self- regulating. There is no denying that. That is the reality. If the importance of broad representation applies, one would assume that application ought to go for every other profession as well, yet we don't see changes in — and I'll use the example again — the College of Physi- cians and Surgeons. We don't see changes there.

Isn't health care impor- tant enough, if the minister's argument is sound, that the same changes should be applied to the College of Physicians and Surgeons? One would assume the an- swer is yes, but that's not taking place for any other profession except for the teachers. What makes the teaching profession so different that somehow the peer-regulating component should no longer be a fac- tor to be considered, that it is no longer a self- regulating profession? It makes no sense. It makes no sense because that argument is simply not sound. If the minister wants to say, "You know what?

I don't trust the teachers to self-regulate; there- fore I'm changing the composition of the council," then own up to it and say that. That's what this act does. That's what she is doing. She is saying she doesn't trust the teaching profession. She is saying to the teachers: "I don't want you to be self-regulating. I don't want peers to regulate them- selves. I want to regulate you. I want to control you. I want the control of the board.

That's why I'm changing the makeup of the board to be that the majority is ap- pointed by order-in-council by the minister, and that is a fact." [1040] I suppose we can debate this on and on, because we fundamentally differ. The minister refuses to see the point that she has changed the makeup of the council so that it is no longer self-regulating, no longer peer- regulating, and that it is going to be a partisan political board with its majority to be appointed by this minister through a partisan political process. The opposition disagrees with that.

We should not be injecting politics into the teaching profession in such a way. We should not be injecting politics into the regulation of teachers in such a way. The opposition does not support the makeup of the council as it is be- ing proposed. I want to ask the minister, under

section 2, seeing as time is very precious in this House…. The eight zones being talked about in the act that deal with the repre- sentation of the eight elected members are yet to be identified. Does the minister have any idea what those zones will be and what that makeup would look like? Hon. C. Clark: Just two sections to my answer here. The first is in response to the member's first comments. Again, I'd be interested in finding out how she would ensure broad public representation on the board.

While she complains that this act does something she doesn't like, she says she wants more public representation on the board, and I'd be interested to know how she would achieve that. She says there are ways to do that — to ensure broad public representation — and I'd be happy to consider those if she has any ideas about that.

7100 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 But I don't hear any. In the last many weeks I haven't heard any suggestions from her about how we could do that, although she says it's important. It's important to note, too, that the board will con- tinue to be independent. It will continue to regulate itself. She should note that in the legislation, because the amendments make specific reference to authorities, public school principals, vice-principals and superin- tendents as a requirement for consult in addition to the eight teachers who will be elected, who are named spe- cifically in

section 2(

a) or sub (2)(

a) here…. In addition to that, it is entirely likely that the majority of the board will be constituted by peers in the teaching profession. When she talks about peer representation, principals and vice-principals hold teaching certificates. There will be nothing prohibiting a minister from appointing more teachers to the board, people who hold teaching certificates. Because those references are made — con- tinue — I hope that will provide some comfort to some of the people listening, if not to the member herself.

In reference to her last question about the members elected to serve and where those zones will be, the zones will be created by regulation. Those zones will be created by the minister on the advice of the college. The college will work to establish those zones, and the gov- ernment will make those changes by regulation. J. Kwan: I understand the member for Delta South has an introduction. Introductions by Members V. Roddick: On this final day of the spring sitting, I am delighted to introduce to the House Hawthorne Elementary from historic Ladner in beautiful Delta South.

Hawthorne is making up for missing their usual annual visit last year by bringing the entire grade 5 class of 73 students, along with eight parents and five teachers, to view our hallowed halls. Because of the large student body, they've divided into two groups. Will the House please give group No. 1 a very hearty welcome. Debate Continued J. Kwan: The minister says there's nothing in the act that precludes the membership from being the majority of people from the teaching profession. Yet the act does not explicitly say that it must be. That is the point.

In every other profession, it states clearly in legislation, where it is self-regulating, the majority of the makeup of the board is from its own profession. Here, in the teaching profession, it is different. It sets a different standard. [1045] One can only conclude from that deliberate action of the government that they're signalling, somehow, to the teaching profession that she does not trust them, that she does not have the faith in them that they would do a good job at self-regulating. That's the only reason one can come to the conclusion why the minis- ter is making these changes.

