British Columbia Hansard — Monday, May 1, 2006 (38th Parliament, 2nd Session) (H0501pm-04) (H0501pm 04)

H0501pm-04

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session, 38th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Monday, May 1, 2006 Afternoon Sitting Volume 10, Number 4 THE HONOURABLE BILL BARISOFF, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Iona V. Campagnolo, CM, OBC SECOND SESSION, 38TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations .......................................................................................................... Hon.

John van Dongen Deputy Premier and Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...................... Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation .......................................................................................................Hon. Tom Christensen Minister of Advanced Education and Minister Responsible for Research and Technology ........................................... Hon.

Murray Coell Minister of Agriculture and Lands.......................................................................................................................................................Hon. Pat Bell Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism............................................................................... Hon. Wally Oppal, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ..........................................................................................................................Hon.

Stan Hagen Minister of State for Childcare ........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors’ and Women’s Issues........................................... Hon. Ida Chong Minister of Economic Development and Minister Responsible for the Asia-Pacific Initiative and the Olympics.................Hon.

Colin Hansen Minister of Employment and Income Assistance ...........................................................................................................Hon. Claude Richmond Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources .......................................................................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of State for Mining............................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Bill Bennett Minister of Environment and Minister Responsible for Water Stewardship and Sustainable Communities ...............Hon. Barry Penner Minister of Finance.......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Carole Taylor Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing ............................................................................. Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Health ......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. George Abbott Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services .......................................................................................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General................................................................................................................................Hon.

John Les Minister of Small Business and Revenue and Minister Responsible for Regulatory Reform............................................ Hon. Rick Thorpe Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts .........................................................................................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Minister of Transportation...........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Kevin Falcon LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition .........................................................................................................................................................Carole James Deputy Speaker ....................................................................................................................................................................................Sindi Hawkins Assistant Deputy Speaker.....................................................................................................................................................................Sue Hammell Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole.................................................................................................................................................

Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .........................................................................................................................E. George MacMinn, OBC, QC Clerk Assistant.........................................................................................................................................................................................Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .......................................................................................................................................................Ian D.

Izard, QC Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees ....................................................................................................................................... Craig H. James Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk ..........................................................................................................................................Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms............................................................................................................................................................................. A.A.

Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ...................................................................................................................................................................Jo-Anne Kern Legislative Librarian ..................................................................................................................................................................................Jane Taylor Legislative Comptroller...............................................................................................................................................................................Dan Arbic

Party Standings: Liberal 46; New Democratic 33 ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) .................................................................... Shuswap Austin, Robin (NDP)............................................................................. Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP).................................................................. Surrey-Newton Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)..........................................Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Hon. Pat (L) .............................................................Prince George North Bennett, Hon.

Bill (L) ............................................................... East Kootenay Black, Iain (L) ............................................................ Port Moody–Westwood Bloy, Harry (L)................................................................................Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).....................................Prince George–Mount Robson Brar, Jagrup (NDP).....................................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Campbell, Hon.

Gordon (L) .........................................Vancouver–Point Grey Cantelon, Ron (L)..............................................................Nanaimo-Parksville Chong, Hon. Ida (L) .................................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Christensen, Hon. Tom (L) ................................................. Okanagan-Vernon Chudnovsky, Dave (NDP)........................................... Vancouver-Kensington Coell, Hon.

Murray (L) .....................................Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L)...........................................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .......................................... West Kootenay–Boundary Coons, Gary (NDP) ....................................................................... North Coast Cubberley, David (NDP)............................................................Saanich South de Jong, Hon.

Michael (L) ...................................Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Dix, Adrian (NDP) .........................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Evans, Corky (NDP).................................................................Nelson-Creston Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................

Surrey-Cloverdale Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ...............................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Fleming, Rob (NDP) ..............................................................Victoria-Hillside Fraser, Scott (NDP) ..............................................................Alberni-Qualicum Gentner, Guy (NDP).......................................................................Delta North Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................ Comox Valley Hammell, Sue (NDP) ................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) ..................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Hawes, Randy (L).......................................................... Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Sindi (L) ............................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ................................................................

Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Gordon (L)..............................................................Surrey–White Rock Horgan, John (NDP)......................................................Malahat–Juan de Fuca Horning, Al (L)........................................................... Kelowna–Lake Country Ilich, Hon. Olga (L)...............................................................Richmond Centre James, Carole (NDP).......................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Jarvis, Daniel (L)..................................................

North Vancouver–Seymour Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................... Esquimalt-Metchosin Krog, Leonard (NDP)......................................................................... Nanaimo Krueger, Kevin (L)..............................................Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lali, Harry (NDP)........................................................................

Yale-Lillooet Lee, Richard T. (L)....................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L).............................................................. Peace River South Les, Hon. John (L)............................................................... Chilliwack-Sumas Macdonald, Norm (NDP).................................... Columbia River–Revelstoke MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................

Bulkley Valley–Stikine Mayencourt, Lorne (L).......................................................Vancouver-Burrard McIntyre, Joan (L).................................................West Vancouver–Garibaldi Neufeld, Hon. Richard (L) .................................................. Peace River North Nuraney, John (L).............................................................Burnaby-Willingdon Oppal, Hon. Wally, QC (L).......................................... Vancouver-Fraserview Penner, Hon. Barry (L)...........................................................

Chilliwack-Kent Polak, Mary (L) ....................................................................................Langley Puchmayr, Chuck (NDP)...................................................... New Westminster Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ............................................................. Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................ Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L).............................................................

Kamloops Robertson, Gregor (NDP) ................................................Vancouver-Fairview Roddick, Valerie (L).......................................................................Delta South Routley, Doug (NDP)..................................................... Cowichan-Ladysmith Rustad, John (L) ........................................................

Prince George–Omineca Sather, Michael (NDP).........................................Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ...................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Bob (NDP)..................................................................Cariboo North Simpson, Shane (NDP) ....................................................Vancouver-Hastings Sultan, Ralph (L) ....................................................West Vancouver–Capilano Taylor, Hon.

Carole (L).....................................................Vancouver-Langara Thorne, Diane (NDP) .................................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Thorpe, Hon. Rick (L).......................................................Okanagan-Westside Trevena, Claire (NDP) ..................................................................North Island van Dongen, Hon. John (L)............................................ Abbotsford-Clayburn Whittred, Katherine (L)........................................

North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wyse, Charlie (NDP) .................................................................Cariboo South Yap, John (L)...................................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn....................................................Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman .......................................... Hon. Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Bulkley Valley–Stikine ...........................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North ...........................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Willingdon................................................................... John Nuraney Burquitlam.......................................................................................Harry Bloy Cariboo North..............................................................................

Bob Simpson Cariboo South..............................................................................Charlie Wyse Chilliwack-Kent ..................................................................Hon. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas...................................................................... Hon. John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley........................................................................ Hon.

Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville..............................................................Diane Thorne Cowichan-Ladysmith ................................................................. Doug Routley Delta North ...................................................................................Guy Gentner Delta South ............................................................................. Valerie Roddick East Kootenay....................................................................... Hon.

Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin.........................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops.....................................................................Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson .....................................................Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country.................................................................. Al Horning Kelowna-Mission ......................................................................

Sindi Hawkins Langley ...........................................................................................Mary Polak Malahat–Juan de Fuca .................................................................. John Horgan Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................ Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ..................................................... Michael Sather Nanaimo......................................................................................

Leonard Krog Nanaimo-Parksville .....................................................................Ron Cantelon Nelson-Creston .............................................................................Corky Evans New Westminster .................................................................. Chuck Puchmayr North Coast....................................................................................

Gary Coons North Island ...............................................................................Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale................................................Katherine Whittred North Vancouver–Seymour..........................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head ........................................................... Hon. Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon......................................................... Hon. 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 ............................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Westwood.................................................................... Iain Black Powell River–Sunshine Coast ...............................................

Nicholas Simons Prince George North.................................................................... Hon. Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson ............................................Hon. Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................ John Rustad Richmond Centre......................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Richmond East........................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston...........................................................................John Yap Saanich North and the Islands ............................................ Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South ........................................................................ David Cubberley Shuswap............................................................................Hon. George Abbott Skeena.......................................................................................... Robin Austin Surrey-Cloverdale............................................................... Hon.

Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers ................................................................Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton............................................................................... Harry Bains Surrey–Panorama Ridge.................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey-Tynehead ....................................................................... Dave S.

Hayer Surrey-Whalley...........................................................................Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock .....................................................................Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard..............................................................Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview.............................................................Gregor Robertson Vancouver-Fraserview .................................................Hon.

Wally Oppal, QC Vancouver-Hastings .................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington.......................................................David Chudnovsky Vancouver-Kingsway ......................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara ........................................................... Hon. Carole Taylor Vancouver–Mount Pleasant........................................ Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................Hon.

Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena.........................................................Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill...................................................................

Carole James Victoria-Hillside ...........................................................................Rob Fleming West Kootenay–Boundary........................................................Katrine Conroy West Vancouver–Capilano...........................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ........................................................Joan McIntyre Yale-Lillooet..................................................................................... Harry Lali

CONTENTS Monday, May 1, 2006 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... .............................................. 4179 Tributes ....................................................................................................................... .............................................................. 4179 Phyllis Hards C. Trevena Peter Affleck S.

Hawkins Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... .............................................. 4179 Statements (Standing Order 25B) .............................................................................................................................. ............. 4180 San Patrignano community for addiction treatment L. Mayencourt B.C. School Trustees Association J. Horgan Human early learning partnership J. McIntyre Fire at Sikh temple in Williams Lake C. Wyse Asian Heritage Month R.

Lee Encounters with Canada program C. Trevena Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 4182 Softwood lumber agreement M. Farnworth Hon. R. Coleman B. Simpson Appointment of John Tomlinson to Agricultural Land Commission B. Ralston Hon. P. Bell M. Karagianis R. Fleming B.C. Ferries contract for service to northern communities N. Simons Hon. K. Falcon Ferry service to northern communities and fare increase C. Trevena Hon. K.

Falcon Impact of ferry sinking on Hartley Bay shellfish industry S. Simpson Hon. B. Penner Petitions...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 4187 H. Bains C. Wyse Committee of Supply............................................................................................................ ................................................... 4187 Estimates: Ministry of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing Hon. R. Coleman A. Dix B. Simpson

Tabling Documents.............................................................................................................. .................................................... 4221 Office of the Auditor General, report No. 1, 2006-2007, Strengthening Public Accountability: A Journey on a Road that Never Ends Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply............................................................................................................ ................................................... 4221 Estimates: Ministry of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors' and Women's Issues (continued) Hon.

