1970 Legislative Session: 1st Session, 29th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 1970

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page 9 ]

The House met at 2:30 p.m.

THRONE DEBATE

MR. DAVID BARRETT (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I

would like to ask a question concerning the tape recording equipment

which has been installed in the House. Is this machine being used to

tape record the speeches, and I wish to inquire as to whether or not

that facility has been instituted under your authority?

MR. SPEAKER: In reading the applicable page of the Votes and Proceedings

that refers to the matter raised by the Honourable the Leader of the

Opposition, it will be noted that it states that you will be asked to

give consideration to the initiation of a system of recording

proceedings in the House under the jurisdiction of the Honourable the

Speaker. Presumably this would entail a resolution being placed before

the House for discussion before taping will be under way. Nevertheless,

I have today, under my own authority, and in order to test out the

equipment to ensure that things will be workable when the House so

directs it, allowed the recording of the debate this afternoon on an

experimental basis, and if the honourable members wish to make the

system retroactive, we will be in a position to do so. On the other

hand, if this is not the wish of the House, of course the tapes may be

destroyed.

HON. W.A.C. BENNETT (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I agree that the

proceedings should be recorded until the matter is discussed in the

House. A record should be made of all the discussions in this debate,

so that there will be no lapse. I certainly want to hear them, and I

want the Opposition members to have an opportunity to put their

speeches on tape on Monday.

MR. BARRETT: Unanimous consent for the experiment, I am sure,

speaking for my side. Will the results of the experiment be made

available to all members of the House?

MR. SPEAKER: This, of course, will depend upon the

instructions given to me by the House, as to the availability of the

various tapes. In the meantime, we are carrying on purely on an

experimental basis, until such time as I receive definite instructions

from the House based upon the resolution which presumably will be

presented.

The honourable member for Delta.

MR. ROBERT WENMAN (Delta): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure and

an honour to be the first member to speak at the first Session of the

29th Parliament of British Columbia, and reply to the Speech from the

Throne. We did make a test of this before but….

MR. SPEAKER: I think if the honourable member placed his microphone in the holder there would be ample volume.

AN HON. MEMBER: Is that the end of your speech?

MR. WENMAN: I promise the honourable member that I will be brief, but not quite that brief.

I take great pleasure in presenting the following motion: Moved by

Mr. R. Wenman and seconded by Mr. Burt Campbell, "We, Her Majesty's

most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of British

Columbia, in Session assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for the

gracious Speech which Your Honour has addressed to us at the opening of

the present Session." First of all, Mr. Speaker, may I congratulate you

on your election as Speaker of the House and wish you all success in

performing your duties as successfully as you have through the last

Parliament. I would like also to welcome the many new members of the

House during this Session. Every member of the House awaits anxiously

to hear your words and to witness your contribution to the people of

British Columbia.

I would like also to thank especially today, the Minister of Public

Works (Mr. Chant). For years we have been concerned about a new

microphone system and I am pleased that he has gone about seeing that

this was established. While it may not be booming forth at the moment,

I know that it does work because we did try it before we started, and

I'm sure that it will be in good operating order very, very soon. I see

that we have a high quality of equipment here and I think that this

looks well towards the future, because certainly while we have this

high quality microphone system here, I am sure that all the

backbenchers can look forward to the same kind of quality in the

offices that will be forthcoming certainly in the next few years.

The most recurring theme throughout the Speech from the Throne was a

concern for the protection of our environment. This emphasis is good

because it does reflect the feeling of the people of the Province of

British Columbia today. Preservation of our environment probably is the

one common concern that has the unanimity of common support from the

establishment, the mass media, the politicians and, yes, even the

student rebel. Concern for the protection of our environment knows no

political affiliation, but rather is common to all men of all cities of

all nations. As late as yesterday President Nixon spoke strongly

regarding environmental control, and in Europe, a special European

Conservation Year has been established. During the past three or four

decades, we have seen a technological era boom forth as an end in

itself and mankind has stood back blinded by the splendour of his own

creation. However, today that blind faith in technology is giving way

to a fear of its consequences. I am pleased to see the emphasis on the

protection of our environment so placed, and I look forward to

supporting further legislative devices to ensure the preservation of

the splendour of this great Province of British Columbia. Government

legislation, however, is only one small solution to the part of a much

larger problem. The pressure on the environment is human. Millions of

people want to drive cars, live in modern houses, go places in aircraft

and, too often, the man who complains about crowded conditions seldom

counts himself as a part of that same crowd. Too many people want to

preserve the wilderness by keeping people out of the wilderness so

people can go into the wilderness. Every individual will have to assess

his own situation, and be prepared to correct the problem at his own

level. Every individual will have to commit himself to be responsible

enough not to throw that bottle down on our beaches or that wrapper

into the ditch. The pollution problem is as small as this — it is as

large as this, and public legislation can be only as effective as

public attitude. Certainly an education programme will have to be

embarked upon as well as a legislative programme.

During the past few years, this government has built a housing policy around the ethic of family-centred living and

[ Page 10 ]

home ownership. While home ownership may be coming

less and less realistic and not in vogue or not in trend according to

certain sociologists; if this is not the trend that we desire we must

not go along with it, we must attempt to change it, and I am pleased to

see the Provincial Government is attempting to buck this trend and to

curb this trend by offering new incentives and new opportunities for

home ownership to tenants and to younger people. The earlier home

acquisition grant for new homes helped many people in the middle class.