Then the minister says that if I have suggestions as to how the makeup of the board could change, she'd be happy to entertain them. I'd be happy to put forward a new act when I become the Minister of Education. Al- ternatively, if the minister commits right now on the floor that she would adopt these amendments if we put them forward, then I would be happy to put them for- ward as well. But the fact is this: the minister has re- fused, herself, to meet with the teaching profession as a collective. The minister is changing the act so that it is no longer self-regulating.

She's only hiding under the notion that she's making it and its representation broader. I don't want to belabour this point. There's less than 13 minutes, to be exact, that I have to debate this bill, so I want to move on and ask her the questions pertaining to this bill. The Chair: Have you completed

section 2? J. Kwan: I'm still on

section 2. I haven't even fin- ished asking all the questions I need to on

section 2, so I need to move on and ask the question on another area under

section

Section 2 also deals with, aside from the appoint- ment issue and the zone issue…. I'd like to ask the min- ister, because it will also look into putting forward an interim board or interim replacement of the council, if you will…. There are no dates specified, but there are 20 people to be appointed to the council as such. I wonder if the minister could give some detailed infor- mation around the election dates and so on. Hon. C. Clark: That speaks to

section 17 of the act. I'd be delighted to talk about that when we get to that section. I do want to say that contrary to the member's statement, teachers do a tremendous job in British Co- lumbia, just an absolutely tremendous job. We have one of the best education systems in the world because we have some of the most qualified, passionate, dedi- cated teachers in the world. The teachers' college, on the other hand, has not done as good a job, I think, i n repre senting them as it could have.

They have, for example — although they have started to just recently — not set standards for competence of teachers, something I know that teach- ers want probably more than anybody else. We want to make sure that they continue and carry on with that role. That's despite the fact that the college was created 13 years ago. I think there are certainly some gaps in the work that the college has done, and we need to make sure that the college is able to adequately do that.

We have consulted, contrary to what the member said, at the most senior levels with the teachers union, as we did with parents and all the other people who we consider to be partners in the education system. We did that. We sought a submission and received a sub- mission, indeed, from the teachers union, as well, about what this would look like. I want to correct some

THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7101 of the misapprehensions that the member repeats about this, because certainly it's not correct. I will finish by saying this. I really believe that the public should be broadly represented on this board. Teaching is the most important profession in the world, bar none. We need to make sure that the public — and all of us who have an interest in the education system — are well represented on the College of Teachers board. The Chair: Hon. members, noting the time and the fact that the opposition has asked for two divisions, one on

section 2 and one on the entire bill, I am now going to put the question. [1050] J. Kwan: I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members J. Kwan: I understand that the students and teachers from St. Joseph's School are in the precinct, if not in the gallery. They might be in the gallery. Are you in the gal- lery? No? Sorry. I was just handed the note that they are in the precinct, and they are taking a tour of the legislative buildings. They are visiting the capital to learn about their capital and, of course, the operation of the House. They are grade 7 students.

There are about 30 of the visitors, five of which are the adults themselves. The teacher accompanying the students is Ms. Oye. Will the House please make these students and their accompa- nying companions welcome. [1055] Debate Continued

Section 2,

section 5 approved on the following division: YEAS — 59 Falcon Coell Hogg L. Reid Halsey-Brandt Whittred Cheema Hansen J. Reid Bruce Santori van Dongen Barisoff Roddick Wilson Masi Lee Murray Plant Collins Clark Bond de Jong Stephens Abbott Neufeld Coleman Chong Penner Jarvis Orr Harris Brenzinger Belsey Bell Long Chutter Trumper Johnston Bennett Christensen Krueger McMahon Bray Les Nijjar Wong Suffredine Cobb K. Stewart Visser Lekstrom Sultan Hamilton Sahota Hawes Kerr Manhas Hunter NAYS — 2 MacPhail Kwan

Section 3,

section 18, to

section 12,

section 28(4) inclusive approved. The Chair: The Minister of Education on the amendment on

section 12.1. Hon. C. Clark: I move the amendment standing in my name. [SECTION 12.1, by adding the following section: 12.1 Sections 30 (1) and 31 (1) are amended by striking out "elected".] Amendment approved.

