British Columbia Hansard — Monday, October 28, 2002 (37th Parliament, 3rd Session) (H1028pm-09) (H1028pm 09)

H1028pm-09

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

3rd Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Monday, October 28, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Volume 9, Number 9 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 3RD 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.legis.gov.bc.ca/hansard In addition to printed transcripts, Hansard Services publishes transcripts on the Internet and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.

Party Standings: Liberal 76; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 1. 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 (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, October 28, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... .............................................. 4075 Statements (Standing Order 25 B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 4075 Contributions of Roy Mah R. Lee Arthritis awareness W. McMahon Sumas Energy 2 project R.

Hawes Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 4077 Health care wait-lists and waiting times J. Kwan Hon. C. Hansen Transfer of patient in long-term care case J. MacPhail Hon. K. Whittred Government spending on health care advertising B. Belsey Hon. C. Hansen Management of Forests recreation sites W. McMahon Hon. M. de Jong Iris House mental health facility P. Bell Hon. G.

Cheema Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 4080 Provincial health officer's annual report, 2001: The Health and Well-being of Aboriginal People in British Columbia Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 4080 Community Services Interim Authorities Act (Bill 65) (continued) V. Anderson J. Bray J. Kwan Hon. G.

Hogg Tributes....................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 4094 Ochi Day anniversary J. Kwan Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 4094 Human Rights Code Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 64) (continued) J. Kwan Hon. G. Plant D. Hayer J. MacPhail

Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 4108 Human Rights Code Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 64) Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 4108 Public Sector Employers Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 66) Hon. G. Bruce J.

MacPhail Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 4113 Workers Compensation Amendment Act (No. 2), 2002 (Bill 63) Hon. G. Bruce J. MacPhail

4075 MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 The House met at 2:04 p.m. Introductions by Members J. Weisbeck: Yin dee tee ma Victoria. [Welcome to Victoria.] [Thai text and translation provided by J. Weisbeck.] Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure for me today to intro- duce and welcome a number of Thai parliamentarians here on a study tour. They are Mr. Pichet Pattanachote, Senator; Mr. Chirmsak Pinthong, Senator; Mr. Nirand Phitakwatchara, Senator; Mr. Charoen Kanthawongs, Member of Parliament; and Mr. Prasang Mongkolsiri, Member of Parliament. Also part of the tour are Mrs. Suthai Phitakwatchara, Mr. Takerng Somsup, Dr.

Vanchai Vatanasapt, Mr. Supanat Permpoonwiwat, Mr. Craig Kowalik and Mr. Pitchya Sookmark. [1405] There are also a number of members from Royal Roads University. I see Dr. Jim Bayer up there and an- other member — is it Nancy? Nancy. I'd like all the members to please welcome these very distinguished guests to our House today. Hon. C. Hansen: It gives me great pleasure to in- troduce several constituents who have joined us today. Enrico and Aline Dobrzensky and their son Dominic are in the gallery today. They are joined by a German exchange student who is staying with them, Martin Simon.

Would the House please make them welcome. Hon. G. Plant: I have two groups of guests to in- troduce. Earlier today I had the opportunity to meet a group of judges and senior officials from the Supreme People's Court of China to discuss, among other things, court facilities and courthouses. I'd like to introduce these people and welcome them to British Columbia, to Victoria and, more spe- cifically, to the Legislative Assembly. They are Mr. Cen, Judge Sun, Mr. Guo, Judge Lin, Judge Li, Judge Han, Mr. Chai and Mr. He.

They are joined and es- corted by Marie Burgher, who is an executive assistant with the public policy options project, and Naiwan Liu, who is the person who made the conversation possible — their interpreter. I hope that the House will please make this group of people very welcome. S. Brice: In the gallery today is Lady Mary-Ann Guilsen, who is visiting Victoria from Montreal. She is accompanied by her sons Michael and Bob Cunning- ham, who are both in business in Vancouver. I would ask the House to make them welcome. Hon. G.

Plant: The second group of people that I would like to introduce and welcome to the Legislature are Australian public servants with specific responsi- bilities in respect of aboriginal issues. We're joined to- day by Philippa Horner, who is the most senior person in the government of the Commonwealth of Australia for native title issues. Apparently she advises the At- torney General. We are also joined by Geoff Dickie, who is the ex- ecutive director of native title services in the state of Queensland, and John Bednarek, who is manager of negotiations in the native title services.

These people were here in British Columbia attend- ing a conference on aboriginal issues. We also had a good discussion this morning. I'm sure that they would be looking forward to the festivities on the floor of the House, and I ask that all members please make them welcome. Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt: Today we have two very special people I'd like to recognize in the House: Sherry and Reinhard Bohnenkamp. Sherry has been the con- stituency assistant in Richmond Centre for almost ten years now, first serving with Doug Symons and latterly working together with myself.

I know she does a fan- tastic job for all the residents of Richmond Centre. May the House please make them welcome. Hon. G. Collins: I just wanted to ask the House to welcome three guests I have here today: my wife Wendy, who's visiting again, as well as my Auntie Ei- leen and my Uncle Norm, who were here a number of years ago, but they're here visiting today. I ask the House to make them welcome. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) CONTRIBUTIONS OF ROY MAH R. Lee: I recently had the privilege of attending the "50 Years of Stories from Chinatown" event in Vancou- ver presented by the Asian Canadian Writers' Work- shop. The event celebrated the contributions and achievements of authors Wayson Choy, Paul Yee and Roy Mah to the Chinese Canadian community. [1410] The organizers paid special tribute to Mr. Roy Mah, who was presented with the inaugural Community Builder Award. Mr. Mah is founder and publisher of Chinatown News, which was Canada's longest running English language news magazine for the Chinese community.

Starting in 1951, the magazine ran for more than 40 years until it stopped printing in 1995. Many in the Chinese Canadian community view Mr. Mah as being responsible for helping to grow and nurture the Chinese and Asian Canadian community for writers. Mr. Mah has enriched our lives in many other ways. Born in Edmonton in 1918, he led more than 100 Chinese Canadian soldiers in Malaysia and Singapore during World War II and was awarded many medals for his heroism. Upon his return to Canada Mr. Mah was part of a strong group of community leaders who argued that if Chinese men can fight for Canada, they

4076 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 had earned the right to vote in their own country. The leaders of the day agreed, and Chinese Canadians re- ceived the right to vote in 1947. A few years later, Mr. Mah launched the Chinatown News. O n l y f i v e y e a r s l a t e r , D o u g l a s J u n g b e c a m e t h e first Chinese Canadian to be elected as a Member of Parliament. Though it's a comparatively short history of politi- cal life in Canada, I think we are seeing increased in- volvement of Chinese Canadians at all levels of gov- ernment.

This can only be good for the strength of our country. [Through the Chinatown News, Mr. Mah has helped bring Chinese Canadians closer to Canadian culture and in so doing was a catalyst for many Chinese Cana- dians entering politics municipally, provincially and federally.] [Translation from Chinese provided by R. Lee.] I would like the House to please join me in con- gratulating and thanking Mr. Roy Mah, who is visiting the House today with his wife, for his contributions to our province and our communities. ARTHRITIS AWARENESS W.

McMahon: This year in June, I was asked to support a friend and constituent as she prepared for the single largest personal challenge of her life. For the first time ever, she had entered a marathon. She began to prepare for her 42-kilometre walk. To do this, she knew she would be challenging both her physical and her mental endurance like she had never challenged herself before. She was doing this for personal reasons. She was d o i n g t h i s t o h o n o u r h e r s i s t e r w h o , f o r 2 0 y e a r s , h a s suffered from arthritis.

I was interested to learn that there are more than 100 forms of arthritis and condi- tions that affect the joints, the surrounding tissues and other connective tissues. Most forms of arthritis can cause significant disability and loss of quality of life. Some forms can even be fatal. One in seven people in B.C. has some form of ar- thritis, or one in every three families. In the next 16 years as the baby-boomers move through the medical system, hundreds of thousands of new cases of arthritis will be diagnosed.

This is why the government has implemented the chronic disease management strat- egy: to help people manage their illnesses effectively and efficiently. We don't often hear from people with arthritis, and living with arthritis can be tough. Today, October 28, 2002, Thora Casey from the great community of Inver- mere, British Columbia, undertook to walk 42 kilome- tres as a member of the Arthritis Society, B.C. and Yukon Division Joints in Motion team, in Dublin, Ire- land.

She tells me that her sister Beverley has an in- credibly positive attitude and keeps herself fit physi- cally, which are two of the challenges a person with arthritis faces. At least 80 percent of the money raised through Joints in Motion is allocated to arthritis research and service programs for the benefit of those suffering from the disease. Thora is pleased to have the opportunity to honour her sister and other members of her family, and many friends, co-workers and acquaintances who suf- fer from some type of arthritis. I know she was inspired as she focused on her goal.