I. Chong D. Thorne B. Ralston J. Kwan M. Farnworth H. Lali J. Horgan Estimates: Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts (continued) N. Simons Hon. O. Ilich C. Wyse M. Karagianis R. Fleming G. Gentner

4179 MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 The House met at 2:03 p.m. Introductions by Members Hon. S. Hagen: I'm very fortunate that I have three wonderful nieces, and today on e of them is visiting us in the House, from White Rock. I ask the House to help me welcome Dr. Dina McConnell and her two daugh- ters Anya and Grace. Tributes PHYLLIS HARDS C. Trevena: On Friday a tragic incident occurred at Campbell River Hospital. Phyllis Hards, a 78-year-old volunteer, died after an attack near the Sunshine Gift Shop, which she managed. Phyllis was known and admired and loved through- out the community.

She'd volunteered with the ladies auxiliary at the hospital for 25 years. Just last December she was given an award for contributing more than 10,000 hours of voluntary se rvice. In 2002 Phyllis was named Campbell River senior of the year. She was tire- less and dedicated, working seven days a week. She was an inspiration to her fellow volunteers, friends and those who came to the hospital. I would ask that the House pass its sympathies to her family and to her friends. PETER AFFLECK S. Hawkins: It is with great sadness that I inform the House of the passing of a dear friend and col- league.

Peter Affleck passed away early this morning, following a massive heart attack that he suffered on Wednesday. He is survived by Anne and his four kids. Many of you will know Peter because he was in the forestry industry for over 30 years. He was a tremendous force in shaping forestry policy in this province. He was in Kelowna since 1994. He was a minor hockey coach, he was a volunteer for all kinds of things in the community, and he was involved in many charitable functions, including helping me out with a golf tournament I do every year for cancer care. Mr.

Speaker, I want the family to know that our thoughts and prayers are with them. [1405] Introductions by Members H. Bains: In the House today are members of Sur- rey Manufactured Home Owners Association and their representatives: Doreen Mortensen, president; Louise Nicholson, treasurer; Ed Barton, director; and Glen Reckseidler, director. Along with them is a woman who keeps me looking good in the community, my constituency assistant, Emily Zimmerman. Would the House please join me in welcoming them. Hon. P.

Bell: I had the honour today of presenting the first minister's award of excellence to Steve Carr, who is the director with the integrated land manage- ment bureau in our Kamloops office. Steve has been with government for quite some time and has been an incredibly dedicated employee who has delivered on many services for all constituents of members of both sides of the House. I would ask that the entire House please help me in congratulating Steve for all of his good work. N. Macdonald: In the House today is Ellen Zimmerman, a constituent. I have spoken to the House about Ellen previously.

She was winner of Women of the Earth. She was honoured in Paris not too long ago. She is here representing Wildsight, which won the top award in Canada for conserva- tion groups — received from the government of Canada and Canadian Geographic for the year 2005. Please join me in making her welcome. D. Routley: Joining us in the precinct today are several members of the Active Manufactured Home Owners Association: Joyce Klein, treasurer; Alex Ross, president; Shirley Stirret, director; Beryl Adkins, member; and Derek Adkins, member. Would the House please welcome these fine folks to the precinct. S.

Fraser: Visiting the precinct today is one of my constituents, Wolfgang Zimmerman. He is no relation, I think, to the other Zimme rman. Wolfgang is the ex- ecutive director of the National Institute of Disability Management and Research. He is working tirelessly to develop the first international university on workplace health sciences as a global centre for excellence. He is working across the spectrum, across different sectors and across this House with members from both sides to make that a reality. Would you please help me make him feel welcome. S. Hawkins: Mr.

Speaker, on your behalf I would like to introduce 14 new Legislative Assembly em- ployees, including eight summer tour guide staff and six parliamentary play ers. With their assist- ance, the tour office offers tours in English, French, German, Spanish and Japanese. I would like the House to please welcome Diana Dearden-Lindell, Stephen Calder, Rhea Laube, Michelle Oko, Jennifer Ives, Erik Mitbrodt, Janet Doherty, Karoline Piercy, Jennifer Abel, Scott Hendrickson, Brendan Bailey, Jason Moldowan and Caret Wass. Please help me make them welcome. D.

Routley: Could the House please help me make welcome Jim Bennett of the B.C. Real Estate Associa- tion. He is visiting us in the precinct today.

4180 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 Statements (Standing Order 25B) SAN PATRIGNANO COMMUNITY FOR ADDICTION TREATMENT L. Mayencourt: I rise today to speak about a pro- gram that I visited in Italy. Italy, like many other na- tions, has experienced an in crease in drug use during the past decade. Vincenzo Muccioli, founder of the San Patrignano community, understands the deeply rooted causes of drug addiction as an escape from reality often beginning in adolescence due to the absence of rela- tionships with families and peer s, as well as feelings of isolation and not belonging.

San Patrignano is an inten- tional community. It is comprised of 2,200 recovering addicts. Residents live there voluntarily, within a walled community. They stay there three to five years. [1410] The mission of San Patrig nano is vast. The organi- zation aims to welcome, support and assist people with their healing journey. It does so free of charge and without discrimination. As I said, in December I had the opportunity to visit this community and see first hand how these programs work. At San Patrignano they have a winery.

They have a furniture factory, racehorses, a cheese factory, a dairy, a vegetable farm, restaurants, the creation of tapestries and handmade wallpaper. In all areas of th is community, the attention to detail and perfection has made San Patrignano a brand that all Italians know means top quality. It is that social enterprise, which those members engage in, that pays for the community. I was very touched by the way everyone worked together there and the camara derie that we saw.

In a spirit of self-banishment, all residents — who are all recovering addicts — control the activities of the com- munities through the goods and services and use pro- fessional training as an ed ucational tool aimed at the complete social rehabilitation of its residents. In the words of Vincenzo Muccioli: "San Patrignano is a community for the living, where you can restart your life after years spent as a social outcast. It is a community against social marginalization." B.C. SCHOOL TRUSTEES ASSOCIATION J.

Horgan: It's a pleasure to rise today and inform this House of the recently concluded annual general meeting of the B.C. School Trustees Association, held in the warm and hospitable city of Prince George over the weekend. I had the pleasure of being at the event with the Leader of the Official Opposition, and it was a very enjoyable couple of days of stimulating debate, resolutions and some fan- tastic entertainment from the D.P. Todd Secondary stage band on the night of the annual reception.

It's that reception that brings me to my feet today, because at the annual general meeting the BCSTA rec- ognized 22 members for long service and life member- ship. I'd like to read those names and those districts. Please withhold your applause until I've concluded. Lyn Skrlac, former trustee of district 85, Vancouver Island North, 21 years' serv ice. Gerda Fandrich, dist- rict 34 from Abbotsford, 21 years' service. Annette Hambler, district 8, Kootenay Lake, 21 years' service. Bob Haslett, district 54, Bulkley Valley, 21 years. Pennie Jamieson, district 67, Okanagan-Skaha , 21 years.

Nel Joostema, district 42, Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, 21 years' service. Laurae McNally, district 36, from Surrey, 21 years' service. Alan Chel l, district 19, from Rev- elstoke, 22 years. Bill Christie from Prince George, 22 years. Norman Hayduk, distri ct 92, Nisga'a, 22 years. Marguerite Kempin, Nicola Valley, 23 years. Lorraine Manning, 23 years, from K ootenay-Columbia. Brent Atkinson, district 40, New Westminster, 24 years. John Malloff, district 51, Boundary, 24 years. Gordon Comeau, Nicola-Similkameen, 25 years. Michael Ewen, district 40, 25 years. Charles Hingston, district 64, Gulf Islands, 25 years.

Jim Sinc lair, district 78, Fraser- Cascade, 25 years. Rosalie Nichiporuk, district 91, Nechako Lakes, 26 years. Lastly, from my constituency, is Wilma Rowbottom, 27 years — 508 years of service to the community. HUMAN EARLY LEARNING PARTNERSHIP J. McIntyre: I rise today to speak about HELP, the Human Early Learning Partnership. This partnership is an interdisciplinary research network linking over 180 faculty, researchers and graduate students from six B.C. universities. HELP work s in partnership with the B.C. Ministry of Children and Family Development and the Minister of State for Childcare.

HELP's research program contributes to new un- derstandings and approaches to early childhood de- velopment and seeks to ensure that all children in B.C. have the means to reach their full potential. To this end, HELP's research aids in developing a better un- derstanding of the biological, familial and community factors that influence the learning abilities and devel- opmental outcomes of our young children. To date, this partnership has funded 77 innovative and collaborative research programs across its partner institutions.

HELP has also created socioeconomic maps for every school district in B.C., and it has dis- tributed a community mapping toolkit across the prov- ince.

The toolkit assists local communities in analyzing these socioeconomic maps, as well as being an aid in analyzing the early development instrument, which is a provincewide survey used to assess children's school readiness on five different areas of development. [1415] With the generous support of the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research, HELP has established a child and youth development trajectories unit that conducts studies tracking children's development from conception all the way through to high school gradua- tion. Just this past February the partnership released the B.C.

Atlas of Child Development. This atlas is a collaborative effort of HELP and the MCFD ministry. It provides colour maps that depict early childhood de-

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4181 velopment trends across neighbourhood and school district boundaries and shows some very interesting patterns. Looking to the future, un der the leadership of the director Dr. Clyde Hertzman, the human early learning partnership continues to work on several initiatives to assist local communities, governments and decision- makers at all levels in thei r efforts to ensure healthy early childhood development. FIRE AT SIKH TEMPLE IN WILLIAMS LAKE C.

Wyse: On March 26 the Guru Granth Sahib, the Sikh scriptures, was burnt as a result of an arson at the Gurdwara Sahib Western Singh Sabha Gyani in Wil- liams Lake. Great personal loss and hurt is experienced by a Sikh whenever the holy scripture is harmed. The most reverend priest of the Sikh religion was in atten- dance to celebrate Vaisakhi day and to assist with the cremation of the Guru Granth Sahib. Giani Gurbachan Singh arrived in Williams Lake from Amritsar in India where the Golden Temple is located. He spent several days assisting in various ser- vices.

This is only the third time he has participated in such a cremation ceremony. I extended the personal sympathy and empathy of each MLA to Sikhs around the world as well as extended the personal wish of each MLA that the healing of each Sikh proceed as quickly as possible. Also, at the request of the mother of the person under investigation for the arson, I extended her best wishes to the Sikh community. I know each of us in the Legislature hopes he will receive the medical care he requires in order to be well.