However, it kept home ownership from those who could not afford high

mortgage payments and high interest rates on new homes. This new

proposal for old homes should bring home ownership within the range of

many, many British Columbians, and it certainly is an imaginative and

progressive step in the right direction. May I commend the government

for this programme. Also mentioned in the Speech from the Throne was

the Senior Citizens Housing Programme. This is another excellent

programme that certainly has been well used in my constituency, and I

am most pleased to announce to my constituency today, that yet another

housing project has been approved in Delta. This is the Delta Housing

Association and there will be another 20 new units added to the Ladner

Housing Complex.

But, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned, because while the Provincial

Government is making an attempt to curb this trend of forcing people

out of their homes, the Federal Government is discussing a Capital

Gains Tax on homes that would act as a deterrent to home ownership and,

if implemented, in effect it would drive not only the poor but many

middle class citizens from their homes. The Federal Government

shouldn't need to take a second or a third look before scrapping this

feature of the White Paper, and I call upon Canadians in all provinces

to protest in the strongest terms possible about this policy. Just

briefly, further on the White Paper, let the lofty objectives of

equalization or re-distribution of the tax burden lull no politician

nor taxpayer into ready acceptance. No matter how one looks at the

Paper, it represents major increases in taxation to almost every

segment of our society. While increases to the minority poor may be

slight, the large silent majority, the already hard-pressed middle

class who are the real producers of our society will once again be

footing the bill for increased government spending and deficit

financing. Unless radical changes are made in this area, and in the

area regarding the taxation of the small business-man — small

businesses are already being swallowed up by huge corporations — the

small business-man will face an evolutionary economic extinction. This

is a very unfortunate fact — this is a whole way of life. Our housing

programme, our family-centred living and home ownership, and our small

businesses have built this country and they deserve to be protected and

encouraged.

Mr. Speaker, I bring before you today a matter of great importance

to this entire Legislature. You will undoubtedly be shocked to hear

that the Federal Government is attempting to start another province in

the middle of British Columbia. They are attempting to build another

province in the middle of our Province. I have a startling letter here

before me that says that this land which adjoins the municipality of

Delta, is neither in Delta nor in the Province of British Columbia.

Where is it? It says here — now this is the National Harbours Board, an

agency of the Federal Government speaking — "Roberts Bank is not a part

of the Province of British Columbia and therefore cannot possibly be a

part of the municipality of Delta." It goes further than that — it

doesn't stop there — it says that Delta by-laws as such, obviously

could not apply. Do you realize what this means? This means that the

Federal Government is setting up some sort of a tax haven for

industries in the west — in the middle of British Columbia. In addition

to this it says that they will not abide by Delta by-laws. What are

Delta by-laws? Delta by-laws are the Provincial by-laws as well. The

Delta by-laws are the by-laws that will be controlling the pollution in

this area. The Regional District by-laws will be the by-laws that will

be controlling the pollution in this area if there is to be any

pollution developed. We don't know, but we are going to be ready for

it, and we're not going to tolerate another province in the middle of

B.C. The constituency of Delta has been tolerant with the

inconveniences of the superport — in fact we have looked beyond the

inconveniences. This was shown to us, and the people of Delta could see

what a great thing this was for the Province and for the country, and

they showed their support of the building of this superport in the

election last August. However, if we are going to have all the

inconveniences, we also are going to have participation in the taxation

and we are going to participate in the control of any side effects such

as pollution that may come from the superport. Now, I know that lately

the Federal Government has been attempting to make a special agreement

with Delta, making it under the guise of water. They say "All we want

is water." But I want to tell you it's not water they want — it's

control and it's jurisdiction. They want to keep Delta, they want to

keep British Columbia, they want to keep the interest of the people of

this Province out of that superport and that's wrong and we're not

going to support that. In the past two or three weeks they have been

bullying the Delta municipal council, forcing them into signing an

agreement that does not refer just to water, but refers also to

taxation and to pollution and every other form of by-law. What a

ridiculous situation! In 1934 an Order-in-Council extended the

boundaries of Delta to include this area. It was recognized that this

area belonged to Delta. What a ridiculous situation! There would be no

workmen's compensation there, there would be no doctors allowed to

practise there, there would be no fire service there, there would be no

possible way, because all these things come under municipal or

provincial control. Or are we going to establish a whole new government

for the island of Roberts Bank…or for the peninsula of Roberts Bank.

Certainly we're not, and we are not going to recognize that agreement

even if they force Delta into signing it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Call out the Bennett navy.

MR. WENMAN: You know you are absolutely right, Mr. Member of

the Opposition, I think we are going to have to call out the Bennett

navy. I understand the ferries are just being stretched. I hope they

are not having guns applied as well. That's right, we have the biggest

fleet, we are ready. But we are not going to see Delta bullied and we

are going to make sure that all the benefits of this superport accrue

to all the people of Delta and all the people of the Province of

British Columbia.

AN HON. MEMBER: Guns were fired yesterday.

MR. WENMAN: Yes, I guess you heard the first gun yesterday. That was the signal that here the war is on.