I know she was challenged, and I know Thora was successful. I just heard about a half hour ago that Thora completed the Dublin marathon. It's certainly a worthwhile cause, and Thora has made a difference. I ask my colleagues to join with me in congratulat- ing Thora Casey. SUMAS ENERGY 2 PROJECT R. Hawes: The National Energy Board wrapped up its hearings last week on a preliminary motion from the owners of the Sumas, Washington, SE2 plant.

The mo- tion proposed that the environmental scope of the hearings be limited only to the effects of the power line connecting the plant into the B.C. grid. [1415] They argued that the environmental impacts of the plant, which in itself will add about three tonnes of additional pollution to an already stressed Fraser Val- ley airshed every day, had been adequately heard in the United States at the EFSEC hearings. The govern- ment of Alberta took the traditional position that the scope of the NEB should always be limited to transmis- sion infrastructure, and it supported the SE2 plant in this motion.

All provinces guard their constitutional authority and oppose any expansion of the NEB into provincial jurisdiction. Traditionally, this has been the path Brit- ish Columbia followed, but not this time. We made a new-era commitment to oppose the SE2, the Sumas power plant, and we're delivering on that promise. I want my constituents and the residents of the Fraser Valley to know that after weighing all the information and recommendations, the government directed our lawyers to argue in favour of expanding the scope of the NEB hearings in this unique situation.

The fact is that our government, through the lead- ership of the Premier and the ministers and MLAs throughout the Fraser Valley, decided that the health of Fraser Valley people is more important than the tradi- tional constitutional position taken by the provinces. For those of us who live in the Fraser Valley, this is an important decision, and the impacts are enormous. This is the right decision to make, and I'm proud of the leadership we've shown on this issue. Now we will await the NEB's decision, and we'll see if they were listening to us.

In closing, I want my constituents to know that contrary to what they might have read in some news- p ap e rs , M L A s hav e ne v e r b e e n m u zzl e d o n t hi s i s s u e — or on any other issue, for that matter. We are free to speak our minds in the best interests of our constitu- ents, because we live in the new era of openness that includes free votes in the House and the freedom for all of us as MLAs to speak in favour of our constituents.

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4077 Mr. Speaker: That concludes members' statements. Oral Questions HEALTH CARE WAIT-LISTS AND WAITING TIMES J. Kwan: Last April the Minister of Health Planning restructured health care. Since that announcement, new figures show that the number of people on wait-lists has grown to more than 68,000 British Columbians. Can the Minister of Health Planning explain why, after she restructured health care, more British Columbians are now on the wait-lists? Hon. C.

Hansen: Once again I will invite the mem- ber for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant to have a briefing on the difference between Health Planning and Health Services. In fact, it was I who announced the changes in April. We indicated at the time that there were going to be some pressures on the wait-lists. Clearly, we had some job actions last summer that set us back significantly w h e n i t c a m e t o g i v i n g t i m e l y a c c e s s t o s u r g e r y , a n d we also had job actions by physicians in the province earlier this year.

We are now putting in place the kinds of structures that will allow us to deal with the wait- lists in the health care system in a very meaningful way in the months and years to come. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J. Kwan: There are four ministers of health across the way. If the other ministers are not really doing their work and health planning restructuring was Health Planning's responsibility, if there's no need for all these ministers…. Well then, just have one. It's not only the number of people on the wait-lists that's growing.

It's the amount of time that people are spending on the wait-lists that is also increasing. Ac- cording to the government's own figures, wait times have increased in 13 out of 16 categories since the Lib- erals' restructured health plan has been put in place. Cataract surgery is up 25 percent. Orthopedic surgery is up by 13 percent. V ascular surgery is up by 35 per- cent. These numbers are an indictment of the Liberals' health care restructuring, and these numbers, by the way, came after the issues the Minister of Health Ser- vices has raised.

Will the minister stand in this House and explain to British Columbians why in the new era they're spending more time on wait-lists? Hon. C. Hansen: I'll be pleased to explain to this House. The reason is because we had a decade with a government that did not train enough nurses in this province to properly staff our operating rooms. We had a decade in British Columbia where the previous gov- ernment actually started… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. [1420] Hon. C. Hansen: …to reduce the number of nurses in training instead of increasing it.

What we have done since we took office is make sure we have 1,266 addi- tional nurses in training in British Columbia. We've got nurses in specialty training so that they can be in the operating rooms, so that we can actually start to deal with some of these challenges instead of the decade of denial that we had in the 1990s. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a further supplementary. J. Kwan: The health care system is being run into the ground by the Liberal government. That's why the wait-lists have gone up.

In the last two weeks we have seen that what passes for emergency care is a broken phone outside a locked emergency door. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J. Kwan: We've seen health authorities… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Let us hear the ques- tion. J. Kwan: …wasting money on spin workshops. We've seen patients dying, waiting for treatment in emergency rooms. Now, according to the government's own figures, we see that the wait-lists and wait times are on the rise.

Again, will the minister stand in this House and admit that as a result of his failed reorgani- zation of the health care system, British Columbians are spending more time waiting for their surgery? Hon. C. Hansen: Actually, the exact opposite is what's happening. Instead of trying to manage a health care sys- tem on a day-to-day basis, which we saw from the previ- ous administration, we're actually putting in place some orderly changes that are going to allow us to give better access to care in the months and the years to come.

Clearly, we inherited some big challenges that were left over from the previous government. I wish there were quick fixes. I wish I could snap my fingers and make wait- lists drop after a decade of mismanagement in the health care system, but at least this government is… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order.

4078 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 Hon. C. Hansen: …coming to terms with those challenges. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, if members are going to ask questions, at least have the courtesy to listen to the answer, please. TRANSFER OF PATIENT IN LONG-TERM CARE CASE J. MacPhail: Well, here's one for the minister re- sponsible for long-term care. If the government's doing such a good job in putting our health care system on a sustainable footing, I'd like them to make that case, that argument, to Edward Laitenen. In March Mr.

Laitenen was forced to leave his extended care bed at Shuswap General Hospital. He was transferred by ambulance 108 kilometres to Queen Victoria Hospital in Rev- elstoke. After three weeks in Revelstoke, Mr. Laitenen was transferred back to Shuswap General to his ex- tended care, again by ambulance. A week later Mr. Laitenen was moved for a third time. This time, the ambulance took him across the street to Bastion Place. To the minister of long-term care: is this any way to treat a citizen in long-term care — to move him three times in the space of four weeks? Hon. K.

Whittred: I will take that question on no- tice. J. MacPhail: Well, there's another aspect to this case that's very significant. Mr. Laitenen is 84 years old. He's quite ill. He's not rich. He and his wife live on a fixed pension. They have trouble enough paying for their medications. Two weeks ago, seven months after the ordeal, Mr. Laitenen's wife was very concerned and upset to find two bills from the government arriving at her door charging her an ambulance fee for moving her husband around like a piece of luggage. I have the bills here — two bills. She's expecting a third. Mr.

Laitenen did not want to be moved. He did not agree to an indi- vidualized care plan that the Liberals promised every senior in this province. He was shuffled around be- c a u s e o f t h i s g o v e r n m e n t ' s c u t s t o c a r e b e d s i n t h i s community. Again to the minister of long-term care: is this any way to treat a sick 84-year-old man — t o m o v e h i m around against his will three times in four weeks and then charge him for the privilege? Will she do the right thing and pay his ambulance bill? Mr. Speaker: Hon. member, the minister has taken the question on notice.

She may answer if she wishes. Hon. K. Whittred: I would be happy.… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Listen for the answer to the question, please. Hon. K. Whittred: I would invite the member to send me the details, and I would be happy to look into this situation. [1425] GOVERNMENT SPENDING ON HEALTH CARE ADVERTISING B. Belsey: I would like to ask a question, a publicly written question submitted by Gary Coons, president of the Prince Rupert District Teachers Association, to the Minister of Health Services.

Although the Premier clearly stated the government would not put available dollars into advertising, how much has the government spent on health advertising? Hon. C. Hansen: I guess just to correct one of the assumptions in the question, the commitment that the Premier made prior to the election is that we would not be engaging in the kind of political advertising we saw by the previous administration.

To answer the specific question, I can tell the member, and his constituent through the member, that when it comes to dollars spent of the budget of the Ministry of Health Services, there has not been any money spent on paid advertising. I can report that out of the budget for the public affairs bureau — which I fully understand comes from the same source, and that's the taxpayers of British Colum- bia — there have been the following amounts disbursed to date: the total ad creative and production component is $198,500, and the total ad buy cost is $416,000. Mr.