On behalf of all of us in the House, I will advise the Premier of the situation facing the Sikh community in restoring the temple in Williams Lake. Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji Ki Fateh. In closing, I request the House to join with me in wishing Sikhs around the world a speedy recovery from their grief. ASIAN HERITAGE MONTH R. Lee: To acknowledge the rich and lengthy his- tory and contributions of Canadians who trace their origins to Asia, May is Asian Heritage Month.

Since the first celebration held in Toronto in 1993, cities through- out the country and British Columbia are hosting festi- vals and activities to recognize and celebrate many Asian cultures found in Canada. In 2001, thanks to a motion in the Senate of Canada, May was officially designated Asian Heritage Month right across the country. British Columbia is home to hundreds of thousands of Asian Canadians whose ori- gins stretch from the area around the Black Sea to the shores of the Pacific Ocean.

These heterogeneous peo- ple have enriched our lives no t only from their cultural contributions but also through their great entrepreneu- rial spirit, creating jobs and opportunities for all who live in our province. Since 1996 the Vancouver Asian Heritage Month Society's annual explorASIAN festival has promoted the diversity of Asian Canadian life and culture in the lower mainland during May. In its tenth year, explorASIAN celebrates pan-Asian arts, culture through education, workshop s, seminars, lectures and community outreach programs .

In addition, scores of musicians, writers and other artists demonstrate and promote traditional Asian culture and arts activities. Today explorASIAN is Canada's largest festival during Asian Heritage Month. As the Parliamentary Secretary for the Asia Pacific, I invite everyone to promote and take

part in the festivities that salute the heritage and contributions from our Asian Canadian population, who have helped make British Columbia the diverse and vibrant place it is today. [1420] ENCOUNTERS WITH CANADA PROGRAM C. Trevena: On a cold April evening, Nicole Mus- felt took the 45-minute boat trip from her west coast community of Tahsis to Zeballos, where the school board was meeting. She was to tell trustees about an experience she was never going to forget. Nicole had r e c e n t l y b e e n o n a n E n c o u n t e r s w i t h C a n a d a t r i p t o Ottawa.

The grade 11 student said: "I learned how mul- ticultural Canada is. I've never seen anything like it." It gave her the motivation to relearn French, which she had stopped in grade 8 because she didn't think she'd ever need it. Nicole goes to Captain Meares Ele- mentary School in Tahsis, where there are now just 29 students from kindergarten through to grade 12. Her Encounters with Canada trip brought together 120 stu- dents from across Canada to learn about our institu- tions, visiting Parliament and the Senate, about science and culture and to meet stud ents from very different backgrounds.

"It's too bad it's being shut down," Nicole told the board, who were meeting in a gym at the Ze- ballos School. "I have a totally different outlook on Canada." It is too bad. Encounters with Canada is about to wrap up its mission of bringing together students from all parts of this huge, great country, giving young peo- ple from different regions and different cultures a chance to learn about their country and each other, a chance to understand what Canada is. Encounters with Canada was part of the Canadian Unity Council, a body which was shut down as one of the first acts of the new federal government.

B.C.'s Min- istry of Education contributed to some of the costs of the program, as did other provincial governments. A great deal of volunteer time, energy, school trustee and teacher commitment went into making it the success it has been for thousands of students. Nicole took the boat back to Tahsis the next morn- ing, saving her a four-to-fi ve-hour drive, and got there in time for school. Thanks to Encounters with Canada, she has taken a taste of her country back into the class- room at Captain Meares. It is a pity that other young people no longer have that opportunity.

4182 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 Oral Questions SOFTWOOD LUMBER AGREEMENT M. Farnworth: On Thursday the Premier stood in a press conference and stated that the proposed soft- wood lumber deal was good for British Columbia. On Friday the Premier wrote a letter to the Prime Minister expressing a range of concerns about this same deal and reserving the right to withdraw from it. To the Minister of Forests: what changed? Hon. R.

Coleman: You know, first of all, I'm proud of the fact that for the first time in over 30 years, there's a stable long-term agreement that can be put in place for softwood in British Columbia and the rest of Can- ada. Just through to the member, so he understands, as the deal was coming together at the last minute, the United States filed the ECC, which is a challenge that they could file, but they had to file by five o'clock East- ern time.

Because that was filed and there were other things at play, before the Prime Minister was prepared to stand in the House in Ottawa, we sent a letter just to protect our legal position in British Columbia. That's all that changed. Nothing changed, hon. member. The deal — as we dealt with when we sat together and put the framework together with the U.S. Ambassador in British Columbia and the rest of Can- ada — is a good deal for British Columbia, a good deal for the future of forestry in B.C. Mr. Speaker: The member for Port Coquitlam– Burke Mountain has a supplemental. M.

Farnworth: I appreciate the minister's com- ments. We all would like to see a deal. We want to see a good deal. What we saw on Thursday was the Pre- mier standing up saying: "Thi s is a good deal for Brit- ish Columbia." Now the minister has stood up here and told us: "Well, we did some things to make sure that we could cover ourselves." Was the minister aware of those issues on Thurs- day? And if so, why didn't he raise those issues on Thursday and have the Premie r say, "Yes, we think it's a good deal, but guess what.

There are some things that we're also concerned about," instead of the saying to the world: "It's a good deal"? The Prime Minister is saying it's a good deal, and then these other things come out the following days. [1425] Hon. R. Coleman: Well, through to the hon. mem- ber, I think you have your days wrong. The letter was sent prior to and with discussion with the Prime Minis- ter on Thursday. It was with regard to the extraordi- nary challenge and not to do with the actual softwood framework at all. The basic United States agreement on softwood lumber is in place.

Frankly, I am surprised that the members of the oppo sition didn't actually get up and say, "What a great thing it is that somebody finally got this deal done," because I think somebody had to. I mean, can you imagine? We didn't say, "Shut down Nanoose Bay," and get into an argument with the United States over this . We actually sat down and managed to get together an opportunity to make a d e a l . N o w w e h a v e i n f r o n t o f u s a n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r long-term stability for our forest sector on a seven-year deal with a two-year option. There was the one letter that went.

It was not about us departing from the deal. It was just advising, as in- structed by legal counsel to do that. That's no big deal, frankly, because now that has been dealt with. With regards to what we know, they will do with the ECC in the future, as far as vacating it, as we move to the final document of the agreement that will be signed. Mr. Speaker: The member for Port Coquitlam– Burke Mountain has a further supplemental. M. Farnworth: Will the minister commit to tabling that letter in this Legislature? Hon. R.

Coleman: I think a letter between the Pre- mier of British Columbia and the Prime Minister of Canada…. It will be up to them to decide what to table. It's not my authority to do such a thing. B. Simpson: I believe that the Premier of the prov- ince is a public officer elected by the public, has a pub- lic duty and is acting in the public interest when he writes a letter to the Prime Minister of this country, who is also a public officer.

Again, to the minister: if that letter is only about the withdrawal of the appeal and not, as is reported, that the Premier indicated a series of concerns about this deal, a series of second thoughts about this deal and reserving the right to with draw from the deal, then why will we not get a commitment today to table that letter in this House for all of us to see that? Hon. R. Coleman: When you have 16 hours of ne- gotiations per day for a six- or seven-day period, you want to make sure that all of your points are covered as you move through to a deal. Y o u k n o w w h a t t h i s i s a b o u t , M r .

S p e a k e r ? I t ' s about this: "Thanks for your hard work on the soft- wood file. Although it's probably not exactly what we wanted, we can live with the deal. More importantly, we will now have a defined playing field that we can work within. We are a wh olesale lumber company with a manufacturing plant in the Fraser Valley em- ploying 80 people. We can tell them tonight that their jobs will be secure." That's what this softwood deal is about. The framework is agreed to. We're moving for- ward.

We should be celebrating the fact that finally there is a future for the forest sector in B.C. in a soft- wood lumber agreement. Interjections.

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4183 Mr. Speaker: Members. Member for Cariboo North has a supplemental. B. Simpson: I certainly do. I find it fascinating that the minister will read private correspondence between a third party and himself…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. The member for Cariboo North has the floor. Continue. B.

Simpson: He can read private correspondence between himself and a third party, and yet he will not reveal what should be public correspondence in which British Columbians can have surety that they have a deal that is in their best interest — all British Columbi- ans, all communities, all workers and not just one mill that we won't even have a name for. [1430] At the Council of Forest Industries the minister stated that B.C. is the big dog when it comes to forest products in Canada.

The minister stated that B.C. also had a commitment from Ontario, Quebec and Alberta to play the lead role in softwood negotiations because of its 50-percent share in th e market. Yet last week the same minister said: "We're just responding to the fed- eral position." So if we were the big dog and had the commitment of the lead role, how did we lose control over the softwood lumber negotiations? Mr. Speaker: Can you pose a question. B. Simpson: My question to the Minister of Forests: how did this minister lose control so that we say it's a good deal and then we have to lodge a right to with- draw? Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. R. Coleman: We did take the lead role on this negotiation. We were the ones driving the bus in this negotiation, and we were the ones working with indus- try across the country. What's more than that, the members might actually want to check with the mills in their community. Actually, hon. member, I have permission to read that e-mail in the House. Besides, I want to tell you this.

There are all kinds of unsolicited correspondence coming into my office today from companies all over British Columbia — from reman'ers to value-added, etc. — saying: "Thanks for finally remembering about us in the future of forestry in British Columbia." What's more, I know who drove this deal. I know that B.C. was at the table. I know that B.C. was the leader in the softwood negotiations with the ambassa- dor and federal government in this country. I do know this — that it was the best deal available for British Columbia for long-term stability for the industry, and we made the right decision on Thursday.

Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. The member for Surrey- Whalley has the floor. APPOINTMENT OF JOHN TOMLINSON TO AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION B. Ralston: Last week the Minister of Agriculture and Lands made several new appointments to the Agri- cultural Land Commission.

The Agricultural Land Com- mission Act clearly states that commissioners must be "knowledgable in matters relating to agriculture, land use planning, local government or first nation government." Can the minister of Agriculture and Lands clarify how he believes John Tomlinson, one of the two new appointees, meets the ALC's merit-based requirements? Hon. P.

Bell: All of the new appointments coming up — there are a series of appointments coming up to the Agricultural Land Commission at this point — are vetted through the board resourcing office to ensure that they meet all of the qualifications necessary to work on the panels. Mr. Speaker: Member for Surrey-Whalley has a supplemental. B. Ralston: Well, there are other qualifications that appear, I'm going to suggest, which came into play. John Tomlinson has close connection to at least one of the minister's cabinet colleagues.