Section 13,

section 34(c), to

section 18 inclusive ap- proved. Title approved. Hon. C. Clark: I move that we rise to report the bill complete with amendment. [1100] Motion approved on the following division: YEAS — 64 Falcon Coell Hogg L. Reid Halsey-Brandt Hawkins Whittred Cheema Hansen J. Reid Bruce Santori van Dongen Barisoff Roddick Wilson Masi Lee Thorpe Hagen Murray Plant Collins Clark Bond de Jong Nebbeling Stephens Abbott Neufeld Coleman Chong Penner Jarvis Orr Harris Brenzinger Belsey Bell Long Chutter Mayencourt Trumper Johnston Bennett Christensen Krueger McMahon Bray Les Nijjar Wong Suffredine Cobb K. Stewart Visser Lekstrom Sultan Hamilton Sahota Hawes Kerr Manhas Hunter

7102 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 NAYS — 2 MacPhail Kwan The committee rose at 11:02 a.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 51, Teaching Profession Amendment Act, 2003, reported complete with amendment. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the time allocation motion on the order paper, third reading will be called now. The question in front of the House is third reading of Bill 51. Bill 51, Teaching Profession Amendment Act, 2003, read a third time and passed. J. Kwan: I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted.

Introductions by Members J. Kwan: Visiting us in the gallery today are students from St. Joseph's School. They are 30 grade 7 students along with five adults accompanying them. They are here on a tour to learn about the Legislature and its op- eration, its history, the fantastic building that we operate in and how democracy ought to be done in this Legisla- ture, and of course to visit the capital as well. Their teacher is Ms. Oye. Would the House please make them all very welcome. Hon. G. Collins: I call Committee of the Whole for consideration of Bill 58.

Committee of the Whole House INSURANCE CORPORATION AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 58; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 11:05 a.m. Hon. G. Collins: The House, perhaps, can recess for five minutes while we wait, yet again, for the opposi- tion to collect their papers. The Chair: The House stands recessed for five minutes. The committee recessed from 11:05 a.m. to 11:09 a.m. [J. Weisbeck in the chair.] Sections 1 to 8 inclusive approved. On

section 9. Hon. G. Collins: I move the amendment to

section 9 standing in my name on the order paper. [SECTION 9, (

a) in the proposed

section 50 (4) by deleting "section 45 (5)," and substituting "section 45 (6)", and (

b) in the proposed

section 52 (3) by adding "automobile" before "insurance market".] Amendment approved. [1110] On

section 9 as amended. D. Jarvis: I wanted to ask the minister if he could give us somewhat of an explanation on that phrase, "appreciably impeding or reducing…competition." It's not that clear to me, and I was wondering if he would care to maybe make it a little clearer to most people. Hon. G. Collins: Perhaps before I do that, I can just introduce the staff that are here with me today: Leon de Wet, who is from the Ministry of Finance, and Dan Perrin as well.

Both these gentlemen have done a huge a m o u n t o f w o r k o n w h a t u l t i m a t e l y e n d s u p b e i n g a relatively small bill, but it required a huge amount of policy development and some pretty clear thinking to make sure we got this right. I just wanted to thank them both for their work and the time they put into it. It was a pretty complex task. It took a lot of hard thinking, and I think they've done a very good job of putting together a model that's going to serve British Columbians very well in the years ahead.

I just wanted to extend my thanks to them for doing that work and to put that on the record. The question from the member relates to

section 9, which is a new

section 43 of the act, which is really the one that says that the BCUC is going to be the regula- tor. The wording that the member raised or has some question around is the phrase "appreciably impeding or reducing…competition." Essentially, that is a bit of a qualitative measure, and I think the goal here is that we're trying to create a fairly light-handed regulatory model for this industry. We don't want to be in there heavy-handed or have the BCUC in there in a heavy- handed way running the insurance industry in this province on a day-to-day basis.