Speaker: The member for North Coast has a supplementary question. B. Belsey: I would like to ask a follow-up question of my own of the Minister of Health Services. There has been a campaign of misinformation… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. B. Belsey: …designed to scare people into believing that the resources they need do not exist. Can the Min- ister of Health Services tell my constituents and this House what resources are being directed into provid- ing quality health care for British Columbians? Hon. C.

Hansen: I'll tell you, one of the things that we're not doing out of the Health budget is sending money into advertising. Just to put that into perspec- tive, in the ten years the previous government was in office, they spent $42.5 million out of the Health budget on advertising. Interjections.

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4079 Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please, hon. members. Hon. C. Hansen: To answer the specific question of the member, we have in fact added $1.1 billion into the Health budget in British Columbia, increasing it from the $9.3 billion that was in place when the previous government was kicked out to $10.4 billion that's there today. MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS RECREATION SITES W. McMahon: My question is to the Minister of Forests.

Following the Ministry of Forests decision to withdraw from the management and maintenance of Forests recreation sites, several groups in my constitu- ency have expressed an interest in operating these sites. These sites are important to my community… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. W. McMahon: …but there is a concern that they are simply going to close. Can the Minister of Forests tell me if, to date, any groups have been successful in tak- ing over the comanagement of recreation sites? Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks, Mr.

Speaker, and to the member for the question because, in fact, out of a chal- lenge has emerged a tremendously good-news story. That relates to the fact that across this province, people — community groups, non-profits — are getting in- volved in the management of our recreation infrastruc- ture. In the riding of Kamloops–North Thompson, in Clearwater, four developmentally disabled adults are now earning a paycheque because they're involved in managing rec sites. In Burns Lake, in the Chilcotin area, people are getting involved. There is a wealth of opportunity out there.

We have an incredibly valuable recreation and trail infrastruc- ture in place in British Columbia, and now people across this province are going to be helping with and be involved in the comanagement of that infrastruc- ture. Mr. Speaker: The member for Columbia River– Revelstoke has a supplementary question. W. McMahon: The Forests recreation sites in my constituency are very important to residents, both for economic reasons and for quality of life. I have person- ally heard from numerous families and numerous tour- ists who have enjoyed visiting these sites for years. Interjection. Mr.

Speaker: C a n w e h a v e s o m e o r d e r , p l e a s e , s o that we may hear the question. [1430] W. McMahon: Can the Minister of Forests tell me how groups can keep these sites open by becoming involved in the comanagement of Forests recreation sites? Hon. M. de Jong: Well, happily….

I talked about a few areas of the province, but the area that this hon. member hails from has already got some tremendous examples of how comanagement and participation by community groups can work — whether it's the Nordic ski club or whether it's the Revelstoke snowmobile association, who are already involved in comanaging the trail system in place. What I want to tell this member and, through her, British Columbians and all members of the House is that a request for proposals has been extended. Com- munity groups are invited to contact the ministry, con- tact local offices and make a proposal.

Right across this province we are going to build on the existing recrea- tional infrastructure with the help of community groups of the sort I've mentioned and the sort that are already involved right across British Columbia. IRIS HOUSE MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY P. Bell: A few months ago I had the opportunity to open Iris House in Prince George, along with the Min- ister of State for Mental Health and my Prince George colleagues. Iris House is a great facility that deals with intensive care for individuals with mental illness.

To help cope with the increased demand for this type of facility, this government's committed to adding addi- tional beds to Iris House. I'm wondering if the Minister of State for Mental Health could update my constituents on the status of this and when it will be completed. Hon. G. Cheema: Iris House is a part of our $263 million commitment to mental health. It provides a more appropriate, homelike environment for patients who are in institutional care at Riverview Hospital. I am pleased to say that we are now in the process of nearly doubling the capacity of Iris House with a $1.1 million expansion.

We are in the construction phase of this expansion, and we expect this project to open in March. In addition to providing improved care for patients, this facility will improve the northern health authority's capacity to pro- vide care for patients in the future, and this is great news for mental health in this province. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. [End of question period.] Interjections. Mr. Speaker: M a y we h av e s o m e o rd e r , p l e as e , s o that we can hear what the Clerk has to say.

4080 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 Tabling Documents Hon. S. Hawkins: I have the honour to present the report on the health of British Columbians, provincial health officer's annual report 2001, entitled The Health and Well-being of Aboriginal People in British Columbia. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call second reading of Bill 65. Second Reading of Bills COMMUNITY SERVICES INTERIM AUTHORITIES ACT (continued) Mr. Speaker: Second reading of Bill 65.

We'll just pause for a moment while members make their way elsewhere quickly and quietly. [1435] Hon. members, please make your way to where you're going quickly, so we may continue the second reading debate on Bill 65 with the member for Vancou- ver-Langara. V. Anderson: Thank you, hon. Speaker. It's a privi- l e g e t o b e a b l e t o g e t u p a n d s p e a k i n f a v o u r o f t h e Community Services Interim Authorities Act, Bill 65. This begins to bring into reality a vision which many people in our community have had for a long time.

The process is underway to begin to transfer many of the services in our community that have been provided strictly through government regulation and develop- ment to the community itself so that families and those who are part of the services can share together in their planning and development over the years to come. The Community Services Interim Authorities Act begins the process of transferring services to the com- munity to be undertaken by the community for the people of the community. It's a process which will find a culmination in new authorities and new services be- ing presented on April 1, 2003.

Over this interim time this bill provides the mechanism in order to begin to set those processes in place.

So that all might understand, particularly those who are listening throughout the province, community services means the following types of services, which will be available to be transferred so that community participation can bring these services closer to home, to the people where they live in their own communities: adoption services, services related to early childhood development, services to assist families in caring for their children, services for children and youth with special needs to assist them to live in their own com- munities, mental health services for children and youth in their own communities, support services for youth in crisis in their own communities, child protection and guardianship services in their own communities, ser- vices for youth in conflict with the law in their own community, services for adults with developmental disabilities to assist them to live in their communities and other services that may be deemed appropriate as these are transferred from Children and Family Devel- opment.

This is a very significant change in the way services are provided in the community. It has come about by the Minister of Children and Family Development hav- ing brought together numerous agencies from across the province which have been working in these fields, many of them independently, and want interaction and community correlation with each other. Now that these services are being moved to the community, these groups have come together in an interactive process to plan, to prepare and to make possible this transition.

I simply want to commend the government and all the agency members and the family members who have come together in this way to make this very im- portant process possible and feasible. We look forward to the completion of it on April 1, 2003, as the interim process is completed and the ongoing process is estab- lished. Mr. Speaker: Second reading debate on Bill 65 con- tinues. [1440] J. Bray: I am also very pleased to stand up in sup- port of this bill, the Community Services Interim Au- thorities Act.

This bill represents the start of one of the most amazing transformations that any government in any province has seen, and that is a recognition of the strength and the value of the community and the strength of the value of the community as it pertains to families and to children. My colleague mentioned the various areas that this bill covers with respect to community services, and I would like to just focus on one, if I may. That is service to assist families in caring for their children.

Often we talk about the term "it takes a village to raise a family." Well, this government and the Minister of Children and Family Development have recognized that what has often gotten in the way of that being a realization is the great dichotomy between the community, the vil- lage, and the supports that government provides to those communities. At times the government's in- volvement has seemed to be at odds with the commu- nity, out of step with the community, butting heads with the community. The reality is that families, fami- lies in crisis and families in need, often bear the brunt of that.

This act — which starts the process of transferring all of those services away from a centralized govern- ment model out to those who know those families best, which are the communities, a community-up process — means that for the government, the staff that we provide in that, the social workers and the resource workers will actually be working with the community to achieve those common goals rather than at times being seen as an interloper in that process. It will be able to support communities to make the best decisions for families and children, as well as adults with devel-

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4081 opmental disabilities and others that community ser- vices provide for, to make sure that the community meets those unique needs in those unique settings around the province. I am particularly pleased this act makes it very clear that it is a process of design that the community is involved with. In fact, I was very impressed, during the minister's comments opening debate, by the number of d i f f e r e n t g r o u p s w h o h a v e c o m e t o g e t h e r i n p o s i t i v e support of this initiative.

In other words, it is not an initiative that's in isolation of government alone. It is really the community coming together around this province, seeing this vision, and everybody sharing this vision and moving forward. This act ensures that over the next several months, as these community plans are developed and the way in which services will be delivered, the community will all be working to- gether to ensure that delivery is not just a continuation of services but an improvement of services.

As somebody who has worked in the community of social service field all my life, I also know that for those who work for government in the Ministry of Children and Family Development — who have tremendous skills and abilities in the area of family services, child protection and resource work and who are caring and compassionate people who have ended up spending far too much time behind computers and actually do- ing administrative work — this is starting to set the course.