Not only is he appar- ently a friend of the Minister of Forests and Range, he also worked in that minist er's 2001 election campaign and is the former B.C. Liberal riding association presi- dent for Fort Langley–Aldergrove — the same minis- ter's riding. He has donated over $12,500 to the B.C. Liberals, together with his wife. He even starred in a B.C. Liberal election commercial as a "business owner." The Minister of Agriculture and Lands has de- scribed the Agricultural Land Commission as "an in- dependent, arm's-length agency." Is the minister seri- ously telling this House he didn't know?

He's asking us to believe he didn't know of Mr. Tomlinson's political pedigree. Or is the truth that he has given Mr. Tomlinson a political directive to get Barnston Island out of the agricultural land reserve? Hon. P. Bell: Although the member is trying to weave some threads here into a conspiracy theory, I'm afraid it just doesn't hold any water. There is nothing that the member just indicated that would not qualify the member or would disqualify the member from sit- ting on the panel. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

4184 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 Hon. P. Bell: There is nothing there that would disqualify the member from sitting on the panel. If I might remind, the stellar performance of the NDP gov- ernment through the 1990s with regards to the Agricul- tural Land Commission…. It was that government that chose to remove Six Mile Ranch and overrode the Ag- ricultural Land Commission — didn't even allow them to have the decision-making process. [1435] T h i s g o v e r n m e n t i s p r o u d o f t h e p r o c e s s t h a t w e have in place.

We have agricultural land coming out at record lows — never been this low. In fact, in the first four years of our government there was less land that came out of the ALR than there was in the last year of that government. M. Karagianis: Well, this actually is one of the worst kinds of patronage appointments that you could possibly want to see at this time in British Columbia. Given recent news events that have implicated the agricultural land re- serve in a legal matter, we now have patronage appoint- ments onto the Agricultural Land Commission.

No order- in-council — in fact, a direct reward for someone who not only contributed to the Liberal campaign but worked very hard on campaigns of members of this House. I would like to know why at this time, with the delicate situation around th e agricultural land reserve and accusations in the courts today, this minister has allowed this kind of patron age appointment to the Ag- ricultural Land Commission. Hon. P. Bell: Certainly, the member that has been vetted through the process is amply qualified to serve on the Agricultural Land Commission. You know, the member refers to orders-in-council.

I just happen to be holding an order-in-council dated June 10, 1998, signed by the previous Minister of Agri- culture and Lands, removing land and overriding the Agricultural Land Commission with regards to the Six Mile Ranch decision. We are transparent; we are open. Land is coming out at all-time lows. In fact, at Barnston Island, the ap- plication the member is referring to — the proponent has asked to have that tabled for now. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Member for Esquimalt-Metchosin has a supplemental. M. Karagianis: Yes, I do.

I'm glad that the member actually brought this up — that this is the most open and accountable government — because what we've seen here is circumventing the merit-based appointment process completely. Where is the openness in that? This is a member who's been given a patronage appointment, who has played a significant role in elec- tion campaigns and contribu ted significant amounts of dollars, now sitting on the Agricultural Land Commis- sion at an extremely import ant time in this govern- ment's history. The agricultural land reserve is being decimated day after day, and now we see a patronage appointment….

Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Can we have some quiet so we can listen to the question. Continue. M. Karagianis: We see a patronage appointment. Again, why was this not a merit-based appointment that should have been done in an open process? Hon. P. Bell: Actually, there is a thorough vetting process. Everyone is able to apply for a position on the Agricultural Land Commission. There were a number of applications that came forward, and excellent ones. The member talks about the decimation of the agri- cultural land reserve. I'm sorry, the statistics just sim- ply do not back up the allegations.

During the period 1996 to 2000 there were 17,433 hectares that came out of the Agricultural Land Commission. In the first five years of our government — 6,963 hectares. There's no decimation here. We're protecting agricultural lands. R. Fleming: In addition to the resumé in which the minister didn't mention about Mr. Tomlinson being the former president of the Fort Langley–Aldergrove asso- ciation, a former campaign manager and a large donor of $12,000, he also starred in the last election in Liberal campaign ads as an ordinary person.

The government has turned the Agricultural Land Commission into a who's who — a grazing pasture of Liberal campaign managers and Liberal donors. Before the government appoints further members to the commission, will the minister commit to post publicly and openly remaining positions and not make them the subject of pork-barrel patronage? [1440] Hon. P. Bell: If this is a vision of what we have for the week to come, it's going to be a slow week in the provincial media, I guess. These are public postings.

Anyone in the province of British Columbia is able to apply to sit on any Agri- cultural Land Commission panel around the province. I guess the member just hasn't actually looked up the website address. If he'd care to go to the government website, I'm sure he'd be able to find those postings. But let's have another look at this. In the year 2000, the last year the NDP was in government, they re- moved 5,797 hectares from the Agricultural Land Commission. We didn't remove that in the first four years of our government. B.C. FERRIES CONTRACT FOR SERVICE TO NORTHERN COMMUNITIES N.

Simons: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. How can the minister agree with B.C. Ferries' claim that the sinking of the Queen of the North

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4185 was a force majeure before the Transportation Safety Board or any other investigation has completed their work, let alone provided any answers? Hon. K. Falcon: Actually, this appears to be one of those very rare — extraordinarily rare — events where the media might have got this a bit wrong. That doesn't happen often, but in this case I have to say that I was apparently quoted as saying that I supported that posi- tion. I want to be clear. I have never said that. In fact, I do not support the application of force ma- jeure, nor do I reject it.

At this point it's something that the lawyers will negotiate between themselves. The key thing for the Minister of Transportation is ensuring, of course, that service is restored — a s i t h a s b e e n t o t h e best efforts possible through the Ferry Corp. — to the folks in the northern coastal communities. Mr. Speaker: Member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast has a supplemental. N. Simons: I appreciate that. It just happened to be on a government website. I'm just wondering: will the minister admit that paying B.C.

Ferries Corp. $2.7 mil- lion of taxpayers' money for trips that the corporation will not be making is not just more evidence of serious flaws in the contract with the government? Hon. K. Falcon: Well, here we go again. I'm having to school the members opposi te in the research that they're doing. He quotes a government website. I be- lieve he's referring to the independent ferry commis- sioner. It's not referring to anything I said. He is refer- ring to comments of the independent ferry commis- sioner on his

interpretation of what B.C. Ferries said to him. So I suggest that the member might want to do a little more research in that regard. The other area where the member might want to do some research is actually in the coastal ferries contract. It's actually on the website. If the member reads the coastal ferries contract, he will know that every quarter there's a reconciliation done on the amount of service that's actually been provided by the service provider. Where there are deficiencies, there are financial adjustments made. The issue, of course, is that B.C.

Ferries is alleging there is a force majeure incident here. There are provi- sions for unforeseen circum stances within the coastal ferries contract. Those are issues that will be negotiated between lawyers for the Ministry of Transportation and the Ferry Corp. Lawyers can have lots of fun with that. The issue for our government is this. We want to make sure the Ferry Corp. is doing every step and tak- ing every step they possibly can to restore service to those communities, and they have worked very hard to do exactly that. FERRY SERVICE TO NORTHERN COMMUNITIES AND FARE INCREASE C.

Trevena: To the Minister of Transportation. I would like to remind him that he signs off on what the independent ferry commissioner does, particularly when it comes to fare increases. I have constituents who are suffering greatly be- cause of the vast reduction in services on the northern routes. In Port Hardy there has been a dramatic reduc- tion in business over the la st months, and we're seeing bookings disappear for the holiday season. Instead of helping these communities, the government is being seen to help the Ferry Corp., despite saying that the Ferry Corp. is independent.

I would like to ask the mi nister how he can justify paying off B.C. Ferries with taxpayers' money at the same time as increasing their fares. [1445] Hon. K. Falcon: Well, this is part of the opposition that, frankly, baffles me sometimes, when it comes to the whole B.C. Ferries situation. On the one hand, I'll hear the member for the North Coast demanding that we must get ferries in serv ice and have ferries right away and that this has to be done. He's running around hysterically suggesting this. Then I get the member from Esquimalt — not this particular member — say- ing we need to slow everything down.

We have to slow down. Don't go ahead and order ferries, because we want to make sure the local shipyards have time in their otherwise incred ibly busy schedules — because they're so busy, and the economy is so strong. I need to slow everything down so that they can have an oppor- tunity to bid. Just for once, I wish the leadership of the opposi- tion would get their act together and figure out what the heck they want us to do. I can tell you what we're going to do.

We're actually going to make sure ferry service is restored and the best possible service is being provided to the north coast and midcoast communities. Mr. Speaker: Member for North Island has a sup- plemental. C. Trevena: The issue — the Minister of Transpor- tation might miss this — is that there is one ferry miss- ing, which means there is no business for much of the north coast and the north Island. B.C. Ferries is also looking to bring in the fourth fare increase, through a fuel surcharge, in 11 months — four fare increases in 11 months.

The company is talk- ing about a 7-percent increa se on the smaller routes and a 3-percent increase on the main routes. Those routes that the minister might have forgotten link the Trans-Canada Highway with the Trans-Canada High- way. I would like to ask the Minister of Transportation whether he will listen to the people of B.C. and not give his approval, which he needs to give, to the fuel sur- charge increase. Hon. K.

Falcon: Well, the member opposite knows that the independent Ferries commissioner is there to look after the interests of British Columbians in terms of the requests for fare increases as a result of fuel sur- charges.

4186 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 You know, the member should know — whether it's the taxi industry, the airline industry, the bus in- dustry…. Many industries are faced with the reality that fuel costs have gone up considerably. I know that in the past, the requests that have been put forward by B.C. Ferries have not been accepted by the independent Ferries commissioner — at least not the total that they were requesting and, in fact, reduced amounts. But fuel surcharges are a reality of life.

The member opposite will know that some of the folks from some of the areas that the member repre- sents were here expressing their displeasure the other day. We pointed out that on the smaller routes, yes, for a passenger attempting to get on some of these ferries there has been a three-year increase in fares. They quoted the 35-percent figure , and that worked out to about 83 cents over three years, including all of the increase.

I recognize that's not an insignificant amount o f m o n e y , b u t w e a l s o h a v e t o u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t h e Ferry Corp. is doing its best to struggle with the fact that fuel costs have gone up over $22 million. I think their approach and the independent Ferries commis- sioner's involvement are appropriate. IMPACT OF FERRY SINKING ON HARTLEY BAY SHELLFISH INDUSTRY S. Simpson: On April 25 the Gitga'at Nation wrote to the Minister of Environm ent concerning the sinking of the Queen of the North .