Our preference is that we go through a bit of a tran- sition period as ICBC modifies its behaviour, as the insurance companies modify their behaviour, and then we end up with a fairly level playing field. The BCUC will then be able to stand back and let the market work and only step in when it's clear that there is an appre- ciable reduction in competition. If a problem arises that's a visible problem, which you can appreciably measure and say, "There's a problem here in the mar-

THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7103 ket," the BCUC would then be able to step in and deal with it. The goal is to try and create a fairly light- handed regulatory model where the intercession is required only when there's a visible problem. D. Jarvis: Just to go a little further on that, is this regulator at one point going to be asked to go out and do a complete audit on ICBC or bring in actuaries to establish what the rates are going to be? Hon. G. Collins: How this will probably work is that ICBC will apply for a rate increase at some point. The B.C.

Utilities Commission will obviously look at that request, and they obviously will…. I mean, it's very likely they wouldn't be able to do all the required evaluations internally to determine whether or not that rate request was in the best interests of the consumers.

It's likely that the Utilities Commission would need to go outside of the commission and access whatever exper- tise, advice, studies, analysis that they required in order to make a proper assessment of whether or not that rate in- crease was justified and whether or not the service that was being provided was commensurate with the cost that was being charged. ICBC would make a request. The Utilities Commission would determine what work they needed to do, and to what extent they needed to get ad- vice, before making a determination. D.

Jarvis: So in actual fact, it will be up to the regu- lator at that point to decide whether he needs an actu- ary on that, so that's fine. Well, I'll sit down. Go to the next section. [1115] The Chair: Member for North Vancouver– Seymour. What sections? D. Jarvis: I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I led you astray there on that point when I sat down. I wanted to ask another question specifically on the regulator himself, and that's all under

section 9. The Chair: On

section 9 as amended. D. Jarvis: I f y o u w o u l d n ' t m i n d , I ' d l i k e t o b a c k - track a bit there. Now, you're going to give this power to BCUC. The regulator is going to have that power. I'm wondering if it's not a duplication of power in the sense that…. Why would we not still be dealing with or going to FICOM or something along that line? [G. Trumper in the chair.] Hon. G. Collins: The Utilities Commission's pri- mary role really is twofold. First of all, it would be to regulate service and rates for basic insurance, a regulat- ing monopoly.

For all these years ICBC has been a mo- nopoly with no regulator to determine what the best interests of the public are. The rates, etc., had all been set at the cabinet table. Now they're going to have to actually report to somebody. The Utilities Commission will oversee that and make sure that on the basic, they're providing good service at a reasonable price. The Utilities Commission will also have a role to play, as far as ICBC's presence goes, in the optional insurance market. There are other players in the op- tional insurance market who will not be subject to the Utilities Commission regulation.

ICBC will, and the reason for that is that ICBC has about 95 percent of the market on the optional side as well. That's really been the problem, people would say — that there's not suffi- cient competition on the optional side. ICBC, having that much of a market share, has in essence a virtual monopoly. It does need to be subject to some addi- tional regulation, at least for an interim period until this sorts itself out and we have clearly established a level playing field and a more open, competitive mar- ket on the optional side.

The Utilities Commission will also regulate the op- tional portion of ICBC's business. Again, that will be in a fairly light hand, we hope, depending on the behav- iour of ICBC. There still is an ongoing insurance indus- try — the private sector people, for example — who are regulated by FICOM, Financial Institutions Commis- sion, which rests within the Ministry of Finance. That will continue. There are a couple of roles here for vari- ous players. So FICOM continues to regulate the play- ers in the optional insurance automobile market. There does continue to be a role there for FICOM.

At some point, we hope that as this market sort of shakes out and becomes more competitive and there's more of a level playing field, there will be an opportu- nity under the act for ICBC to go to the Utilities Com- mission and say: "We believe that there is a competitive marketplace in place for the optional side." They can say to the Utilities Commission under the act: "We be- lieve that exists now.