They will be able to be back out in the field actually practising what they studied for, which is ser- vices to families, services to children, services to people with developmental disabilities. They will be able to focus their attention in concert with the community to help families and individuals in each of those commu- nities. I am particularly excited that on Vancouver Island, the committee working in the various areas of admini- stration and policy and legislation is working tremen- dously cooperatively.

I am just so excited that I see this new way of delivering services as not just being a leader in Canada but, really, being at the cutting edge and leading the world. The minister spoke during his comments about the recognition this plan is now re- ceiving internationally. I think it's a testament that the recognition is not just of government but of the com- munity assets we currently have that are going to be able to come together to ensure we improve services.

The other area I see this act is starting to lay out, too, is that communities will start to be able to ensure that as they work together, they find the kind of effi- ciencies that focus efforts not on paperwork and ad- ministration between government and agencies but that they can devote more of their energy to actually ensuring they're delivering services because they'll be working together to develop those plans. [1445] I know the minister has heard me several times in estimates talk about the rather complicated contracting process between government and community services and the amount of time and effort agencies have to focus on satisfying the paper-craving that government sometimes develops.

By moving things all to the com- munity — decision-making as well as service delivery — it will greatly reduce all of that work which did nothing to actually serve children but served other needs. The Community Services Interim Authorities Act sets out the process by which communities will maxi- mize their efforts and government will maximize their efforts. The beneficiaries will be children and families and people with developmental disabilities. I look forward to seeing the final plans in the spring.

I commend the minister for his work, and I know that constituents in my riding who are involved in those areas are very excited and are working very hard to make sure this vision becomes a reality. J. Kwan: M r . S p e a k e r , j u s t t o a d v i s e y o u , I ' m a l s o the designated speaker on this issue. Mr. Speaker: Thank you. J. Kwan: I'd like to first congratulate the minister for getting this bill to this House. I know the minister has been working on this process for a long, long time.

That said, I also wish to take this opportunity to raise some concerns about this legislation, and I'd like to share those concerns with members of this House.

I understand from the minister's statements in first reading that the intention of the act is to have "real par- ticipation and influence by communities in the delivery of services." I think there's a real fear growing in com- munities that having participation and influence is all too often a code word for downloading of costs and responsibilities to the communities, and all too often these additional burdens come with insufficient fund- ing and support from government. I'm hoping the minister can reassure the House and the people in the community that this is, in fact, not the case.

However, since the election…. I've been around long enough to sometimes perhaps get a little bit cyni- cal around the actions of government. When govern- ment says it's protecting the most vulnerable, we see actions to the contrary. We see program cuts that are hurting and gutting the heart and the spirit of commu- nities. We've seen that in education, with school boards taking the heat for stresses caused by underfunding that this Minister of Education, this government, have brought about. This government is very comfortable in saying: "It wasn't us who cut the program; it was the school trustees.

So don't blame us; blame somebody else." Well, it was this government that brought about those program cuts and the underfunding that caused the stress in the community. It is this government that's ultimately responsible for the devastating cuts that are taking place across the board in this province. We just saw it in health care. We see the crisis that's being cre- ated by this government in health care. You can try to avoid responsibility, but I see through it, and I suspect the public is seeing through it as well. I just want to let

4082 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 the minister know that people are watching. We in the opposition are watching. I hope the minister understands, and I think that the minister does understand, that the lives of children and their families are too important to play politics with. They're too important to take a risk of reducing pro- grams at their expense. It is the lives of children that are at stake and the futures of their families that are at stake. I hope the minister understands that and under- stands that the restructuring….

While on the one hand, we can look to see how we can improve the system, how we can allow for true responsibility for the com- munity but with sufficient support to ensure they have the tools to get the job done, to make sure that funding is not eroded…. I hope that will become reality and that, along with this piece of legislation, sufficient funding will also come from the government.

To look back, though, in terms of reviewing what the ministry has done to date, what this government has done to date, we hear stories from the public, stories in the me- dia that have been reported about what some of the im- pacts of the cuts are, and it's directly in this ministry. Let me just quote from the Creston Valley Advance . This was an

article published on July 11, 2002. I won't read the entire article, because it is long. I'll just read parts of it so that we get the idea of what we're talking about: "A former program assistant with the Creston and District Society for Community Living is among employees speaking up about the lack of opinions and options available to mentally and physically disabled adults who once lived in two homes owned by the society.

Part of what was formerly known as the Endicott Centre, Rosewood House, was closed in May, and Archibald House was closed on June 30 by the Ministry of Children and Family Development in what were billed as cost-cutting measures, but Pat Mahoney said the move will cost even more in the long term. [1450] "'Clients have been given no choice in what's going to happen to them,' said Mahoney, a former program assistant at Rosewood.

Instead, the nine clients, who range in age from 30 to 75, are being moved to other housing units operated by the CDSCL, the Creston and District Society for Community Living, or are living with people contracted to look after their needs. Dale Deal, a spokesman for the Canadian Union of Public Employees who also worked at Rosewood, said family members who disagree with the clients being moved into the community aren't being given a choice." The

article then goes on to say: "Clients being moved to other facilities operated by the society are being transferred to already crowded locations without a corresponding increase in staff, which Deal said makes the workload difficult. Mahoney suspects the closure was accelerated at the behest of the provincial Liberal government. 'It sure looks like it.

It happened so fast.' Mahoney is predicting dire consequences for disabled people in the Kootenays as they age. 'There is no safety net for having a huge problem with somebody in Cranbrook,' he said. 'We were the safety net.' Mahoney said the centre was a successful part of the community that shouldn't have been closed. 'To me, it's like you're losing a landmark in the community,' he said. 'I think this community needs to be aware of what's going on,' Deal added. 'I think it's a shame.'" It's just one example in terms of the cutback of pro- grams that's caused by government underfunding.

Another situation, in the Alberni Valley Times , De- cember 2001: "What will people with disabilities do without a citizens advocacy office, community living, group homes and other programs? There will be no citizens advocacy office dances or having coffee in the citizens advocacy office or having friends. Thousands of people will be without jobs in British Columbia communities. We need all those programs like the citizens advocacy office, group homes, community living and other programs in this community for people with disabilities.

The funding cuts are not acceptable." This is an editorial in the Alberni Valley Times. The cuts, of course, are not just in one small com- munity in one part of the province. They are through- out the province in very many different communities. There are a series of articles that put these issues out for contemplation and for the public's information and, hopefully, to bring the issues to the government and have the government address their concerns. So far, though, we have not seen that the government reacted in any way, shape or form to the concerns.

In fact, just this past weekend in Penticton, the Premier rose up in the Liberal Party's convention to say they're going to stay the course. They're simply not going to listen to the public with respect to their concerns. I hope that's not the case here with this minister. In another article, in the Cowichan Valley Citizen , December 5, 2001…. Interjection. J. Kwan: You know, the member is saying I should have been there. No, actually, I was busy out talking to people as opposed to being locked in a room talking to only people that the Liberal government wants to talk to.

I want to talk to people who don't have access to the government. That's what we've seen to date, because MLA offices are locked. People are not able to get in to access the MLAs or the cabinet ministers to raise their concerns. That's what the opposition members were doing this weekend. The Cowichan Valley Citizen: "Budget cuts called for by the provincial government's core review of services will have a dramatic impact beyond the expected layoff of as many as 12,000 provincial employees, warns the executive director of the Cowichan Valley Association for Community Living.

Bonner said the Ministry of Children and Families provides CVACL with about $2.1 million of its annual $2.5 million budget, making layoffs and service cuts inevitable if the ministry's budget is slashed by 30 percent." We now know it's being cut by 23 percent. Still, 23 percent is a significant impact on the overall delivery of programs. "'Cutbacks of this extent will restrict CVACL and other service providers from delivering our present level of residential care, day program support and early

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4083 intervention to children,' he said, 'and most of these services already have wait-lists.' Bonner attended a meeting of the Coalition for Community Living in Victoria last Tuesday, where he said overwhelming opposition to budget cuts was expressed. [1455] "'Everyone I talked to felt threatened, abandoned and outraged.' With 85 percent of his ministry funding allocated to pay staff and most operational funding dependent on community organizations like the United Way, Bonner insists that there's no fat left to trim.

It is his view that funding actually needs to be increased in order to reduce the amount of people wait-listed for CVACL services. He took that message to a meeting with the MLA for Malahat–Juan de Fuca. 'He told me the ministry is essentially out of funds and having to make difficult decisions,' Bonner said. 'I'm urging government to think of the long-term costs of cutting back funding — cutting back our children's services really increases the stress on families to have to deal with additional challenges. Mothers may have to quit their jobs to take care of kids, and that leads to a cycle of stress and poverty.