In their letter to the minister, they made reference to comments that are attributed to the minister in the Vancouver Sun, April 21, where the minister is cited as saying that early tests indicate the environmental impact of the sinking is less than feared. The minister is further quoted as saying: "I think most of the clam beaches have been spared." Well, in their letter the Gitga'at Nation does say that such comments are not an accurate depiction of the reality on the water, and they only act to instil an- ger and frustration in the Gi tga'at community as they agonize over the safety of their food supply.

On April 20 we know that the minister and the Premier met with the Hartley Bay band, and at that time the Premier promised th at they would be the first to know the extent of environmental impacts. Yet the very next day, the minister is quoted in the Vancouver Sun. Why did the minister br eak the Premier's promise to the people of Hartley Bay and not speak to them first about what he believed the situation is, rather than running off to the Vancouver Sun? [1450] Hon. B. Penner: For the benefit of members, I'll just read a fuller extract of that

article that the member was referring to. In fact, the initial

part is a paraphrase writ- ten by the reporter. Environment Minister Barry Penner says early tests indi- cate the environmental impact of the sinking is less than feared. "We do take it seriously though," he said. "I think most beaches and clam beds have been spared, but we're continuing to monitor if there's any risk to human health." However, Penner said he's committed to getting the fuel out of the Queen of the North, with input from first nations leaders. "I would describe it as a delicate but vital task to see that the remaining fuel is removed." Mr.

Speaker, the informat ion that we talked about in Hartley Bay and that I have at this point — which is the most up to date, although I've asked for a further update — is that out of 13 sites tested, seven showed no signs of elevated hydroc arbons. So the majority of the sites tested — i.e., most of the sites tested — showed no signs of contamination. It doesn't mean that more testing isn't taking place. I've asked for a further update, and I'll provide that with the Hartley Bay people and others as soon as we get it. Mr. Speaker: Member for Vancouver-Hastings has a supplemental. S.

Simpson: I'm pleased that the minister can read the newspaper to us here, but the reality is that the people of Hartley Bay — a letter signed by two heredi- tary chiefs, the Chief of the Hartley Bay band and councillors — asked the minister to get back to them and clarify these comments. I talked to the Chief of the Hartley Bay band at 1:30 today. They haven't heard from the minister yet.

Get- ting a well-deserved awar d for community achieve- ment is one thing, but what the people of Hartley Bay really need is support and action on their economic and environmental problems caused by the sinking of the Queen of the North. In their own review of these same results that the minister spoke about to the media, the Gitga'at biolo- gist found elevated levels of carcinogenic contaminants in those shellfish beds on th e path of the fuel released by the Queen of the North . They've called for more analysis and for a real plan to deal with the remaining fuel in the vessel.

Does the minister disagree with the findings of the Gitga'at people regarding contamination? When is he going to speak to them about the very real concerns they expressed in their letter of April 25? Hon. B. Penner: The first time I had a chance to read the letter that the member refers to was about 20 minutes before two o'clock today. I will be getting back t o t h e H a r t l e y B a y p e o p l e a s s o o n a s w e h a v e m o r e information to share.

At this point the information is that the majority of the sites tested — at least, this is the latest information that I have — did not show any elevated signs of hy- drocarbons. Of the five that did, two are believed to have been the result of normal seagoing traffic and not necessarily related to the sinking of the ferry. This leaves three sites that Ministry of Environment officials indicated some concern about. That's why we have called on Health Canada to help us perform detailed analysis. I t i s a n i s s u e t h a t w e t a k e v e r y s e r i o u s l y .

T h a t ' s why, frankly, when the ferry sank on March 22, at 7:15 that morning Ministry of Environment officials reacted

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4187 immediately, were dispatched to the site and set up an incident command structure that included first nations representatives being an integral part of that response. That's why the response has b een as effective as it has been. [End of question period.] H. Bains: I ask permission to present a petition. Mr. Speaker: Proceed. Petitions H.

Bains: I have an 861-name petition from manu- factured home owners of this province who are deeply concerned about the lack of compensation and protec- tion they receive at the time when they get an eviction notice because the landlord may have decided to de- velop the land for other uses. C. Wyse: I request permission to present a petition. Mr. Speaker : Proceed. C. Wyse: I wish to present a petition of 75 members of Dog Creek and Canoe Creek communities demand- ing that the roads be better maintained and that more of their roads be paved. Orders of the Day Hon. B. Penner: Mr.

Speaker, I call estimates debate on the Ministry of Forests and Range in this House. For the interest of members, I call in the other House, the Douglas Fir Committee Room, continuing estimates debate for the Ministry of Community Services. [1455] Committee of Supply ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF FORESTS AND RANGE AND MINISTER RESPONSIBLE FOR HOUSING The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); S. Hammell in the chair. The committee met at 3 p.m. On Vote 32: ministry operations, $473,203,000 Hon. R. Coleman: Just for clarification for the members present, I will be moving Vote 32 for now.

I will also, later on, move to Housing. We'll do the Hous- ing portion of the debates, but this will get us through this portion of the debate. The ministry focus is twofold: forestry and housing. My comments on housing, as I said, will be reserved for later in the debates when I deal with the opposition critic with regards to housing. In forestry our job is to oversee the public interest. That means providing leader ship in the protection, management and use of the province's forests and rangelands. We're doing that, so to begin with, I want to speak about forestry.

The main agency responsible for the stewardship of 47 million hectares of provincial land is the Ministry of Forests. We have an estimated 3,559 full-time- equivalents and a budget of $723.8 million for 2006- 2007, which obviously includ es the Housing portion. Those numbers represent an increase of 282 FTEs and a budget increase of approximately $80 million over '05- 06. Our core business areas are protection against fires and pests, and managed fire to protect the provincial Crown land investments in the forest land base. This includes increasing emphasis on fuel management and constructive use of fire.

On October 4, 2005, a new na- tional wildfire strategy was developed with the exper- tise of British Columbia. Pests. Of course we have a few of those in the for- ests, as we're all aware, particularly the mountain pine beetle. We'll expand on that later, and I'm sure we'll have some discussions with regards to that over the next few days. Other bark beetles, thou gh, do include things like the spruce beetle, the Douglas fir beetle, the western pine beetle and others. All of them are interesting little insects that seem to have unbelievable resilience when it comes to what they can do on our land base.

With regards to forest stewardship, I think it's im- portant that we have sound environmental steward- ship of forest resources. That includes looking at forest conditions and ensuring actions today to maximize the future health of our forests. We manage range issues — for example, invasive plants, forest encroachment on grasslands, etc. We evaluate range practices. We restore damaged range- lands and work with other agencies to ensure a healthy and viable range industry. In compliance and enforcement, we uphold B.C.'s laws protecting forests and range under the ministry's jurisdiction.

For example, we enforce forest practices and enforce revenue and pricing legislation governing removal and transport of timber. We act on forest crimes such as theft and arson and mischief. On the side of forest investment, through the forest investment account, some revenues are invested back into the land base. This ensures we have productive forests for future generations. One example is water- shed restoration. On the pricing and selling of timber, we ensure that British Columbians benefit from the commercial use of their forest assets.

We provide a competitive regulatory framework, a fair pricing system and effective alloca- tion of timber harvesting rights. We also run B.C. Timber Sales, which is auctioning significant portions of the provincial allowable annual cut to generate pricing and cost data. That drives market-based pricing and provides competitive access to timber for industry.

4188 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 Our key priorities. Number one is timber realloca- tion. That would be completing our timber reallocation of 20 percent of long-term replaceable logging rights being reallocated; 8.2 million cubic metres are to be affected. All that volume is now being transferred. All on-the-ground operatin g areas for B.C. Timber Sales have been identified, and we're halfway through identifying on-the-ground operating for first nations and community tenures. To assist impacted workers and contractors, $125 million has been set aside in the B.C. forestry revitaliza- tion trust.

The trust is ad ministered by a board. The board consists of major licensees, contractors and workers, who establish eligibility criteria. By the end of March, $45.4 million was paid out to the impacted workers and contractors. We created and expanded forest opportunities for 29 communities since August of 2004. Obviously, when these notes were prepared, we were looking for a new framework on softwood lum- ber and some opportunities to have long-term stability on the land base.

I think we're actually moving down the road to where we have that in the document, which basically outlines the fr amework between our two countries. People should always recognize that the actual softwood trade deal is between Canada and the United States, the two parties with regards to that. On revitalizing the coast. There are some significant challenges on the coast, so we have to work with a number of people, including the steelworkers, the Coast Forest Products Association, industry and com- panies. We're reviewing the Competition Council re- port and submissions from the two industry advisory groups.

The council believes an industry-led plan could be successful with support from government and has the best chances of success. We've already started moving on several revitaliza- tion initiatives. They include market-based pricing, timber reallocation, proper pricing of pulp logs, and more use of weigh scaling and market studies. [1505] On the mountain pine beetle side, the infestation of the mountain pine beetle, as everyone knows, is the largest in B.C. history, affecting 8.7 million hectares of land. More than 400 million cubic metres of timber have been attacked.

The mountain pine beetle action plan sets out steps for both short-term and long-term actions. We've committed another $113 million for mountain pine beetle–related activities, to be spent over the next three years.

The funded activi ties include an additional $75 million for Forests for Tomorrow, government's re- forestation plan; $20.7 million to upgrade and maintain Forest Service roads at the heart of the infestation — this is in addition to $90 million from the Ministry of Trans- portation for highways affected by increased logging traffic; $17.5 million for additional staff to handle timber tenures associated with increased harvesting. We're also working with stakeholders to plan our future forests.

Participants include scientists, industry, communities, Canadian Forest Service, universities, licensees and first nations. Last month we reached agreement with the first nations. An agreement for first nations was very im- portant in that we will harmonize the plans between first nations and government with regards to the future of forests in B.C.

We're reallocating years two and three of funding received from the federal government to work with first nations — $2 million for wildfire pro- tection and fuel management on provincial Crown land around reserves; $8.9 million allocated for first nation forestry council's strategic long-term plan to sustain culture and depend on invested forests; potentially $880,000 for research priorities identified by the first nations; and $1.3 million to fund first nations participa- tion in the government's mountain pine beetle response team for a two-year period.