We don't believe we should be subject to any more regulatory burden than the private sector insurance in the optional market." The Utilities Commission then can do a study, make an evalu ation and say: "Yeah, they're right. We now think there is a pretty open, competitive market on the optional side. ICBC doesn't have any undue powers." The Utilities Commission can then make a recommendation to cabi- net to turn that regulatory switch off for the regulation of the optional portion of ICBC's business.

Then ICBC would be just like every other player, subject to no more or no less regulation. [1120] I f g o v e r n m e n t w e r e t o d o t h a t a n d m a k e t h a t choice, if at a later date it was determined that in fact the market was either going back to the way it was or ICBC was taking advantage of that for various reasons to actually dominate the market again, then govern- ment could switch that back on. We're trying to set up a structure that will operate on its own eventually. That's why that trigger is there. Perhaps that describes the two roles the member was asking about. D.

Jarvis: Heretofore, ICBC's rating system and the information they use for their rating have been kept to

7104 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 themselves, where in the rest of the competitive world it's been open and shared so that they can get the in- formation from other insurers. Will this now be open to the so-called competition out there — the information on ICBC's rating system? Hon. G. Collins: It's a very good question, because that is one of the issues that's been raised by private in- surers — that they're required to share amongst them- selves their information as part of creating the market, and ICBC doesn't do that.

There are reg-making powers in the act that would allow government to direct ICBC to comply with the practice that's currently there — or whatever the practice would be for the disclosure of that information in the optional side. ICBC doesn't currently keep information in exactly the same way as the private insurers do. They have to transition their systems, etc., to get to that stage. There will be a bit of a transitional period. Rest assured, we will encourage them — probably fairly vigorously — to comply with that and to make the transitions that are required as quickly as possible. D.

Jarvis: Thank you for the information. That's basically what I was looking for. One other final question I wanted to know. I assume that he or she who will be appointed regulator has not b e e n a p p o i n t e d y e t . C a n y o u g i v e m e a n i d e a o f w h a t type of individual you're looking for? Will they have had experience in the private system or maybe even just with ICBC? Just where do we stand on that point? Hon. G. Collins: How the regulation is actually going to work is going to be the nub of it. The regulator — having the right person there is important.

We've also identified through this process the issue of which minister should be responsible for what. For example, right now I'm sort of in this strange position of being the minister responsible for ICBC at the same time as I am the minister responsible for the legislation that regulates ICBC. I think that sends a negative message to the marketplace.

We've tried to be very open and involving with all the different players as we've developed this legislation and have treated ICBC no differently in those consulta- tions than we've treated various private sector insurers in trying to determine what this model needs to be. Clearly, there's an issue identified there: that having a minister responsible for advocating for the corporation as well as for regulating that corporation is a problem. Government is about to address that to make sure that's clarified. Within the Utilities Commission itself, the member will be aware there are changes coming.

They are going to be involved with B.C. Hydro again in a bigger way than they were during the period under the previous government as well as taking on the private sector in- surance regulatory process for ICBC — or the competi- tive side. We do need to have some different people, or some additional people perhaps — expertise at the Utilities Commission. We are looking right now for somebody or several somebodies, depending on what we believe is required or what the Utilities Commission believes is required, to come in and play that role.

It's fair to say that to a certain extent, monopolies are monopolies are monopolies. They tend to behave the same way. There's a lot of economic study on the behaviour of monopolies — things that they do and how they operate. To a certain extent, they're not that different — Hydro, ICBC or some other monopoly. [1125] But there is an insurance issue here. If you're going to be regulating ICBC's optional insurance business, you do need to have some expertise from the insurance sector, you would think. We are taking that into con- sideration.

Ideally, we'd love to have somebody who's worked on both sides, who gets it — the dream candi- date — and we're looking. We hope to be able to have some individual or perhaps more than one, depending, come in and be able to do that job in a way that gives everybody comfort that they're knowledgable, fair, even-handed and have the ability to make this work. We continue to look for those people. D. Jarvis: Madam Chair, I promise this is the last question.