As a s o c i e t y , d o w e w a n t t o s e n d m e s s a g e s t h a t e a r l y intervention child care isn't that important?'" That's an excerpt from the newspaper article. In Kamloops, yet another region of the province, in the Kamloops Daily News: "Community care workers are not the only people frightened by the B.C. government cutbacks to social services. Several people with mental disabilities participated in Tuesday's protest by Kamloops community social service workers.

One of them, Alice Taylor, made a speech that brought tears to the eyes of some veteran caregivers. 'Your cuts are hurting us,' says Taylor, reading from a written statement, 'so just leave us alone.' Taylor has lived with the same caregiver since 1999, one of the people who might lose her job as a result of the Liberal government's rewriting of union contracts in this sector. Taylor said she fears a return to institutionalized care, where it's like having guards come and go." Still in Kamloops: "Upon receiving the recent action alert of November 13 from the B.C.

Association for Community Living regarding the planned cutbacks and also hearing of the proposed cutbacks to the front-line workers and departments in the Ministry of Children and Family Development, I feel compelled to write a letter of concern regarding these issues. I've worked in the public school system as a school support worker for the last 20 years. The students I've worked with have a wide range of disorders, both physically and mentally. "My history goes back to the days when Kamloops had two segregated schools which many clients from the institution attended.

During these years I've had the pleasure of working with social workers, group home staff, parents, support services, community support services, etc., who I feel have been most critical in assisting students to achieve their goals to be the best they can and to successfully integrate into our society. Without the assistance of all members of their support team, these students would not have been able to achieve their success. "Many of the students I've worked with were students who were in the care of the Ministry of Children and Family Development and relied upon their social workers to advocate for them.

It causes me great distress to think that our provincial government plans to initiate serious cutbacks in funding and services for people with disabilities, as well as to children in care. The proposed cutbacks fly in the face of the pre-election promises the Liberal government made not to cut these services. There are many ways we can do better with the dollars we have, but cutting staff, services and funding from an already bare-bones system is not the answer." A similar issue has been raised in Nanaimo in yet another article.

It talks about the concern of the tar- geted number of layoffs of staff, the inability of the community to cope and, ultimately, for the community, who depends on these services, to suffer. In the Van- couver Sun , closer to home, are more issues around problems around wait-lists. Individual letters written to us around these concerns, too, indicate the same issue. Time and time and time again there is a theme that emerges as we look at these letters and these editorials. It is the cutting of the program, of the funding and what will ultimately happen.

There won't be sufficient resources to provide for the programs that are needed. While we're restructuring, we can look at ways of how we can do things differently, but the government and the minister must be aware that the tools for people to do their work must be available. You cannot cut back and say: "Here it is. Here's your responsibility, com- munity. Go to it, and go do a good job of it." When the tools are not there, they can't do their work. That's the reality, and that's what I'm concerned about. [1500] The Vancouver Sun put forward a story last No- vember that has some very interesting statistics.

The ministry supports community living for about 8,700 adults with developmental disabilities. Approximately 75 percent, or roughly $1 billion, of the ministry's fund- ing is spent in the area of community living. The statis- tics obtained by the Vancouver Sun through the Free- dom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act show that in June there were about 12,000 children and youths receiving services from the ministry's special needs health programs, but 14,500 were on this wait- list.

In the story this minister said that the government has dealt with the wait-lists by spreading services thinly among children and youths, and now 6,867 re- main on the wait-lists, but acknowledged that only two-thirds of the children and youths receiving minis- try aid are getting minimum support. I wonder how this new community governance model will address these issues of wait-lists. I hear about innovation, the goal of improving outcomes and participation. But what of wait-lists in the community?

It is all very well and good if the service model has been revamped, but if you're still on a wait-list waiting for that service, these changes won't do you much good. The reality is we're seeing another 23 percent reduction in the minister's budget. Earlier today, thanks to the minister — who actu- ally, amongst few ministers, offers briefings to the op- position around the status of change that's going on within the ministry — I met with the minister's staff. They were very good in providing information and

4084 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 answering questions. The issue that I raised with the staff is that when the minister is faced with the cuts in his ministry, what will happen? Will those cuts then correspond and be transferred to the community who's to deliver these services that have been given to the community? The answer was yes. We know that the transfer of service cuts is going to take place. It is a three-year budget that the minister h a s p u t f o r w a r d . I n t h e b u d g e t i t s a y s t h a t n e x t y e a r there will be a 23 percent funding reduction.

There'll be a 22 percent staffing reduction, and those will simply transfer onto the community. Caution around the re- structuring needs to be raised at this point. It's not just about the authority that we need to be careful. It's also the funding and the tools associated with it and what tools are given to the community. As well, I asked the question: aside from the fund- ing, who will be monitoring the progress for the com- munity in terms of what's going on? The answer from the ministry staff was very simple: the minister. The problem is that the minister himself has to bring for- ward these service cuts.

Quite frankly, it puts the min- ister in a bit of a bind. On the one hand, I'm sure the minister, in his own heart, doesn't want to bring for- ward these program cuts, but yet he is forced to. He has to. He has to do the bidding of the government. He has to do the bidding of the Premier. So they are off- loaded. It is the minister who will ultimately say: "Hey, look at what we're doing and how well we're doing it." We see this in question period every day. You ask a legitimate question on what's going on. As an example, how can wait-lists for the Ministry of Health have in- creased?

The minister's own website shows the catego- ries of surgery have increased significantly. Not just the number of people on the wait-list has increased, but also the amount of time has increased. This is all under the auspices of the government's restructuring plan. Supposedly, it's going according to plan, yet the northern health authority has come for- ward to say they cannot meet the objectives that have been laid out. They cannot meet the target that's been laid out. They're going to have to go through more cuts in health care in order to achieve that.

Then in the House, when asked that question, the Minister of Health Services gets up and says they're doing a great job, everything's on target, they're moving forward, and this is what has to be done. Are we going to hear the same thing from this min- ister when the issues arise? I anticipate they may well arise, because the budget is targeted to be cut by 23 percent.

How can you have the watchdog function of how things are going — if the community is getting enough resources to do their job — being monitored by the government? [1505] I further asked the question: will there by a public reporting of what's going on? The steering committees, as I understand it, will be putting together reports to the minister. But that's to the minister. There's been no commitment to date whether or not those reports will be made public.

I would assert that those reports must be made public, not through an FOI process that's lengthy and that could delay the immediacy of know- ing what is going on — for British Columbians to know what's going on and to monitor fairly and accurately what is going on with all the changes within the minis- try.

It is incumbent on the minister to make that deci- s i o n a nd t o re s p o nd i n t hi s H o u s e , t o s ay , " Y e s , I wi l l make the report open and accessible to the public im- mediately," and therefore really support the notion of transparency within government, not this other notion within the new-era agenda where everybody says that they're open and transparent within the Liberal gov- ernment. What we've seen to date is for the govern- ment to bring forward more obstacles to accessing in- formation, to create more committees that say they're even exempted from the FOI process.

That, in my view, is not open and transparent government. I hope the minister will commit today, in this House, that all the reporting that is sent to the minister from the steering committee on the restructuring, on the progress and on what's going on is in fact made public for all British Columbians to assess and to make a determination whether or not progress has been made.

In the minister's second reading statements, the minister claimed that "the introduction of this legisla- tion marks an important step in meeting two new-era commitments: to stop the endless bureaucratic restruc- turing that has drained resources from children and family…." It is interesting for the minister to claim that starting the most extensive restructuring and downsiz- ing ever undertaken for this ministry somehow com- plies with the pre-election promise to stop the endless bureaucratic restructuring.

In the second reading statement also, the minister went on to say: "While we identify and develop the processes for change, we must at the same time safeguard the quality of services to tens of thousands of vulnerable children, families and adults that the ministry serves. A budget reduction target of 23 percent must accompany this change over the period of our three-year service plan. A year ago many of those involved might have had some skepticism and, indeed, declared this process impossible.

Yet we have persevered, and people have been committed to it and involved in it, and we are currently right on track." As far as I can tell, the minister has yet to produce a shred of evidence that any cuts, much less a 23 percent cut, can be introduced without seriously eroding the services to vulnerable children, individuals and fami- lies. Many of the families I've spoken to remain as skeptical as they were a year ago. I read off some of the news media reports in terms of the concerns and what the impacts are in the community as a result of budget cuts.