First nations are now full partners in the mountain pine beetle fight. The key to success is working to- gether. We're the first government to set aside revenue- sharing for first nations — committed to increasing first nations participating in the forest sector. Since September of 2002 we have signed agree- ments with 104 first nations, including forest and range agreements and direct awards . This provides access to 16.9 million cubic metres of timber and $119.6 million in shared forest revenue. Under the New Relationship, we've been working with the First Nations Leadership Council.

Those discussions resulted in an improved forest and range agreement template. In the transition to Fore st and Range Practices Act, by January 2007 all forest companies will be operating under forest stewardship plans. We're well on our way to achieving that goal. At the end of March forest com- panies had advertised, submitted for approval or ap- proved forest stewardship plans covering 40 percent of the annual allowable cut. We dedicate $12 million in the Forest and Range Practices Act to an evaluation program for the next three years to ensure that the new model is working.

I have come to one conclusion after being the minis- ter of this particular ministry for the last almost year. I am gifted with some very qualified and capable people in the ministry, who are able to adapt and change and do things that are remarkable to protect the forests and build a strong forest industry in British Columbia. A.

Dix: In advance of the return of the member for Cariboo North — who is in fact, as the minister will know, our very able critic on forest issues — I wanted to follow up with the minister very briefly on the issue that was raised around the correspondence between the Premier and the Prime Mi nister during question period. I'm wondering if the minister would be able to tell us very specifically when he would be able to come back and tell this House and give this House an answer on that question.

It seems to me that what we're talking about here is a very fundamental deal for British Co- lumbia, for the economy of British Columbia, for all of the communities of British Columbia. It seems, to me, important in this case. The minister will appreciate this, I think, because the minister knows that what happens when there's an absence of

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4189 information in a sector that's so central to people's lives…. When there's an absence of information, some- times people start to ask serious questions or have seri- ous doubts about agreements . So I wanted to ask the minister…. I know that the minister is very interested in this area, and I know he will have been working very closely in the period since question period with his staff to get an answer for all of us on this important question of the nature of this correspondence and what it is.

I wanted to ask the minister if he would give this House a commitment to come back to this House at the earliest possible opportunity with an answer to the important question that wa s asked during question period about the relationship and about the letter be- tween the Premier and the Prime Minister. [1510] Hon. R. Coleman: I think I was pretty clear in ques- tion period. Of course, it's probably in a little bit of a different environment that we ask those questions, because it may be a bit more of a different stage.

Just for the member's information, the 27th of April was the last day possible for the U.S. to protect their legal rights under an extraordinary challenge under NAFTA. They had to file that, if they were go- ing to protect their rights, by five o'clock Eastern time on the day that we were moving through this process. And you've got to appreciate there were four prov- inces, a U.S. coalition on the lumber side, the U.S. trade representative, our embassy, I'm sure their em- bassy, our Prime Minister's office and whoever else would have been involved.

As we're coming through this, we're trying to get to where we would actually be in a position to announce prior to the end of that deadline. That just wasn't able to be accomplished, so the Americans filed their ECC, which in my understanding they will vacate as we move through to the agreement — because, remember, this is a framework agreement. The Premier wrote the Prime Minister saying that we had concerns about them filing the ECC, and the ad- vice was that we had to send that letter to protect our legal position as we came through the framework.

What people, I think, have to understand is that what we have today is a framework of an agreement. I think the member will appreciate — and the members should be aware of and probably prepared for — that over the next 60 days, as different clauses of the final agreement have some discussion back and forth, there may be some other public play back and forth with regard to what might be in one clause versus another, as the lawyers start to work through this agreement.

The framework agreement isn't very long, but I suspect that by the time th e actual trade agreement is written, it will be fairly lengthy, and it will have whereases and wherefors an d clauses in it. I would caution, as we go forward, that people understand that there's going to be a little bi t of this. I think we'll hear from different players in industry anywhere in Canada and the U.S. that may have is sues with it as we try and finalize that final drafted agreement. That would be the answer to that question for the member. B. Simpson: I will come back to softwood and ex- plore that somewhat.

I would like to make some introductory comments. Since I was appointed to this role by the Leader of the Opposition, I've been on a steep learning curve. Even though I've had ten years in the industry in all facets of the softwood side of it — the solid-wood side of it in particular — both in the United States and in British Columbia and Alberta, I've found that I had a lot to learn in terms of the policy and in particular about the coast.

During the months that I've been appointed to this role, it's become crystal-clear to me — and we've had the debates in this Legislature — that our number-one industry — the industry that historically British Co- lumbia has depended upon as the main driver of its economy, and it still continues to be a major driver in our economy — is certainly in a state of crisis, the likes of which we have never seen or experienced. To sug- gest that this is stuff that we've seen before is simply masking the nature of the crisis that we have in front of us.

On the coast, though, the crisis has been painted as a crisis for the major industry. We talk about capital. We talk about the need to have a cost structure that allows that industry to be competitive in the global marketplace. We talk about it from the industry per- spective. As I've travelled the coast — I've had the op- portunity to be up in the Queen Charlottes; I've had the opportunity to be up and down the coast, in Campbell River and Nanaimo and Port Alberni — the real crisis, I believe, is what's happening at the community level.

N o w , i t ' s a d e r i v a t i v e o f w h a t h a p p e n s w i t h t h e companies. There's a growin g fear on the coast among the people who know this industry, who have worked in this industry, that beca use they're not included in this process — because they have in fact in many ways been excluded from this process — what's happening is that by default, the coastal forest sector will be turning into land developers and log-sellers. That's not my fear. I don't know the coast as well. I'm learning it.

That's the fear of the people who live in the communities on the coast, who have a long — in fact, generational — relationship with this industry — know it intimately. It's in their lifeblood. Many of them have given their lives to this industry, literally as well as figuratively. That's their fear. [1515] I was at a rally in Nanaimo on Thursday, where the road was shut down. People were out there. The con- cern — you could feel it. It was palpable in the air.

The other fear on the coast, and it's one that's gen- eralized throughout British Columbia, is that commu- nities are losing their benefits from our public re- sources. Lost in this debate is the fact that these forest resources are public resources and that there's an ex- pectation that we derive public benefit from those re- sources. When the communities hear the minister talk

4190 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 about communities that are dining out on their indus- trial tax base or hear the Competition Council talking about British Columbians having to lose their entitle- ment mentality and that social rents are too high, there's a fear growing am ong community leaders, workers, unions and, quite frankly, among most of the independent operators out there that we're losing sight of the fact that in British Columbia our forests are pub- lic and we have an expectation of deriving public bene- fit from that. That's being lost in this debate.

Then, of course, there's th e fear in communities all over this province that people are losing their liveli- hoods. They're losing their ability to pay their mort- gages. They're losing their ability to give their children education. They're losing their ability to support their seniors in retirement, because they're losing their jobs.

As mill after mill closes, as community after commu- nity loses its industrial tax base because of those mills closing because of logging operations that are shut down, the communities and the workers are feeling that they've lost their connection to the land base, and they have lost their connection to an industry that his- torically was there for them to derive benefit from. A lot of this is a derivative of the Liberal's forest policy. It's not just market forces. That's also lost in this debate. The Liberal government made a deliberate choice to do the 20-percent takeback.

We'll get into that during the estimates debate. They also made the choice to engineer the revitalization trust the way that it has been engineered, so that some people can get access to the trust and some people cannot. They've engineered the conversion, on the coast, to log exports through orders-in-council and through the way that they changed the Forest Act for the way that tenures are allocated and the way that tenures can be partitioned and purchased and become a private, tradable com- modity. We will explore that at length.

The changes to the Forest Act that the government had done over — from 2003 forward, predominantly — has retracted both the minist er and the ministry from a significant level of oversight in our forests, in the in- dustry and on our tenure system. It's beginning to have significant implications.

On the tenure system, for ex- ample, we're waiting for a decision from the competi- tion bureau in Ottawa that would see Western Forest Products — a new player on the scene which has ab- sorbed a number of older players there, but a player on the scene — have 44 percent of the allowable cut on the coast — in one company's hands. If one looks at the revitalization plan, the intent was to diversify our tenure base, not to concentrate it. Yet on the coast, we see one company has 44 percent.

In the interior we see two companies north of 100 Mile House that have the lion's share; in the southern interior we see one company that has the lion's share. That was not the intent of the plan, but you don't always get your intent when you make the degree of changes that this government made over the last number of years. With respect to forest stewardship, we are actually losing control.

The Forest Practices Board tabled their document today calling into question the legal frame- work, the regulatory and legislative framework for forest stewardship and forest management going for- ward and, in there, challenge whether or not we have the legal framework to ensure that we will be manag- ing for the future, that we will have good stewardship practices on the ground in the future.

Again, on the coast we have Cascadia, which put in one forest stewardship plan for all of its operating area — many, many concerns expressed because of the number of watersheds and sensitive areas — all under some omnibus forest stewardship plan. That's an area that we will explore during estimates. [1520] As the minister and his staff know, issues around waste that is being left on the ground and the implica- tions of stumpage and take-or-pay, issues around log exports, as I've mentioned….

All of that is growing a degree of concern on the ground the likes of which certainly I haven't seen in my ten years in the industry and in my 22 years of living in Quesnel, which is a for- estry town. It's not much better in the interior. The southern interior has been dramatical ly impacted by the water- bedding effect of the two-bit stumpage. I'm being told that people aren't certain what the April 1 interior log grade changes mean for them. They don't know what it means for their business plans. They don't know if it means it's going to be up or down.

Most suspect that they're likely going to be carrying higher stumpage in the central interior, and it may still keep the stumpage high in the south. Many companies in the south are threatened. In the central interior, again we have the issues of corporate concentration; the waste allowances on the ground, which I've expressed concerns to senior staff around; and of course road conditions. The degree of undermining of our road structure, both in our Forest Service roads and in our primary highways, is signifi- cant.

Only this year do we have some money put aside for that, and we have a lot of backlog to catch up with. Then, of course, the implications of the mountain pine beetle on the long-term allowable cut. As the min- ister well knows, the mountain pine beetle is not only eating up the older trees, the 60-to-80-year-plus, it's eating up the middle-aged trees, if you will, and it's eating up the teens now. That has significant implica- tions for our long-term allowable cut, and that's some- thing that needs to be explored as well.

Against all of this backdrop, there's a presumption i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a t h a t w h a t w e n e e d t o d o t o b e competitive is get costs down and to get costs down at the expense of communities, at the expense of workers and potentially — and this remains to be seen — at the expense of what goes on, on our land base. As the minister was apprised last fall by CIBC World Markets, the real challenge to British Columbia is that we are now entering into a market where the world is awash with wood. It's awash with logs from various sources, and it's awash with dimension lumber from various sources.