It was encouraging to hear in the Speech from the Throne that Japan will surpass the United Kingdom as our second

[ Page 11 ]

largest customer, because it is here on the Pacific

Rim that the greatest potential waits for British Columbia and Canadian

trade. I was disappointed, however, to hear that British Columbia

offices in England and the United States are being expanded before

permanent offices were being established on the Japanese Asian side of

the Pacific. It is time for British Columbia to break out and expand

from its traditional trading patterns with the United States and

Europe. We have been content to sit too long on our side of the ocean

and wait for customers to come to buy. We must take an aggressive

stance and get out and sell and trade. We have made a good start in

Japan with our impressive Expo pavilion. I would propose that we open a

permanent British Columbia House in Japan during the coming year with a

view towards expansion of other Asian markets in the near future. Such

an office could operate as a catalyst between B.C. and Asian

businessmen. Our businessmen need to be encouraged to move in this

competitive world market even if they have to price to competition

rather than to profit, and take smaller initial gains to establish

themselves in this tremendous potential market. Whether your motives

are humanitarian or economic, by increasing trade with these countries

we can raise both their standard of living and our standard of living,

as well as creating good customers and peaceable neighbours We are

building our port facilities in Vancouver and in Delta port, and you

know these ports weren't built to compete, they were built to

complement. The sooner that we clarify the jurisdictional dispute, as

soon as we have set up a tri-level jurisdictional control over the

superport including municipal, provincial and federal authorities, as

soon as we can see that the superport will complement the great port of

Vancouver, we will move further ahead, further forward, in the interest

of all Canadians.

While the long term outlook for British Columbia is indeed bright,

in the short term the economy is in a state of delicate balance. In an

attempt to slow down inflation by decreasing the growth of the money

supply during the past year the Federal Government has bounced interest

rates to an alarming and unprecedented high. While the Federal

Government through its sale of 8 per cent Canada Bonds may have been

very successful in lowering the quality of reserves available to banks

and thereby decreasing the amount of credit available and tightening

the money supply, it has on the other hand pushed the municipal and

provincial interest rates so high that responsible local governments,

had they any choice, would never consider borrowing at these interest

rates However, since hospitals and schools and sewage treatment are

immediate, the Federal Government is in effect forcing irresponsible

inflationary borrowing at the local level. At 10 per cent, how long

will local government be able to keep up interest payments, let alone

ever repaying the principal? If such rates are to persist hospital and

school construction will be forced to halt. Reduction of the money

supply is an important and quick economic regulator; however, it seems

that the earlier inflationary psychosis of the consumer is changing to

an erosion of confidence in the economy. The whole money market is a

delicate sensitive instrument based on confidence, and when it becomes

threatened it is time to employ new monetary devices to gradually

restore confidence, because confidence is the basis of productivity

While easing up on the brakes will have to be gradual, the business

cycle is nearing completion and the Federal Government should begin to

ease up by at least reducing the interest rate. As the noted economist

Milton Freeman says, "The government may be going too fast too far in

the right direction." During the coming years the battle of inflation

will be best met, not by high interest rates, but rather by some method

of controlling wages and prices, and I would commend the Federal

Government in its attempt here at moral suasion. I think that this is

good and I think that this is necessary, but we may have to go further.

Somehow the rate of the money supply must grow more gradually related

to real productivity. I think that increased efficiency of operations

will be an absolute necessity in every department of government and

every form of business. We will have to make better use of facilities,

educational facilities, hospital facilities, all of our facilities. We

are going to have to decrease government programmes. We are going to

have to increase productivity and trade, and we are going to have to,

Mr. Speaker, move from extractive to refining industries in the

Province of British Columbia, and that is why I was so pleased to hear

in the Speech from the Throne that consideration, or that encouragement

is being given to the establishment of a copper smelter in the

fantastic Highland Valley. I think this is a tremendous step forward.

It's just the first step forward. We must move further in this

direction, we must move further in the direction of developing low

labour content type of industry with high technology. We have a small

population and large resources. The fine manufacturing is going to have

to be done elsewhere, so that means that our labour force, which is the

best educated labour force in Canada, is going to have to be better

educated and that means more and more and more technical and vocational

schools. There are five vocational-technical jobs for every one

professional job. I say it's good that there are new vocational schools

being started, but that is not enough; we need more. We need more

facilities of the technical institute in particular and I am pleased to

hear that that programme is moving forward and I hope that it will be

accelerated.

The welfare benefits that the government provides should be merely a

foundation upon which the individual has freedom and incentive to build

as his own resources and freedom permit. The long term aim should be to

build a society where many government programmes become superfluous

because the vast majority of people have the education and resources to

provide adequately for their own diverse needs. The government must

provide to develop the individual to his individual maximum capacity of

productivity and creativity, encourage personal initiative and

responsibility as a prerequisite to the return to the mainstream of a

productive society. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to say that this

government, like all other governments preceding us, like all other

governments on this continent, has fallen far, far short of these

objectives. Instead, we have created a huge bureaucracy to gobble money

faster than those who do produce in our society can produce within our

society. While there is probably no total cure for the welfare dilemma

that has faced mankind for so many centuries, surely in an age of such

rapid change and courageous vision, and since past attempts have

failed, it is time to try some new bold adventures in an attempt to

find a more complete solution.

It is time to go back to our basic objective and start all over

again. Probably the most visionary and economic and sociological idea

available to us at the moment is the principle of negative income tax.

Negative income tax is equitable, it is dignified, it is efficient and

it may just possibly motivate the individual through incentive to

initiate. A negative income tax would reduce bureaucratic

administrative costs and take money directly to those who are in need.

Professional social workers' time is too often spent on

[ Page 12 ]

unnecessary administrative detail, and

non-essential consultations with people who, given the money directly,

could well administer to their own needs. I know that this idea was

promoted and developed along with many, many other fine innovations by

a very fine Minister and I wish to compliment the former Minister, the

member from Comox (Hon. D.R.J. Campbell) for his job in Social Welfare.