In second reading, the minister stated: "The feed- back, comments and consensus from the core services review process were that the current systems were both dysfunctional and unsustainable over the long term. Further, there was a strong consensus that regional and

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4085 community-based models of governance are the pre- ferred option for more effective and more efficient ser- vice delivery." As far as I can see, most of the submissions did not argue that services were unsustainable. They argued that services were underfunded. Further, there was no consensus on the model that the ministry is proposing. That model is based on one out of hundreds of compet- ing submissions to the core review process. That sub- mission was, incidentally, the only one that supported the minister's agenda of 23 percent cuts.

We can see, even by submissions received by the ministry, that there is manipulation of the information, manipulating it to actually sell and support the gov- ernment's own agenda of cost-cutting exercise. The question that I raise again is: how do we know that there is indeed progress, that there are indeed enough resources for the communities that take on this respon- sibility to do the work that is required of them, when in fact the community groups in their own submissions to government say that it's not an issue about sustainabil- ity?

I n f a c t , w h e n I t a l k t o p e o p l e , m o s t p e o p l e s a y t o me that investing in our children is too important for people to actually cut its programs. That ultimate goal of investing in children for our future is the ultimate goal. Therefore the investment is worth it. That's what they say to me. They don't sit around and say, "Well, gee, this is unsustainable," as the government often says about all services, whether it be health care, edu- cation, and now children and family services. They say t h e c o n t r a r y .

T h e y s a y w e n e e d t o i n v e s t i n i t a s o p - posed to taking away. [1510] Yet what we see in government's actions is the op- posite direction from what many British Columbians say. This is the caution I raised earlier around the watchdog function. It's not that I don't trust the minister. I think the minister has his heart in the right place. I'm sure of that. I know some of the work the minister did before he got elected to his position now.

I know the minister, before this time, wanted to advocate for a positive change, not to cut services and reduce services, but he i s r e q u i r e d t o d o t h e g o v e r n m e n t ' s b i d d i n g . H e i s r e - quired to do the Premier's bidding of cutting funding to programs, thereby hurting the very people he is mandated to protect and provide services to. That is the reality we now see. The minister went on to say in his second reading: "Hundreds of community leaders have since begun to contribute their knowledge, ideas, time and energy as we try to reinvent governance in these areas of social service.

Their wisdom has been gathered and has been focused." Well, from the information I've received, hundreds of community leaders who offered their time and ex- pertise felt they have been completely shut out of the process. They believe it was because they would not endorse the government's predetermined agenda of the 23 percent cut. I want to be very clear here. The issue is not neces- sarily about the governance model in terms of a change to give the responsibility to the community. I want to be clear that that's not necessarily the issue.

The issue is the resources that need to accompany that work and that responsibility. Many people have said time and again that they are not endorsing a 23 percent cut from the government's budget for children and family ser- vices. The minister in his second reading went on to say: " B y a n d l a r g e , p e o p l e t e n d t o d i s t r u s t c h a n g e . " T h e people I've spoken with and had contact with are not necessarily opposed to change. In fact, they want to see change. People see the need for a change, and I see the need for change in some cases as well.

Where the dis- trust comes in about the restructuring process is that it is predetermined and driven by the government's need to implement arbitrary and unreasonable budget- reduction targets. What is driving the model for change is not what is needed to make it better necessarily, but rather, it's what the bottom line is. If that is the reason that drives the need for change, that's where people have issues. That's where I have an issue.

It cannot be a bottom-line exercise when we're dealing with children and families who are at risk and who need an investment from gov- ernment so that they, too, can have a future and their quality of life can be improved. There's distrust that the minister has never seri- ously considered, I believe, alternatives besides the plan that the government came up with a year ago. Now, perhaps the minister has considered it and has been unable to convince his own government to make changes. At the end of the day, the same prevails: those cuts are taking place, and the community is getting hurt by them.

That message somewhere…. I don't know who can deliver it to the Premier or to the Minister of Finance, but it has to be delivered, and it has to be listened to. That is the issue that needs to be focused on as well. Many families think every step of the process has been governed by the requirement that either you buy into the minister's predetermined plan or you're left out in the cold. We see that. We see that amongst dif- ferent ministers.

"If you don't agree with me, if you don't agree with what we're proposing, then there's no need for consultation." That's the pattern, the trend, of this government when it comes to that. [1515] Then the ministers often would say: "It's not that we haven't consulted; it's simply because they don't agree with our suggested change." Well, if the majority of British Columbians don't agree with your suggested change, there's a problem. I would venture to say there is a problem.

You cannot say you consulted with peo- ple, when the majority of people don't agree with you, and then you just shut out the people who want to bring forward different opinions for consideration. It's not because they want to harm the government in any way, shape or form. It's not because they want to harm the system of the delivery of services in any way, shape

4086 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 or form. On the contrary, they want to actually advance those things. They want to bring in a positive sugges- tion. Some of it may require that government deviate from the original and only agenda, the bottom line. Sometimes it requires that.

That's what is needed, I think, to see this interim set of approaches in delivering services so that the children and families who are in need of greater services and protection have those kinds of resources ; so that the ears of government are actually open to them, to receiving different informa- tion, not just on the issue around delivery-of-service models. The resources need to be there so that they can in fact deliver those services in an adequate and suc- cessful manner. The issue, though, around consultation does arise in this debate around this bill.

The minister advised that there was plenty of consultation. He said: "The steering committee hosted video conferences linking more than 400 families in 20 communities over a four-week period, creating the opportunity for people to m e e t f a c e t o f a c e a c r o s s h u n d r e d s o f k i l o m e t r e s t o dialogue with steering committee members. Just last Thursday, I took

part in one such video conference with more than 70 people with disabilities and family members from across the province. I joined the co-chairs of the steering committee and other committee members in responding to the issues and concerns from people in five different communities." Well, some of the feedback I've been receiving is that the transition steering committee's consultation consisted of a series of information sessions held as they were drafting or after they had already submitted their draft report.

In communities like Nanaimo, where families turned out in large numbers to express serious concerns, I've been told that none of those concerns were reflected in the report, which claims sweeping support for all their proposals. The undoubtedly pricey video conferences were held in October after the steering committee had al- ready submitted its report to the ministry. How can the m i n i s t e r p o s s i b l y i n c l u d e t h a t a s p a r t o f t h e c o n s u l t a - tion? It's after the fact. He received the information after the fact. Then to say that you have consulted….

The report had already been put in and forwarded. There's a problem with the process around that, a prob- lem with consultation. The ministry had clearly already written the draft legislation even before getting the draft report, so what was the point of even pretending to be consulting? If legislation is already drafted and you haven't yet re- ceived the report — never mind that the report was sent first, and then you went out and had the video conferencing — how does that add up to consultation? Where is the real input? How is it reflected?

How is it reflected in all the different stages that are essential for true consultation to take place? Now, some ministers in the Liberal government have made this argument: "Consultation means what we want to move forward on, and people can comment about it afterwards." It's not good enough. That's not really how consultation works. How consultation really works is that you go and ask people without a predetermined agenda. You say to people: "We do have some ideas, and here they are. What do you think about that?

How do we improve upon it?" Then you take that input and incorporate it into the changes that you want to move forward. That, in my view, in all my years working in the community, having been an elected official, is what constitutes consultation — not the other way around. It doesn't work when you have legislation already in place, and then the report comes out afterwards, and you say: "Oh, by the by, here's the report. The report has already been submitted. We went out and talked to people, but none of those comments are included in any of these things." That does not amount to consulta- tion.

It surely does not amount to true consultation, if anybody has any understanding of what consultation really means. [1520] The minister stated: "The changes to this legislation will create a more stable system of services for chil- dren, families and adults with developmental disabili- ties.

It will bring the capacity for decision-making closer to the community, providing faster and more direct responses to the needs of vulnerable people." Some families worry that these changes will instead give families the dirty job of implementing the minis- ter's budget cuts for him, therefore providing the min- ister with political insulation from the devastating im- pacts that could result from these cuts. The changes may give families the impossible task of having to choose between cutting services that affect their own loved ones or choosing cuts that will affect other fami- lies.

We see that, and I predict that in the Ministry of Education as these cuts are now taking place across our province, as we see schools being closed, as we see classroom sizes increasing, as we see special needs children not getting the services they need, as we see teachers having to make a difficult decision: do they spend time with Johnny or Annie? Who needs more support at this moment? How do they make the deci- sion and determine who needs one-on-one support

whereas the other children don't? That is what's hap- pening right now across the province in the area of education. I hope this will not happen in this ministry, really, and I pray that it doesn't. I'm not normally a religious person, but God forbid it should happen. The risks are too high for the people who depend on these services, who do sometimes…. I think some of them do. There's truth to it. The electorate did have an election. There was an election, and they voted the Liberal government in.