As we've seen most recently, China is moving quickly toward becoming a competi-

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4191 tor, not a consumer. That is causing quite a ripple through our industry. The CIBC World Markets indicated, in fact — and again, it was in a ministerial briefing — that what we need in British Columbia is a Manhattan Project.

We need something to the degree of magnitude of a crea- tive way of thinking about what we do with our for- ests, or as one of the slides that was presented to the minister said: "You might as well lock up all of your forests in parks, because that forest has more value, in many respects, than just simply to liquidate it and to try and enter the marketplace on cost alone." The Competition Council report — which the min- ister, I'm glad to see, mentioned and indicated that he was looking at; I look forward to a discussion about that — further exacerbated this debate by saying that British Columbians have an entitlement mentality they have to get rid of; that social rents are too high from our public forests; that wages are too high; that man- agement costs are too high, and we haven't deregu- lated enough; and that stumpa ge, the cost of the fibre, is too high.

Despite all of those changes, when you go back to the CEOs and ask them: "What more do we have to do?" They say: "We want more of the same. We've got to go deeper, we've got to go harder, and we've got to get more of the same." Again, the predisposition there is that it's all about costs. I believe there's a different vision out there. As I go around this province and talk to communities and to workers, there is a different vision.

That vision pre- sumes that what we need to do in the marketplace is drive on value — not to join the race to the bottom, but to make sure that the market demands wood from the highest certification possible, and to work with nations that want to sustainably manage their forests and change the market so that we have a high demand for certified wood at the highest level of certification. [1525] As the minister is well aware, the truck loggers have done a large poll in their area.

One of the parts of this vision is more community control over the land base, more direct community input into decisions on what happens to the forest resources. Canfor just re- cently did six surveys in th eir operating areas for their CSA certification, which said exactly the same thing — that corporations control too much of the decision- making and policy-making, that communities and workers need to get more of that control back and that British Columbians deserve to derive more from their forests.

Part of that vision — along with driving certified wood, along with giving more local control — is to drive B.C. up the value chain to derive more jobs, more return to communities and workers, and more value for every log that we take out of our forest. In that is — not a change, I guess — a historical role for the Forest Service, and that is that they focus on excellence and forest stewardship. As the Competition Council pointed out, what it wants — what the CEOs group wants — is a Forest Service that has more of a business mindset. They're very explicit about that.

I believe we need to protect the Forest Service, particularly in a results-based code, to be more clearly focused on stewardship values and to not fall into that trap wh ere we have only business interests or predominantly business interests driving what they do on behalf of British Columbians.

Finally, I believe that if we start to make some of those changes, we can have a competitive forest indus- try that positions itself in the marketplace not as a cost competitor — that would be part of it — but as a value competitor that operates off of public forests and that derives public benefit and derives best value from every log. That vision is th ere. The problem we have is that we don't have that Manhattan Project on the go. Every time we ask what we need to do to address the issues in the forest industry, we go back to the CEOs.

I have worked with many of these CEOs and vice-presidents in these companies. They are good people, and they are well-meaning people. But they have one driver, and that is shareholder value. The province of British Columbia and the minister's office and the Forest Service have another value, and that is forest stewardship that derives the best value to British Columbians. That's a difference that will probably fla- vour what we have here in estimates debate for the next few days. With that, I would like to move into the questions. I see that the minister has senior staff with him.

For ref- erence, what I'd like to do today would be to examine some aspects of the service plan particularly around the finances, move from there into a further exploration of softwood, then from softwood move into the Com- petition Council reports and state of the industry, and end up today, hopefully, with a look at the Forest Prac- tices Board and B.C. Timber Sales. With that in mind, the ex plicit questions.

In the fiscal plan, where we have both the revenue and the costs of the ministry, on the revenue by source — and I'm looking at page 10 of the fiscal plan; and I know that the minister will have in front of him some reve- nue figures, so I'll just ask my question and wait for the answer — it has revenue from forests as a line item under natural resource revenue. It has the updated forecast for '05-06 at $1.203 billion, and then it declines through '08-09 to $965 million. Is that all revenue de- rived from forests? That's all of the rents, stumpage, taxes on log exports, B.C.

Timber Sales — all of those fun things that are in the ministry. [1530] Hon. R. Coleman: There are a number of things we take into account when we're dealing with revenues. These are the net revenues after, obviously, we take out cost for stumpage and whatever credits we give back for roadbuilding and what have you when we do the stumpage calculation. The things that affect it the most would be the vol- ume expected to be harvested. We think that's going to go down over the next number of years, a portion of it because of mountain pine beetle, but also because dur-

4192 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 ing 2006-2007 the U.S. housing market is expected to soften. That results in lower prices for lumber and other forest products for th e next several years. The continuing strong Canadian dollar will also decrease stumpage revenue for the next few years because the dollar has quite an impact. Japanese lumber and pulp prices are a challenge for us, as the member knows, and the exchange rate with the U.S. It's basically a conservative estimate, given those factors as part of the calculation. B.

Simpson: I have, by FOI, the estimates debate binder from last time, and I have a breakdown on revenue forecast that includ es timber tenures, B.C. Timber Sales, total ministry stumpage revenue, other forest revenue and logging tax. In that breakdown — and that was the estimates — in the slide as you move towards that decline, where will the biggest hits come from? If I understand the minister correctly, the stumpage revenue because of a volume decline…. What about some of the other forest revenues? Hon. R.

Coleman: The biggest hit, as we describe it, is in the timber tenures, which is the major licensees and the major harvesting, expected to drop off over that period of time for the reasons I explained earlier. B. Simpson: Are there any other revenues derived from the forests and from what the Ministry of Forests and Range has operational responsibility over? Or is this line item, which goes from the 1,200 in '05-06 down to 965 in '08-09, the sum total of all of the derivative revenues from what the Ministry of Forests and Range is operationally responsible for? [1535] Hon. R.

Coleman: The numbers are actually lower than what you had in the previous estimates binder because of the adjustments going forward, as we've had to do this year's movement out with the Canadian dollar and what have you. Maybe for the member's information, the '08-09 numbers are actually expe cted to be $918.9 million now. We've actually lowered our expectations on reve- nue. It still comes from the timber tenure as being the largest of that that the drop would be expected within.

My understanding is that, ex cept for a small amount of export revenues, it would be, basically, targeted through a different ministry. Those are the total dollars from this ministry. B. Simpson: I'm actually not going from the last budget. I'm going from this year's fiscal plan, so I ap- preciate getting the further update. But again, my point is that all of the operational areas of the Ministry of Forests are covered under th is revenue stream. That revenue stream is declining. It must now be 34 to 35 percent over this three-year projected period.

Using the figure of 1,203, which was in this fiscal, down to 965, I have a decline of 33 percent there. So if you go down to 918, it's declining even further. Do I understand that correctly — that the revenue stream from all of the operat ional areas of the Ministry of Forests is declining by about a third over the next three years? Hon. R. Coleman: That's correct — approximately. B. Simpson: I'm actually surprised that the volume decrease expected is in the mountain pine beetle areas in the interior.

I had an expectation the volume de- crease would be on the coast, because we've already seen that, and it's starting to track that way. It's only a three-year window. My understanding of the AAC uplifts and so on that are coming on…. We still have some districts that haven't done their uplifts yet; 100 Mile House is just in the process. My understanding is that in the Quesnel TSA, even up in the Vanderhoof area, the volumes are still ramping up. So why would we see a decline over this three-year period? My expec- tation would be further out.

The direct question to the minister, then, is: what is the volume decline that we're going to see? Hon. R. Coleman: There are two major things that affect what happens with regards to our commodity, no matter whether we have an uplift in mountain pine beetle or not: the housing market in the United States, because 85 percent of our market that we ship is to the United States; and the continuing strong Canadian dollar, which has an effect on whether somebody's going to sell at a certain price.

The interesting thing is, of course, that these num- bers were done prior to us getting to a framework on softwood lumber, which may actually have a positive effect back the other way now with regards to govern- ment revenues. But we don't know that today. It'll take a little bit of work as we walk through the agreement to get there. But our expectatio n is…. I think what we try and do is try and be relatively conservative. Basically, stumpage rates are determined using the comparative value pricing system. Rates are determined in two steps.

First, an average stumpage rate is determined based on lumber and chip prices as measured by Statis- tics Canada; and second, the stumpage rate for each cutting permit is determined. Those are specific. As higher and lower depending on average, depending on quality of fibre and a number of other things…. As the member knows, the deteriorating quality of the fibre in the interior is probably, as the mar- ket adjusts, going to actually adjust the price of what we might get for us as far as the net revenue is concerned. [1540] It certainly is a huge challenge.

I do know as we went through this process, I wanted to be very conser- vative, because I didn't want to put the fiscal plan at risk by being overly optimistic on the revenues. I'd rather outperform the revenues than underperform the revenues. B. Simpson: The minister has indicated that this is predicated on a number of market factors, which then

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4193 drive back to what the expectations are on the land base, and then you take a look at your revenue stream from the land base. If I understand the minister cor- rectly, it's an indication of the potential softening of the U.S. housing market, and the fiscal plan supports that and so does the group that does the independent fore- cast for rationalizing the government's plan. What was the estimate on price, going forward? What was the price point that the government based this fiscal plan on? Hon. R.

Coleman: I'll read it right from the docu- ment for the member, because otherwise, I'm sure I'll get it wrong: On the price side, U.S. lumber prices have remained rea- sonably steady since the last f o r e c a s t u n d e r t a k e n S e p - tember 2005. The price for SPF 2-by-4s is expected to av- erage $338 U.S. per million — I would imagine that's a thousand board feet — in 2006-2007 and decrease to — we're using an estimate of decreasing — $300 U.S. early in 2007-2008 and remain at that level through a number of years. All that depends on the market and whether there are more housing starts.

Obviously, we would like to find some other mar- kets for some of our wood. B. Simpson: Just a bit of clarification for me for later discussion. In the softwood agreement the Ran- dom Length's framing composite lumber price was used. How does that differ from the price forecasting on 2-by-4 random lengths? Hon. R. Coleman: The Random Lengths composite is usually quite a bit higher — $40 to $50 per thousand. W e c a n , i f t h e m e m b e r w a n t s , p r o b a b l y a r r a n g e f o r somebody to give him a technical-pricing briefing ver- sus us trying to figure that out here today. B.