I did a study in his Department and I talked to his officials and he

had their respect and their confidence, and I think the many ideas that

we see now coming forward were born there. I know that the new Minister

is going to take these ideas and he is going to add to these ideas new

ideas of his own, and I know that the problem, while it may be that it

can't be solved, at least it will be alleviated, and I know that the

members of this Legislature are going to stand behind our Premier when

he speaks down there in Ottawa and says that B.C. is ready to give the

people of our Province — all the people of our Province — a good

standard of living and that is what a negative income tax will do. Most

people on welfare don't want to be there and it is the responsibility

of government to help them return to the mainstream of society. Our

Premier has had the vision to grasp the concept and carry it forward,

and we wish him success as he takes it to Ottawa again. Such a plan is

national in scope and could replace existing unequal equalization

grants that relate poverty to a province rather than an individual

person. Let government build jobs and economy through incentives to

industry, but let government also build individual people to cope with

the opportunities around them with dignity and courage.

I was pleased to hear in the Speech from the Throne that further

action will be taken on automobile insurance, because the work is far

from complete. While the terms of reference have not been outlined, I

am certain that any discussion should centre around cost, profit, and

price control. Basically, I feel the legislation that the Committee has

drawn up is excellent. It's being held across the country as an

imaginative programme and the actual package, the compulsory package,

is a good package. I think, however, that if we are going to say to a

person that you must buy, in some way we are going to have to control

the price. It was very difficult last year in the Committee, I found as

a member, to determine just what are the costs of automobile insurance,

just what is the profit on automobile insurance. I think these are

things that we must know. We have to know these things so that we can

decide in our own mind if the price is equitable. It certainly seems

high at this point. If we are going to take this kind of compulsory

action, and we are fining people and losing their jobs and sending them

to jail, if we are going to do this, then the basic package will have

to be tightly regulated either by the proclamation of existing

legislation referring to price or by a government-operated insurance

scheme for the compulsory liability and public damage section.

Hopefully, the Committee this year will be able to establish from the

insurance companies the true picture of actual cost and profit for this

package in order that a fair price for compulsory automobile insurance

will be offered to the public. If not, it may be necessary to take this

section of automobile insurance out of the hands of private insurers,

an objective that is not desirable, in my opinion.

I would like to talk briefly regarding the Cultural Fund. Money from

the perpetual Physical Fitness Fund will be spent through the

involvement of thousands of people in a Festival of Sports being held

between May 16th and June 1st. This is good. Perhaps next year we will

consider the recreational interests of all of our people and have a

similar festival for the Cultural Fund and people interested in that

side of our recreational life. In Surrey we are attempting to do this,

and we are combining a festival, a sports festival, a cultural

festival. We are having volley-ball tournaments, band concerts, dances,

hundreds of related activities, an active and aggressive involvement

and participation of British Columbians. This is good, this is what we

want, we want this aggressive involvement and participation. I would

take this opportunity to commend the government on these programmes,

both financially and sociologically so successful. These are good

programmes helping sports and culture throughout the Province. I would,

however, bring to the attention of the Committee as a great sport and

cultural heritage whose extinction is being threatened within our

Province, and I think it does relate to culture, does relate to sports.

Perhaps it is no longer convenient for the six great Clydesdale horses

to be kept at Oakalla, but it is in the interest of our sports and

cultural heritage to keep the team together in British Columbia. As I

present this brief to the Attorney-General on behalf of the horsemen

and pioneers throughout the province, I would urge that our famous,

ever famous second look be taken with regard to the Clydesdales and I

look forward to a solution to this problem. While in some way this is a

small problem it is a very real problem, and it does relate to the

cultural heritage of our Province, and I am sure that the

Attorney-General will have another look and we'll hear an answer during

the Legislative Session on what can be done.

I would draw also to the attention of the members another great cultural activity in the Province of British Columbia.

AN HON. MEMBER: ….on the Liberal payroll.

AN HON. MEMBER: ….on the Insurance Committee.

MR. WENMAN: One of the great cultural activities that has put

White Rock and British Columbia on the cultural map, not just of B.C.

but of Canada, is the White Rock Players. Our White Rock Players win

the Dominion Drama Festival again and again and again. Each year they

present to the public a Christmas pantomime based on a fairy tale. Now,

this year as in all years, you know if last Fall you tried to get

tickets to see the show in White Rock for December you had to get them

in August. You have to get your reservations in. Because I thought this

was so successful and did represent an important part of our culture, I

suggested to the White Rock Players, and they have complied by bringing

their White Rock Pantomime to Victoria. They are bringing it

particularly at this time, early in the Session, so that each and every

member in this Assembly may have the opportunity of witnessing this

fine form of entertainment and culture. I have placed on your desks

tickets for the performance on Monday night and I hope that you will be

able to attend. I hope that you will enjoy this situation and I would

invite you backstage to meet the cast when the play is complete.

Many people today seem concerned about gaps between individuals and

generations. I would temper my concern and say, that rather from these

same gaps grows progress, for what is a gap but a differing opinion or

a new idea? Through communication we have, we can, we will, we must

bridge these gaps, for without these gaps there is no progress, for

these gaps do represent new ideas. Because of the biological cycles of

man's aging process there has always been and there

[ Page 13 ]

always will be these generation gaps. The second

world war generation has long since given way to the atomic generation.

The atomic generation has already given way to the space generation,

each with its own dialogue and standard. While the last generation cast

its weaker members as alcoholics and derelicts on Skid Row, the current

generation seems to be casting its own members, its weaker members, as

drug derelicts. While I could dwell at length on many negative

conditions, and speak about the things that disturb us about young

people, I would speak rather about the positive opportunities available

today for our youth, because history constantly records that in the

ashes of turmoil the heart of the ember is cool with ideas and hope for

the evolution of a new and greater society with new and better ideas,

and I think these ideas are there and are there among our young people.