I assume that the purpose of this bill and what y o u 're p l an ni ng t o d o i s s o t hat g o v e rnm e nt wi l l no w be out of the insurance business, theoretically, and that government will not be interfering with the rate struc- tures of that for political purposes, etc., forevermore. Am I correct? Hon. G. Collins: It is government's intention that we at the cabinet table, as was previously the case — as what was done in the past — will no longer be in- volved in setting rates for ICBC, directing ICBC, direct- ing their service levels, etc. That is something the regu- lator will be involved in.

I think it's bad. You look back historically, and you can see rates that come up after an election and go down right before an election. We probably saw the worst perversion of that prior to the last election when everybody got a cheque — I think it was $100 — around the province from ICBC, and it was probably the worst scenario that you could see. The year afterwards ICBC ran a $250 million loss. Those are the kinds of things that happen when politics is involved in setting automobile rates. It will probably take politicians a while to get used to not telling ICBC what to do all the time.

It will probably take the public a while to understand that the politicians can't tell ICBC what to do all the time. There's a bit of a cultural change there for everybody, and it's probably going to be a bit of a cultural change for ICBC to have to respond to a regulator as well. This is going to be tricky. It's going to be a bit of a cul- tural shift for everybody, but at the end of the day I think the model is one that will serve customers well. It will serve ratepayers well.

We hope there will be more choice, better pricing, better flexibility in the types of services that are offered, and that can only help the consumer.

THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7105 Ultimately, as we said with the core review, if we can get that kind of a healthy market happening in what's currently on the optional side, there may be opportunities, if the public is comfortable with that model and it's proven itself, to look at what is currently in basic and say: "Do all of those components that are now in basic need to stay there, or would it be benefi- cial to the consumers to take some portions of those, put them into the optional market and create a better choice and better selection for the consumer?" That's the goal.

That's what we're trying to achieve. I think this bill does that, but there will be a lot of work that needs to be done on the part of all players in order to make sure that it's effective.

Section 9 as amended approved. Sections 10 to 17 inclusive approved. On

section 18. The Chair:

Section 18 — an amendment in the min- ister's name. Hon. G. Collins: I move the amendment standing in my name on the order paper. [SECTION 18, in the proposed

section 57 (3) by deleting "section 45 (5)" and substituting "section 45 (6)".] Amendment approved.

Section 18 as amended approved. Sections 19 and 20 approved. Title approved. Hon. G. Collins: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendments. Motion approved. The committee rose at 11:29 a.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 58, Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, 2003, reported complete with amendments. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the time allocation mo- tion on the order paper, the bill will be read a third time now. [1130] Bill 58, Insurance Corporation Amendment Act, 2003, read a third time and passed. Hon. G.

Collins: I call Committee of the Whole for consideration of Bill 64. Committee of the Whole House TRANSPORTATION STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 64; G. Trumper in the chair. The committee met at 11:33 a.m. Sections 1 to 35 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. J. Reid: I move that the committee report the bill complete without amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 11:35 a.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. V. Roddick: I ask leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members V. Roddick: On this final day of the spring sitting, I am delighted to introduce to the House Hawthorne Elementary from historic Ladner in Delta South.

Haw- thorne is making up for missing its usual annual visit last year by having the entire grade 5 class of 73 stu- dents, along with eight parents — Mrs. Boray, Mrs. Creighton, Mrs. Glass, Mr. and Mrs. Clatt, Mrs. Ellis, Mrs. Hatfield and Mrs. Twaits — and five teachers — Mrs. Simm, Mrs. Williamson, Ms. Gonzalez, Ms. Mo- rely and Ms. Radslof — view our hallowed halls. Because of the large student body, they have been divided into two groups, so would the House please give an enthusiastic welcome to group No. 2. Report and Third Reading of Bills Mr.

Speaker: First of all, pursuant to the order of time allocation on the order paper, third reading will be called now. The question is third reading of Bill 64. Bill 64, Transportation Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. Mr. Speaker: I should ask the House Leader: when shall the committee sit again? Hon. G. Collins: Later today. Hon. G. Collins moved adjournment of the House. Motion approved. Mr. Speaker: The House is adjourned until 2 p.m. today. The House adjourned at 11:38 a.m.

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0529am-06
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0529am 06
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	3c7782eb9e9bf1137d54f86dde7b99deca43f71c

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