They wanted to see change, but change that they were promised, where they said they would not cut services to British Columbians, where they said they will in fact protect the most marginalized, the most vulnerable in our community. Deliver that promise. Deliver that promise is what the opposition is asking for.

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4087 There is nothing that would make me happier than if the minister and this government would deliver that promise and not hurt the people as I do see now, where all of their programs, many of their programs, are tak- ing place in our community; where people are being hurt; where children, families, seniors, individuals — young or old, irrespective, across the board — are get- ting hurt by this government's programs. And then for the Premier to say, "I'm staying the course. You guys are just making noise out there, and you know what?

People elected us for change…." People did elect this government for change, but not the changes this government is doing. Let's be clear about that. If the government changes course, the op- position will be the first to applaud the government, to say: "Good on you for recognizing what needs to be done and for doing what you promised to do." That's what we want, and that's what British Columbians want as well. I raised the issue around the cuts, but so far the minister has not addressed this in his comments. I also found the sections of bill that refer to donations inter- esting — very interesting.

We already know that this government's move towards cost-cutting has meant more and more people having to pay out of their own pockets. It is overt, actually; it's quite blatant. The gov- ernment is saying to you: "Fewer services for you, but you have to pay more." We see that. We see that in the Ministry of Health. We see it in health services deliv- ery, where MSP premiums have gone up. Pharmacare is going up, actually, in a week's time or so for people. We see that services are being cut off in terms of cover- age from MSP. We see these things and these changes taking place.

Costs to communities, individuals and families have actually gone up, but services have actually decreased. We haven't really heard from the government in terms of how the minister's going to address these issues, yet we see in the bill that there's a

section that talks about…. Well, there's a way for you to get more money, for you to make more money.

Section 12(1) reads: "An interim authority may solicit and accept donations from any person or source for the use of the interim authority."

Section 12(2): "In addition to solicit- ing and accepting donations under subsection (1), an interim authority, with the minister's prior approval, may solicit and accept donations for purposes related to the provision of community services or administra- tive services by or on behalf of a new authority." [J. Weisbeck in the chair.] Is this going to let the government off the hook to say: "Yes, we've cut 23 percent, but we gave you the authority to manage your resources. We gave you more flexibility"? Where have we heard that?

In the area of education, from the Minister of Education, "We gave you the authority to manage your resources; we gave you the authority to go and make more money," and all of those kinds of things. In the meantime, the Minister of Education knows very well that she's hurt- ing education, or she should know very well. If she's pretending not to acknowledge it, she should know that very well. [1525] We see the same kind of theory and the same kind of approach being applied here under this bill.

I hope it is not an approach from the government to say to the community groups: "I've given you flexibility to go and manage the service cuts, to manage the resources so that you should be able to deliver the mandate that is now required of you, even with less money." I hope that is not the intent here. I hope it's not the intent of government to say to the community groups…. I worked for non-profits for many, many years be- fore I became a politician, and we spent a lot of time looking for donations and so on.

Luckily for me — in the position I was in and working with the particular non-profit that I was involved with, dealing with low- income individuals, tenants rights and housing needs and human rights and so on — core funding for the organization for these key positions was never in ques- tion.

I hope that we will now not see a translation of this clause under 12(1) and (2) to say to these organiza- tions — and now with a 23 percent reduction in ser- vices and budgets, it means that core funding from government in some of these programs will be eroded — therefore: "You must exercise this section's options to go out and find moneys and donations." I hope the minister will stand up in this House and guarantee that core funding for these authorities will be stable and maintained, that he would be able to do that.

I hope this bill does not mean that the interim authorities will have to try to raise funds on their own in order to provide for core services. If they have to do that, they will have very little time to mind and be able to deliver the mandate they're meant to do. I do want to say it is true that non-profits often use fundraising to raise money, but these funds are often used to supple- ment what they're getting from government, to in- crease and to enhance what it is that they're doing. Fundraising should not be required to replace govern- ment funding. That is the issue I want to raise with the minister.

In talking with community advocates and parents, I've been made very aware of some deep concerns in the community around how this whole restructuring process has taken place. The report of the minister's transition steering committee — the TSC, as it is called — has not yet been made public, but it appears that the next stage of detailed operational and financial plan- ning for the ministry restructuring and cuts is already underway, based on agreements reached between the minister and the transition steering committee. When will this transition committee report be made public?

The latest I've heard is that the final revised report was presented to the minister over the past weekend. Yet again I find myself asking the govern- ment why they're not introducing this report before they introduce legislation or at least introduce it at the same time so that the information could be shared and reviewed by British Columbians, so that we can assess

4088 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 what the steering committee had in fact said to the government and what the concerns might or might not be. Or have they been addressed? Who will be on the board of the interim authority? The bill makes it very clear that the minister can hand- pick his own appointees. I've spoken to parents and advocate about how they feel about the representation in the restructuring process so far.

What I'm hearing is that there are some grave concerns about the steps the minister has taken during this restructuring process and about the structure of the transition steering com- mittee.

The biggest concern has been whether the steer- ing committee has been truly representative of parents and community members or whether it just serves as a hand-picked board to recommend the cuts and restruc- turing that the minister already has in mind. [1530] I really hope this is not the case, but I've been given some information that raises these issues — a whole bunch of letters, in fact, that the opposition has re- ceived. I'll put some of these on record, and I hope the minister will respond to these. I hope the minister will say, "Don't worry.

It will be representative, and here's how we will do it," and illustrate how he will actually m ak e s u re t hat i s i n f ac t t he c as e and no t ju s t p ay l i p service to the notion of consultation, as I know some other ministers have done. I hope the minister will re- spond to some of these letters. Here's one letter from an individual, and it reads as follows. It's addressed to the minister.

"As a parent of a nine-year-old autistic son, I have grave concerns over the implementation and fast-paced transition that seems to be happening to turn over control to community living associations to provide services to children and youth. In the first place, I do not feel that children and youth special needs have been duly represented in the transition steering committee and, from reviewing all the minutes, do not feel that they will properly be represented if this proceeds." Now, the letter goes on to highlight some of the con- cerns they have, and the minister has this letter al- ready.

I would ask the minister to please take a look at this and respond to this individual. Here's another letter, again addressed to the minis- ter. It's very recent, actually. In fact, this letter is from October 21, 2002. Parts of the letter read as follows: "I'm writing to express my anger and dismay that you're proceeding full speed with plans to downsize your ministry, implementing arbitrary, dangerous and unjustified 17 percent budget cuts. I'm also outraged at the corrupt and cynical consultation process that has been employed in an effort to portray that this is something that B.C. families actively support.

"I'm writing to inform you that as a parent of a child with autistic spectrum disorder, I do not support your vision to transform community living services. I do not support plans to transfer responsibility for services to a community governance model. I do not support your transition steering group, the Community Living Coalition, the Individualized Funding Family Coalition or the overall process to date.

As a volunteer facilitator for the Vancouver-Burnaby parents support group of the Autism Society of B.C., I know that our families either don't know, don't understand or don't support these plans." It is a lengthy letter, which again raises a whole range of issues that have been brought to the minister's atten- tion, and I hope the minister will respond to this letter too.

Another letter on a similar note but with a different request: "Please postpone any further transformation to community living services until at least three months after a hard copy of the Community Living Transition Steering Committee's final report and budget have been distributed to all the stakeholders, individuals, family members and service providers. This will give people and their advocacy groups a chance to suggest changes and then agree or disagree on the final outcome. Most stakeholders have not had an adequate chance to influence the proceedings.

Detailed information is extremely difficult or impossible to obtain, and most family members do not understand what is going on. Until the wishes of all these people are known and the majority agrees to the new governance model, the mandate to create community-based governance would not have been met. "You have committed to a 17 percent funding reduction over two years plus an additional 6 percent capacity to address the waiting lists, which adds up to a nearly 23 percent reduction in funding per person.

I don't see how this can be accomplished without a serious reduction in service quality that's violating one of the CLTSC's basic principles stated in their May 17 meeting: no reductions in service quality.

"In order to understand how this 23 percent reduction is to be accomplished, we need to have detailed budgetary information — i.e., how many social workers will be eliminated, how much will funding for accreditation and licensing be reduced, which support services will be cut, whether basic services will have their funding further reduced or be required to add additional clients without additional funding, etc.

"The new community living authority will have an extremely difficult task ahead, so I'm asking you to simplify their job and not request any transfer of funds from other ministries for programs supporting the most vulnerable people with developmental delays." It's not necessarily disagreeing with the need for a new governance model, but there's concern around the budget constraints, what is in the report and what in- formation is available so that people can evaluate it and then determine what that new model should look like. There seems to be a theme that emerges from many of these letters.