Never before has youth been challenged with such opportunity, such

challenges within the structures of our society. Never has a society

produced such a standard of productivity upon which to build. In

British Columbia we are particularly fortunate for the time and place

in which we live. The shelves of our stores are full of every commodity

mankind could possibly want or need, the economy is strong, our young

people are well educated and our Province awake to unfold to the north

towards the new and broader dimension. Takla Lake and Dease Lake — they

are not the end of the line, they are the beginning of the line. I

would predict that within ten years the boundaries of British Columbia

and Canada will be redrawn. Whole new cities, resource industries,

transportation and communication links will stretch northward to the

border of the Yukon, to the MacKenzie River through to the Arctic

Ocean. The P.G.E. won't stop but will move on through these nations and

through this area, opening up new land and opening up the opportunity

to change the economic and political map of Canada. Such a building and

expansion is as inevitable as it is exciting. In its opportunity and

strength we have and are building a young society to meet its

challenges. We must have vision of future worlds, for where there is no

vision there is no challenge, where there is no challenge there is no

opportunity for young people to grasp responsibility and to grow. If we

fail to challenge our young people in a positive, direct and

non-platitudinous way; if we fail in gaining their participation and in

guiding them into a productive role within our society we will instead

drive them into withdrawal, and this kind of withdrawal is a most

expensive illness that society cannot afford, economically or even

politically, and this is the real danger of young people taking drugs

today. It is taking away their ability to innovate, their aggressive

ability, their will to survive. It turns young people in on themselves

and makes them negative and critical in their thinking. Our youth today

possesses a tremendous potential of energy, idealism and enthusiasm

just waiting to be tapped. The government of this Province of British

Columbia has built a strong foundation, a solid foundation upon which

to enter the decade of the 1970's. We live in the right time — we live

in the right place — and I look forward to participating in the 1970's

with optimism, with energy and, Mr. Speaker, with enthusiasm. Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Revelstoke-Slocan.

MR. BURT CAMPBELL (Revelstoke-Slocan): Mr. Speaker, I welcome

the opportunity on this the first time that I have addressed the

Legislative Assembly of this Province to join with my good friend and

congratulate you most heartily and most sincerely on your re-election

as Speaker. You have gained a reputation for Olympian impartiality,

fairness and wit, that has spread throughout this Province and I know

that regardless of some of the events of yesterday you will continue to

carry on the duties of your office with decorum and dignity. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask your indulgence and, very briefly, seeing

that I was a long time getting here — (Laughter) — recognize some of my

guests who helped in that task. I want to recognize my wife, Judy, my

parents, Mary and Les Campbell, my sister, Mrs. Ronald Stewart, my very

good friend, Fred Pressacco, my constituency President and Campaign

Manager, Mr. Ben Dean and also welcome the new and enthusiastic young

Mayor of Revelstoke, Mr. Don Gillespie, and many other very good

friends and relatives and supporters who are here today from all over

the Province. Again, if I may beg your indulgence and put in a

commercial, I had invited my guests to the dining-room afterwards, and

had worked through your office, Mr. Speaker, but your secretary caught

me as I came into the Chamber and said "It closes as soon as the Debate

is over", so I'll excuse myself very quickly, and maybe the proceedings

will be of such length after I speak that we will be able to get into

the dining-room. (Laughter). You can take it out of my time.

I should like to thank the Premier most sincerely for the honour he

has paid the riding of Revelstoke-Slocan in asking me, as its

representative, to second the Address in Reply to the Speech from the

Throne. It is an appropriate tribute to the great labour constituency

of Revelstoke-Slocan, a great

section of which was in the Opposition

for twenty-five years, that he should ask this riding, which on August

the 27th gave a clear majority of its vote, to second the motion of the

honourable member from Delta. I should like to join with my electors in

congratulating the Premier on having for the seventh consecutive time

led the Social Credit movement to such a resounding victory. And it was

a tremendous victory; with the Socialists frozen at roughly 34 per cent

of the over-all vote, Social Credit obtained over 70 per cent of free

enterprise. Mr. Speaker, this is quite an emotional moment for me. One

of my greatest ambitions — in fact my overriding desire since I was in

High School — was not only to sit in this House, but to sit in it under

the leadership of Premier Bennett. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to

contesting many more elections under the Premier's leadership, because

we in the government group are unanimous in this regard. If we look at

that election of just under five months ago, is it any wonder that the

N.D.P. House Leader is against united appeal? (Laughter). You know,

Mr. Speaker, the House Leader of the N.D.P. was quoted recently in the

press as having told his party supporters not to count on his automatic

candidature for Leader of the socialist forces in this Province. He

said that this present Session of the Legislature will give the party

an opportunity to judge him and give him an opportunity to judge the

party. On reading this I was reminded of one of the stories that I read

to my children. You remember the Queen in Snow White and the Seven

Dwarfs, who would ask "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the fairest

of them all?" pretty secure that the answer given would be her name.

But one day the mirror answered that there was yet one fairer, and so

it is with the N.D.P. Mr. Speaker, the House Leader of the Official

Opposition asks the question, expecting to hear his own name shouted

back at him, but there is not unanimity in their ranks and I would

suggest that the man who appeared that party's second choice a year ago

will this

[ Page 14 ]

coming June find himself its third choice.