Simpson: I appreciate the offer. The point that I wanted to get clarification on is that we do our fiscal projections on one metric, yet in the softwood agree- ment another metric is used. So it strikes me that there's a misalignment there. If, for the seven-year agreement, we're going to use the Random Lengths framing com- p o s i t e l u m b e r p r i c e , w h y w o u l d n ' t w e d o o u r f i s c a l forecasts on the same so that we have an understanding of what the market implications are for being in this agreement?

Why two different metrics — one for fiscal forecast and one for seven-year agreement? [1545] Hon. R. Coleman: Because the SPF 2-by-4 is the massive, massive majority of the business, it's the best for us for pricing internally to project revenues. The composite includes a whole bunch of other things. It includes not just 2-by-4s an d 2-by-6s and 2-by-10s, but it can also include things like siding and flooring and a number of other things. On the softwood deal it was just that it was better because that's a number we can all focus on out of the commodity markets and understand what that is.

It gives us a price point. But for doing internal calcula- tions to actually measure back, as I understand it, and be more accurate to what we're actually getting out…. Part of this whole thing is about, you know…. If we have somebody who says, "We got this many logs," we know by historical figures, I would think, that if they've cut so many logs an d they're putting out this many 2-by-4s…. We know how many they actually have had. The composite would probably muddy the waters on those calculations for revenue purposes. B.

Simpson: In the discussions around softwood — I want to come back to the substantive part of the dis- cussions — did the minister have in front of him a longer-term projection on the Random Lengths fram- ing composite index? If so, what was that longer-term projection? It strikes me that if I'm going to sign off on a deal that has that as the metric, I need to know what the projection is to know what the net impact will be on the proposed tax. Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, we had all kinds of techni- cal data in front of us as we went through this discus- sion, both in Canada and in the U.S.

I'm happy to share the Random Lengths composite forecasting, using what we call RECI, with the member, at dinnertime or something. I may need the copy in front of me, but I'm certainly happy to share it with him. He can have it. What we did was…. We had our technical people located strategically, I guess, to make sure that the in- formation was available as numbers were moving back and forth, so people could understand what they were. In addition to that, not just us but most companies of any size across Canada were doing the same thing, I think, as were other jurisdic tions, as well as were the federal guys.

It was a pretty live process. B. Simpson: I'd appreciate a copy if that's possible. That would be helpful. Just a quick gist as you look at the forecast. This is a seven-year deal. What happens to that particular index over the course of the seven years? You've got three price ceilings here. I just want to get a sense. All of the market indicators that I have seen and that are reflected in the government's fiscal plan are downward pressures on prices.

I'm curious to know: w h a t d o e s t h a t d o w n w a r d p r e s s u r e l o o k l i k e a s y o u forecast that metric out, say, just over the next three or four years? [1550] Hon. R. Coleman: The expectation is that over the next number of years we will be, over 50 percent of the time, at no tax and will be shipping volume without restrictions — if you're in the tax side of this scheme. If your region chooses a quota, then the quota is tied to a market share that is predetermined and is affected by pricing going downward.

Th ere's an estimation of about two to three months' work to be done on the agreement, in which this stuff will be worked through. I hesitate to get into a whole lot of detail about what this thing looks like, because we have a frame-

4194 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 work that now leads to th e agreement. The framework is, I think, fairly sound and will lead us down the road to where we need to get to. Certainly, when we did the numbers coming through the discussions, this is what drove us to make sure that the price came down to where we actually established it. B. Simpson: That 50 percent and the no-tax range is helpful, and we'll look at the framework shortly. Com- ing back, then, to the projec tions around revenue, the minister indicated that the stumpage component was based on CVP.

Did that in clude the interior lumber grade changes? If so, did th e ministry project an up- ward or downward adjustment as a result of the inte- rior log grade changes, if they're using the CVP meas- ure for revenue? Hon. R. Coleman: The grade changes are revenue- neutral. B. Simpson: Does the industry, in his estimation, see it as revenue-neutral to them? Quite frankly, what I'm hearing throughout the interior is a fear that we may be seeing higher stumpages.

So while the ministry has it as revenue-neutral, what's the sense and the feedback that the minister is getting from those that will be impacted by that change? Hon. R. Coleman: A lot of work was done on this with industry. It is revenue- neutral. That's not to say that in one area — where somebody has been getting a sawlog at a discounted pric e because they've been call- ing it something that it wasn't — the grade changes might not catch some of that and maybe affect some of the averages, but certainly it's revenue-neutral across the interior.

My expectation is that it allows us to measure the value of the fibre better as we do the grade changes, because that was one of the concerns about this whole thing. The member brought it up to me before about stumpage bingo and all that, and that's what this is aimed to eliminate. We started a fairly extensive process with industry last August, moving to the April 1 dead- line, and worked it through pretty well. B. Simpson: The stumpage bingo component. Again, I'm aware of a review of stumpage bingo and the impacts of that. What's the status of that review, now that the minister has raised it?

When will we see that report, and will that report be tabled pub- licly? [1555] Hon. R. Coleman: The report is done by an inde- pendent consultant. The conclusion was no statistical correlation on the quarterly assessment with regards to this issue and no impact on the safety. We're sharing that, obviously, with the people we work with on WorkSafe B.C. and also with the safety group we have, which we participate on. I'm happy to get a copy of the report to the member. B. Simpson: Again my thanks to the minister.

On all those sleepless nights I can just go through these reports and cure my insomn ia, but I do appreciate looking at that. As the minister is well aware, that's something that's been out ther e as an issue, and I'd be curious to see what the consultant ended up saying. Back again to the revenue projections. The minister and the Premier have indicated to the Council of Forest Industries that we're going to change to market pricing in September in the interior. With respect to the projec- tions, the minister indicated that it was based on CVP.

Was there any account taken into what the potential adjustment will be to a market pricing system? What does the ministry believe will be the net impact on revenue of switching to market pricing in the interior? Hon. R. Coleman: We do our projections based on the system we're operating in at the time. That's where the CVP comment comes from. Basically, we've mod- elled the system. We've done our modelling.

Obviously, through the next number of months, as we deal with some of the issues on softwood and mov- ing forward, we would probably, after a quarter of operation, do our adjustments — once we saw what the impact was, if there were any. We're not in a posi- t i o n t o p u t i n p l a c e , o n a r e v e n u e s i d e f o r f i n a n c e , a projection based on something that's not implemented yet. Once we implement it, we will then watch the sys- tem. If necessary, we will adjust our revenue projec- tions accordingly. B.

Simpson: I think there are lots of people who h a v e l o t s o f i d e a s o f w h a t t h a t m a y d o . C e r t a i n l y within the industry there's an assumption of some sort of correction in the marketplace as a result of the inte- rior log grades shifting and looking for the overall hit to them to come down. On the revenue side, we've established a decline in revenue. I believe we've established that all the opera- tional area of Ministry of Forests derives that revenue.

I'd like to switch now to the expense side and under- stand and explore some of the expenses here. [1600] First of all, again according to the fiscal plan on page 11, the Forests and Range expenses over the same period increase from $834 m illion, or whatever it is you've got, up to $976 million. Are there other ex- penses that are associated with the Ministry of Forests and Range's functional obligations that are not in- cluded in these expenses — that are associated with the operations on the land base but are not included as a line item? I'll come to the service plan, where the line item is out.

But are there ot her expenses that accrue to government from managing our forests, which are not shown in the Ministry of Forests and Range line items? Hon. R. Coleman: No, this is the operational cost of the ministry, and that number the member is quoting also includes the other part of the ministry, of course. That's it, except if we had an extraordinary fire season, which would then have an impact which we…. Usu-

MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 4195 ally, I think, we have a notional access to contingencies if we needed it. H o w e v e r , w h e n I f l e w b a c k f r o m E d m o n t o n t h e other day, I was very happy to see the level of the snowcap that's existing. I look at the snowcap differ- ently than I did when I was worried about floods. Now I look at it and think: maybe it might stop the forest fires. B. Simpson: I say a hearty "amen" to that comment.

The point I want to get at, though, is that for exam- ple, the revenue functions from the Ministry of Forests and Range have been put over to Revenue branch. There are expenses accrued to Revenue branch from collecting some of the stumpage and finances as a re- sult of the operations. I'm seeing nodding. Does the Revenue branch then break down its costs associated with that particular aspect of managing our forests? Hon. R. Coleman: We do the pricing and the bill- ing, which is the big cost. Revenue does the collection. I guess you'd have to ask the Minister of Revenue what he spends on it.

They do th e collection. There is some cost recovery, I understand, back and forth between them and the forest compan ies as well. Our budget deals with the pricing and the billing, which is the most expensive part of that whole package of getting the revenue. B. Simpson: Part of what I'm getting at is that there are dissipated costs for the wo r k t h a t w e d o t o e x t r a c t our forest resources and to have the forest industry work on our land base. Revenue branch is one of them.

Some of the work that Agriculture and Lands would do around LRMPs, LRUPs, and so on, is costs that really accrue to setting objectives and doing plans and so on that the Ministry of Forests and Range then derives the operational plans from. So that's a cost of doing business in British Columbia that accrues to the Crown. Minister of Environment bears costs.

Economic Development and Community Services would bear costs, particularly now arou nd some of the activities that they've got in mountain pine beetle and growing our presence in the Asia-Pacific. [1605] Even recently the Office of the Premier is having Ken Dobell involved down in Washington doing soft- wood negotiations. So while the line ministry is seeing this increase in costs, there are also a number of dissi- pated costs throughout government that need to be factored in there.

To the minister: at any point, has anybody sort of sat back — and I know this goes across governments and across parties — and said, "What does it really cost us to run the forests for industrial activity in this prov- ince?" to get a sense of that more holistic cost structure? Hon. R. Coleman: I just simply don't have those numbers. We have the integrated land management branch that does certain things on the land base. The member is right. We participate in land use planning, but in some cases it benefits us as well, because we can actu- ally have some certainty on the land base.

We have forest roads that we've constructed also, obviously moving into some of the recreation values of the land base. It's one big land base, and we manage our end of it and deal with our revenues and costs on it. I guess when well over 90-some percent of the land in British Columbia is owned by the Crown, it's going to be a big function of a lot of ministries of government.

We're responsible for the forestry side where we know what our cost is to deal with the tenure, deal with getting the plan done, getting the approval out the door, collecting our stumpage as to what we think is the revenue com- ing off that base. But there are all kinds of other values on the land base, of course, as the member knows. There was some a r g u m

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0501pm-04
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0501pm 04
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	474ea183371c5aadbbb9fa973e867c030a0f3e47

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