Yes, some actually say outright: "I'm very concerned. Here's how I feel that I or people I know have not been consulted." Many of the letters also say, though, that yes, we know there's a need for change, but here are some underlying core founda- tional issues that have been put in front of these groups to try to meet these challenges.

Much of it centres around the funding, what the intent of the government is and why the government and the minister don't make that information public and available so that people can assess and make a determination and there- fore comment on these proposed changes so that we can truly create cohesiveness in terms of trying to

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4089 change the system in a way that can be positive and minimize the confrontation and dissension that can exist and, perhaps most important of all, minimize the distrust that exists in our broader community. [1535] Here's another letter. This is actually a very recent letter. It just came in on October 23. I'll just read a cou- ple of paragraphs from the letter.

"I'm seriously concerned about the proposals being discussed by your organization with the Liberal government, which have cost reductions as the primary focus and will jeopardize my son's eventual successful placement into a suitable facility outside of our home. I think many families are simply gravely concerned about the eventual outcome of the changes proposed for the provision of services to persons with developmental disabilities. "The Supreme Court of Canada recently adopted this position.

Since disability strikes randomly and irrationally, it is unfair to place the burden of care and cost entirely on the shoulders of the family for life. The community as a whole should share in the care of those among us who are the most vulnerable. "It has generally been the view of progressive agencies and service organizations, as well as governments, that disabled persons are entitled to be full members of the community.

In my opinion, enabling disabled persons to be members of the community requires us to ensure suitable living accommodations are made available that offer comfort, privacy and dignity to the residents. That is what I hope will be available for my child. That is what I fear is being placed at risk through your current deliberations respecting transition services." Just three more letters here that I want to put some information from onto the record, around people's con- c e r n s . T h i s o n e , a g a i n , c a m e i n o n O c t o b e r 2 3 .

J u s t t o highlight some of the concerns that have been raised, the letter reads: "I'm aware of families and perhaps other stakeholders who have been afraid to voice concerns for fear of repercussions, which could include being targeted for funding or service reductions — that services will be discontinued for adults who are assessed with an IQ bordering on 70 and above or a new, more restrictive threshold; that the community living authority will take over equity in group homes currently being held by the B.C.

Buildings Corporation, as this will facilitate the possible sale of some of these homes; that there will be wage cuts, discontinued block funding and implementation of individualized funding for specialized services for those with autism.

This will result in the loss of supports and qualified, seasoned staff with the necessary specialized skill and experience to support individuals with autism, with complex or challenging needs." Actually, there are many bullets in terms of what some of the concerns are, and I've only just highlighted a couple for the flavour of the debate for the minister's information and this House's information. Here's another letter with respect to concerns around changes.

Parts of the letter from this individual read as follows: "It saddens me, though, to think that the needs of the older population have not been identified during the months of the CLTSC planning, except for a passing verbal reference now and then when older parents have expressed their concerns. Take, for example, the proposal to sell off existing group homes to produce revenues. Individuals who are now seniors, like their parents, and have lived all their lives at home have had their names on wait-lists for residential care for years.

"If no new group homes are being set up and existing ones may close, what are the residential options for them? Congregate care? We've already seen the minister think about that. Foster care? Sorry, there are not enough foster parents with experience and dedication to fill the void. Frankly, older parents are already experiencing the stress and heartache of adult children being shuffled from one foster parent to another. Each time a situation doesn't work out, the individual returns home to wait for another placement.

Meanwhile, parents wind up in hospital emergency as they share the trauma of their son or daughter and because of their own failing health." This letter only just came in on Friday the 25th. The people who are writing these letters…. The point I want to make is that they've heard the minis- ter's second reading debate.

They have now seen some of the changes that have been proposed, and they still have some of the concerns. [1540] There's a final letter from somebody from Maple Ridge, actually, who essentially raised similar points to all the others around the notion of potentially putting in place income testing to make it more difficult for people to qualify to get the support they need, the con- cern around the ministry's budget cuts in terms of the ability for the community to deliver the services they need and also the issue around consultation and per- haps the lack thereof in terms of true consultation.

I won't read all of the letters. Many of these letters were copied to the opposition, but they were also writ- ten to the minister. I expect that the minister would have these letters, and I would hope that the minister would address them. As I said, I raise these letters in this House to illus- trate the points that are flawed with the process to date, not necessarily to say that people don't want to see change. That is not it at all. You see that from the flavour of the letters I've read onto the record.

Rather, people want to make sure how the changes take place and, after the changes are in place, that the future, in terms of resources, is provided for so that the delivery of the services is actually in place so people at the end — the families and the children, the elders and so on — would not be hurt. It would be interesting to see who is to be ap- pointed to the board of this interim authority and if the board will be truly representative of those impacted by these changes. I hope that it will. The minister did put out a paper on community living services last October.

From a scan of the minis- ter's website, I saw there were plenty of responses. I did pick up on some of the themes throughout the re- sponses, and I would like to flag some of those from the Web for the House. There must be, above all, adequate funding for ser- vices. This is not currently the case. The ministry must commit to providing adequate funding. Many indi-

4090 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2002 viduals and families are currently sitting on wait-lists for services. This needs to be addressed. Provincewide standards need to be in place regarding the availability of services. Many adults with developmental disabilities do not have family support. This government must not lose sight of that when restructuring. Families should not be relied upon to replace the role of government services. I hope that the minister has taken these issues to heart and that he'll manage the restructuring in addressing these issues as well.

Before I close, I'd like to ask what the role of the aboriginal authorities is in this bill. We have been con- tacted by a few representatives in the aboriginal com- munity who are concerned about the lack of specifics around aboriginal authorities in this bill. I note that the original MOU that was signed by the previous gov- ernment by Chief Ed John, who was the minister then, brought about changes — changes that need to actually ensure the aboriginal community has full say in terms of how these issues around children and families are addressed. That was done.

I know that the minister was very anxious to see the continuation of that MOU. I understand that the minister actually sought out Chief Ed John and met with him and others to look for ways of how to renew and revitalize the MOU since the election. I'm glad that the MOU has been renewed, and I'm glad to see it is being revitalized.

I know the government says that addressing the aboriginal issues — the dismal statistics that are out there around aboriginal children and families, whether it be educational outcomes, health outcomes, being in conflict with the law, substance misuse situations that take place in the family, education outcomes in terms of completion of high school or advancement into post- secondary education…. Disproportionately, the abo- riginal community takes the brunt of it, and yet they are less than, I think, 3 percent of our population. There's something wrong with this picture. Make no mistake about it.

There's something wrong with this picture when the statistics tell us so. I know that Chief Ed John had taken the leadership to address these is- sues prior to becoming part of the previous govern- ment, and he had brought forward in that capacity the MOU. I applaud the minister by putting aside partisan politics and seeking out Chief Ed John and others to say: how do we advance with respect to this? [1545] The MOU that was signed brought forward some key commitments from the government.

The govern- ment acknowledges that there are no statistics that ex- ist for aboriginal children, who make up approximately 4,000 of the 10,000 children in care in the province. Of course that number has to be reduced, and we are all in agreement with that. What is signed and agreed to under the MOU…. There are some key purposes around this front, and I would like to just put that onto the record, because the MOU also required the government to address not just the purposes but also the funding issue as well. First, on the issue around the purposes of the MOU.

I quote directly from the MOU: "The purpose of this MOU is to establish a joint dialogue and decision-making process regarding general and systemic issues relating to the safety and well-being of aboriginal children and families that (

a) is on a government-to-government basis, (

b) recognizes that first nations — the Métis nation, the Inuit and other aboriginal peoples — assert jurisdiction over their children and families regardless of residency, (

c) recognizes the importance of transferring the delivery of services to aboriginal communities, (

d) draws on the expertise of aboriginal service delivery agencies and research institutions, and (

e) reflects the historic and new relationship established at Tsawwassen on June 11, 2002. "The joint dialogue and decision-making process will focus on (

a) reducing the number of aboriginal children in care and returning aboriginal children to their communities where it is appropriate to do so, and (

b) other topics or issues agreed to by the party. " Subsection 1.3 then states that the joint dialogue and decision-making process will be carried out through the minister's joint aboriginal management committee, which is established in

section 2 and is composed of representatives of the parties, aboriginal service delivery agencies, and co-chaired by the Minis- ter of Children and Family Development and an abo- riginal representative. Then it goes on to list all of the different groups that are involved. So the purpose, as I understand — and the intent really is the basis of the purpose — is a good one. Make no mistake about it. We want to see joint decision-making, we want to see shared responsibility, and we want to see the aboriginal community really taking the lead on a lot

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H1028pm-09
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H1028pm 09
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	3cdf3a50ab8cdfbe68db7f92c8e390adc3f70c7b

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