And what about the once great Liberal Party? How did it fare in this

election? Well, the wayward bunch didn't do too well as it

criss-crossed this Province. In fact the ranks of its negative minority

are even thinner now than when the election was announced. At least

they had six pall-bearers then for the Liberal Party — now they're down

to five. Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Liberal Party likes to quote

statistics that he believes show that more people oppose this

Government than are for it. This Government won a greater percentage of

the popular vote than did Prime Minister Trudeau in his election. While

eighty per cent of the electorate rejected the new Liberalism, which

apparently consisted, as my friend just said, of water-skiing, swims in

lakes, dips in pools, Indian wrestling, and other assorted frivolities,

there's not much doubt that the Liberal leader probably had more fun

than anyone else last July and August, but I am sure that this is of

small consolation to him today as he looks across and down to his left

at the Government benches. But while the Premier's first intent was

certainly to pay tribute to the great constituency of

Revelstoke-Slocan, he also made it quite clear in his announcement to

the press of the names of the mover and the seconder, that he wanted to

recognize youth — the young people of this Province — because it wasn't

only the little old ladies and the assorted unknown so loved by the

Eastern news media who gave this Government its well deserved and great

victory, it was the young people as well, and I am hopeful, Mr.

Speaker, that the Government will see fit at this Session to bring down

legislation lowering the age of legal majority in this Province from 21

to 19 years and to also change the age at which a young person is

considered a juvenile from 17 to 15 years. This latter move would be

more in accord with the practices in other provinces and would

recognize the greater maturity today of young people of 16 and 17 years

of age. With respect to the lowering of the age of legal majority, I

repeat the well worn but the none-the-less valid argument that if a

young person of 19 is old enough to take up arms for his country and to

vote in this Province, then surely he is old enough to enter a licenced

premises and to accept the other responsibilities of adulthood,

including the responsibility in law for his financial, legal and

personal affairs.

Mr. Speaker, two days ago, before this Session opened, the Service

Club of which I am proud to be a member celebrated its fifty-fifth

anniversary. I refer to Kiwanis International. This is the reason I

wear this quite bright tartan jacket today, for it is the distinctive

jacket of the club of which I am a member, and I wear it on this my

first occasion of speaking in this House, to pay tribute to the service

club philosophy, to help draw attention to those thousands upon

thousands of British Columbians who willingly aid their communities

through their efforts in a multiple of service clubs. After this

Legislature rose last year the retiring President of the Simon Fraser

University student government told a service club meeting that the

lives of its members, while not entirely meaningless, none-the-less

were finished. Referring to the members at the meeting, he said "You

are not of my world." I don't agree that volunteer effort and the

service club philosophy are dead or no longer needed, Mr. Speaker, and

I think that the results of the efforts of volunteers, numbering in the

millions upon millions of man hours, are to be found throughout this

Province, ranging from health centres, senior citizens' villas, skating

rinks and other athletic facilities. I think it is very significant,

Mr. Speaker, although I'm sure it wasn't intentional, that the members

speaking today represent constituencies that are tied together with

twin ribbons of steel joining two very controversial but far-sighted

projects of this Government. The very capable railroaders of this

Province are scheduled to start moving coal on April 1st of this year

from Sparwood in the East Kootenays through to the Roberts Bank

superport development in Delta riding, while it is in Revelstoke-Slocan

constituency that two of the Columbia River projects, Mica and Duncan

Dams, are located. Both the Roberts Bank and Columbia developments were

born and grew in controversy, and both will stand as monuments forever

to the look-ahead spirit of the Social Credit Government of this

Province.

I would like to, very briefly, outline some of the benefits the

development of the coal resources in the south-eastern

section of our

Province will be bringing in so far as they relate fairly directly to

railroading. As members are aware, the C.P.R. is putting huge unit

trains into service to haul coal. These trains will consist of 88 cars.

By 1972 three trains will be in service delivering eight million tons

of coal a year and, on the basis of these contracts, direct benefits to

B.C. workers in industry will amount to more than ten million dollars a

year, including more than four million dollars a year in wages to

railroad employees, including the member from Columbia (Mr. Chabot).

And this is just the beginning. While Kaiser Resources contracted to

supply 45 million tons over fifteen years, it has since signed two

further agreements totalling another 30 million tons, and Fording Coal

has a 45 million ton contract that will see the start of coal delivery

in 1972. I am hopeful that all of this coal from the Crowsnest area,

Mr. Speaker, will move over all Canadian lines. But what will this

development mean along the entire line and, in particular, in

Revelstoke — this development fought for and made possible by our

Social Credit Government? There will be five new mechanical supervisory

positions at Revelstoke along with one at Golden and two at Vancouver.

Each unit train will create 12 new jobs in the railway running trades

at Revelstoke, and the people were told that in August, and the people

reciprocated, they knew the Government provided those. Eighteen of the

96 jobs created by the 1st unit train going into service this April 1st

will be at Revelstoke, and when the second train goes into service

later this summer, 30 of the 187 jobs will be at Revelstoke. When the

third unit train starts delivery in 1972, 43 of the approximately 250

jobs that these trains will have created will be at Revelstoke, and the

payroll directly attributable to the unit trains in the Revelstoke area

is expected to be $337,000 next year, while in 1972 this payroll is

expected to climb to nearly half a million dollars. With two unit

trains, the annual payroll along the entire route is estimated to be

nearly $2,631,000, while in 1972, with three trains, the annual

payroll is estimated to be nearly four million dollars a year. These

are all jobs and payrolls, Mr. Speaker, which would not have existed

had not this Government fought for the Roberts Bank development which

makes available the huge freighter capability so necessary.

Like the honourable member for Delta, I was pleased to hear in the

Throne Speech yesterday that the Government intends to extend to

tenants, by way of a grant or second mortgage loan, assistance for the

purchase of older homes. For while the Government of this Province is

doing all in its power, more than any other government in Canada, as

the former speaker told us, to make possible home ownership and to

relieve one of the larger expenses associated with keeping a home, the

property tax, the central government at

[ Page 15 ]

Ottawa is showing no leadership at all in this respect and in fact

its White Paper, again as the honourable member said, throws further

obstacles in the way. More than half of all Canadian families cannot

meet the cost of buying or renting homes suitable for their needs, and

the Federal Government's policy of high interest rates seems designed

to ensure that this state of affairs lasts forever. It used to be

generally conceded that most Canadians, when they bought a house, would

pay for two, now it seems as if we must pay for three. The one the

contractor builds may deteriorate, but the invisible two houses belong

to N.H.A. or some other mortgage company, and last for what seems

forever. The cost of money is greater than all the cost of materials,

labour, management, profit and insurance put together, but now the

Federal Minister of Finance proposes a capital gains tax on homes.

Granted, he does propose a yearly exemption of $1,000, but this is not

enough to cover the current inflation in home prices. The national

average selling price of a home is already up some $1,500 over a year

ago, and in this capital city of Victoria, for example, the inflation

induced price increases up to almost $4,000. Mr. Benson's proposed

capital tax on homes is nothing more than a tax on inflation. The

dollars are already nowhere near the value they were only a few years

ago, and now he proposes to tax away yet more of them. The most

commendable and worthy attempts of our Provincial Government in the

field of home ownership are being frustrated by the Federal Government,

and this Government should lose no opportunity to tell Ottawa so in the

strongest terms possible.

Perhaps I might be allowed just one more reference to the election,

Mr. Speaker, and that is to comment briefly on the role of the B.C.

Teachers Federation in it. The B.C.T.F. engaged in a partisan political

campaign, although one side benefit, perhaps, was the tremendous free

publicity for the apple industry in the South and North Okanagan

constituencies. I wonder how the campaign sits with the labour

legislation of this Province when a political levy was made on teachers

who are supporters of all parties in a futile attempt to defeat this

Government. I would certainly suggest to the Government that it give

very serious consideration to prohibiting the collection of teachers'

dues by School Districts, not in spite, Mr. Speaker, but to protect the

individual teacher who does not want to be compelled to engage in

partisan politics at either the local or provincial level in his

constituency. With respect to salary negotiations this past fall by

local teachers' associations and individual school boards, there was

widespread dissatisfaction amongst trustees and teachers throughout the

Province, and in several areas of the Province there were even

demonstrations, totally unprofessional in their nature, that were

staged to protest what the teachers claimed was a lack of good faith in

bargaining by school boards. Mr. Speaker, perhaps the time has now

arrived for this Government to institute bargaining on a province-wide

basis or possibly, and I say this, having given the matter serious

consideration, to even decide to bring the matter of teachers' salaries

under its direct influence through appropriate amendments to the Public

Schools Act. The arbitration awards made last December were, on the

whole, inflationary in nature, awards that range from 6 ½ to 9.2 per

cent are most certainly difficult to accept when teachers have been

getting regular increases right along. Such awards and even ones higher

can be understood when no increases, or only slight increases, have

been made over the years, but this is not the case here. While the

average increase last fall was 7.3 per cent, when it is recognized that

close to two-thirds of all teachers also advanced in September of each

year on the scale for the particular category in which they are placed

in the School District Salary Schedule, the actual average increase

obtained by teachers was a full 8 per cent. To be opposed to such

increases, Mr. Speaker, is in some quarters equivalent to being against

better education, if not motherhood and the flag as well, but

discussion of this most pressing matter is very, very necessary today

and action is even more important if the boundless appetite of the

salaries part of our educational system isn't to hold back the actual

development of education itself. Teachers' salaries today compose 68

per cent of the operating budgets of our School Districts and our

Provincial Government, both directly through grants to School Districts

and indirectly through the home-owner's grant, is far and away the

greatest contributor to the cost of education. Therefore, in my

personal view, it must seriously consider placing itself in the

position where it will have a greater role to play in the determination

of this highly significant and important educational cost.

I am glad, Mr. Speaker, that there have been public indications by

the Department of Municipal Affairs, and by the Minister of Lands,

Forests and Water Resources, that the Government intends to take a

greater hand in pollution control through legislation, and I was

pleased to hear several references made to this fact in the Throne

Speech yesterday. While the Municipal Affairs Department has asked

Regional Districts to delay requests for pollution control authority in

anticipation of legislation, the Minister of Water Resources reported

in late October that the Pollution Control Board Branch has carried out

work with the B.C. Research Council on the general problem of air

pollution and has submitted to the Government a series of

recommendations for extensive controls that, besides requiring certain

changes in legislation, would require the necessary financial backing

being voted by this Legislature. Meanwhile, last November 1st, the

Minister of Health was quoted as stating that consideration may have to

be given to banning the use of detergents and other household cleaners

which result in a high phosphate content in waste water. Many will find

fault with any methods chosen to help alleviate this growing problem of

pollution, Mr. Speaker, but fair-minded people will applaud in this

highly important and, as my friend pointed out, very emotional field. I

believe there has been much greater progress in the field of pollution

control than most of us have given this Government credit for

achieving, but the Union of B.C. Municipalities was not alone when it

reported to the Cabinet in December that it recorded vast differences

in authority and opinion between Government Departments. In actual

fact, liaison between the various Departments is increasing all the

time, but the public is not fully aware of this. It is generally agreed

by almost everyone that the fight against pollution is not just the

battle of senior governments or of industry or of our municipal

governments, but is the responsibility of each and every individual

citizen. Everyone of us has a responsibility in this regard and each

and everyone of us must be prepared to pay his share to ensure, in the

words of the Throne Speech which opened the Parliament before this

present one, "the preservation for all time of the blessings of clean

air, pure water, and fertile soil." I am pleased by the assurances in

yesterday's Throne Speech that this Government will continue to work

toward the protection and preservation of our total environment so that

all our citizens may enjoy the beauties and wonders of our heritage as

intended by nature. Mr. Speaker, for public discussion, are

[ Page 16 ]

we prepared to put our money where our mouth is? A surcharge of 1

cent on the present 5 cents Social Services Tax for a stated number of

years, perhaps two or three, for pollution control. Such a surcharge

based on the amount raised by the Social Services Tax in the fiscal

year ended March 31st last would raise something like $35,000,000 a

year, or nearly $35,000 a day, this is Sundays included, Mr. Member for

Kamloops. This tax would involve all citizens in the basic

responsibility of doing something about pollution, and at the two ends

of the scale it would not work a hardship on those of low incomes who

now spend most of their income on non-taxable items, while the industry

with its great purchases and expansions would pay the major share of

the funds required to help clean industry up. Call it, if you would, a

penny for pollution — let these pennies add up.

In the Speech from the Throne I was glad to hear that we will be

asked to consider amendments to the Payment of Wages Act, to give

greater protection to the working people of this Province in regard to

unpaid wages. I have already had a great large number of these cases

and appreciate the cooperation of the Department of Labour on them.

I am glad to hear that this Government's extensive programme of

highway improvement will continue this year and note that the Speech

from the Throne reports that roads affected by the Columbia Development

have been re-located and most of the re-construction is completed.

There is a very important road in that area still to be re-constructed,

Mr. Speaker, and that is the

section of Highway 23 between Nakusp and

Galena Bay. While I am pleased with the discussions held so far with

the Minister of Highways on this section, I urge the calling of a

contract on this road this year.

Like the member for Delta I, too, am

glad to hear that a Legislative Committee will be asked to give further

consideration to certain aspects of the new automobile insurance and

will be asked to make recommendations for improvement.

I note that consideration will be given to a new Motion Pictures

Act, but recall the comments of a good friend who has often said to me

that there is another type of pollution beside the environmental kind,

and that is pollution of the mind.

I have mixed feelings about the announcement in the Speech from the

Throne that we will be asked to consider a system of recordings on tape

of the proceedings of this House. I have always believed that while

some form of a Hansard is desirable, none-the-less such systems, where

they exist, are greatly abused. Attendance in the House of Commons at

Ottawa suffers because members decide they need not attend regularly

and instead read the debates — if they do that. In some parliamentary

bodies members are even allowed to correct the record and, in effect,

change the record entirely. In others, members are allowed to have

material printed in the record without ever having read it to the

legislative body. Perhaps tape recordings should be kept on tape and

used only as a means of checking what was said if a dispute should

arise. Perhaps they should be transcribed and printed, but possibly

only after a stated period of time following a Session, so that we

don't find members talking only for the sake of those people back home

to whom they intend to send them out by the thousands. At any rate, as

a new member, I certainly look forward to hearing the views that will

be expressed on this proposal.

And now, Mr. Speaker, in concluding my remarks I would like to turn

to a matter of major importance to the northern part of my riding,

specifically the city of Revelstoke, and the notice that the C.P.R. has

given to the Canadian Transport Commission of its intent to apply for

permission to discontinue some 18 passenger trains across Canada,

including its only trans-continental passenger train, "The Canadian".

This move by the railway company follows by only three and a half years

the withdrawal from service in April of 1966 of the C.P.R.'s other

trans-continental passenger train, "The Dominion". Briefly, under the

process for examination set up under the National Transportation Act of

our Centennial year, a railway company first must file with the

Canadian Transport Commission notice of its intention to apply for

permission to discontinue a service, and this the C.P.R. hasn't done.

Then the company must formally apply to discontinue the service. It is

at this stage that the Canadian Transport Commission examines the

application to determine whether the service has, in fact, operated at

a loss. If it finds that it has been, then it certifies the amount of

the loss and publishes it and the company is then obliged to give broad

public notice of the proposal to discontinue the service. Following

this the C.T.C. then move towards a decision. If the C.T.C. concludes

that the public interest does not require retention of a train service,

it may approve discontinuance. If it feels that it is an essential

service then it can order that it be continued and the railway may make

claim for reimbursement from the Federal Government of up to 80 per

cent of its annual losses. Mr. Speaker, when the C.P.R. makes formal

application for the discontinuance of "The Canadian" I would urge this

Government to make a submission to the Canadian Transport Commission

opposing it. I believe there is general agreement that redundant

railway services should be cut out. The covered wagon gave way to the

railroad, and perhaps the day will come when passenger trains will give

way completely to some other mode or form of travel. But, that day has

not yet arrived. Especially in a trans-continental sense, and certainly

not when it is the C.P.R.'s last trans-continental passenger train that

the company is proposing to abandon. Mr. Speaker, the building of this

line was a bold and magnificent accomplishment, and yesterday we were

reminded that next year we would celebrate the centennial of the union

of this Province with the rest of our country in a Confederation that

required the building of a trans-continental railway as one of its

terms, and surely, Mr. Speaker, we are not going to celebrate this

centennial by acquiescing to the abandonment of one of its founding

bonds.

Mr. Speaker, the programme which has been placed before us in the

most general of terms in the Speech from the Throne is none the less a

challenging one, coupled with the Budget yet to be brought down. I

suggest that they will together provide a most worthy blueprint for

this first Session of the golden 70's which will carry this Province

into a great new decade of progress. And so, Mr. Speaker, I take great

pleasure in seconding the motion of my honourable friend the honourable

member for Delta and commending it to your consideration.

On the motion of Mr. Barrett, the debate was adjourned to the next sitting of the House.

The House adjourned at 3:50 p.m.