1975 Legislative Session: 5th Session, 30th 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)

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1975

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page 31 ]

CONTENTS

Afternoon sitting Statement Clarification of prorogation procedure. Mr. Speaker

— 31

Mr. Bennett — 33

Mr. Speaker — 33

Routine proceedings

British Columbia Recycling Corporation Act (Bill 13). Mr.

Steves.

Introduction and first reading. — 33

British Columbia Coastal Zone Commission Act (Bill 14). Mr. Steves

Introduction

and first reading. — 33

Oral questions

BCR railcar shortage report. Mr. Phillips — 33

Purchase of Casa Loma property. Mr. D.A. Anderson — 34

Loan to BCR. Mr. Bennett — 35

CBC reference to Hydro committee. Hon. R.A. Williams — 35

Loan to BCR. Mr. Smith — 36

Negotiations for ferry purchase. Mr. Wallace — 36

Shortage of BCR railcars. Mr. Fraser — 36

Loan to BCR. Mr. McClelland — 36

Review of film classification. Mr. Wallace — 37

Safety in BCR car shop. Mr. Phillips — 37

Throne speech debate. Mr. Bennett — 37

The House met at 2 p.m.

Prayers.

MR. D.E. LEWIS (Shuswap): Mr. Speaker, in the Speaker's

gallery today, seated with my good wife, is one of the more

progressive cooperative leaders in municipal government in

this province, His Worship, the mayor of Salmon Arm, Martin

Budziak.

MR. R.E. SKELLY (Alberni): Also in the gallery today are a

group of students from Evergreen State College in Olympia,

Washington. It's a political science class who have come up to

see how our system operates. They are under the direction of

Mr. Matthew Smith. I would like the House to make them

welcome.

HON. L.T. NIMSICK (Minister of Mines and Petroleum Resources): Mr. Speaker,

in the gallery today, along with my very good wife, are two very important people,

my niece and nephew, Mr. and Mrs. H.B. Collier from Nelson.

MR. C. LIDEN (Delta): Mr. Speaker, we have a group of grade

10 students from Burnsview School in Delta in the gallery

today. They had a very exciting trip on the ferry this morning

when the storm blew a window in and covered the cafeteria with

glass. They are here with their teachers, Raymond Hole and John

Pateman. I ask the Members to make them welcome.

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Members, in view of a patent

misunderstanding of the constitutional procedure of prorogation

which was evidenced on the part of some Members on Monday, and

statements that have appeared in the press by one particular

writer, I propose to mention the authority upon which

prorogation takes place.

It was obvious to me that, perhaps without realizing it and

the consequences involved for His Honour, the leader of the

official opposition (Mr. Bennett) attempted, while the

Sergeant-at-Arms with the mace was going to meet His Honour, to

embark upon the routine proceedings of the House.

Last November 26 this House resolved that the House, at its

rising, do stand adjourned until Mr. Speaker may be advised by

the government that it is desired to prorogue the fourth

session of the 30th parliament of the Province of British

Columbia. The resolution adds that Mr. Speaker may give notice

that he has been so advised, and thereupon the House shall meet

at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its

business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time.

I was advised by the Deputy Provincial Secretary on January

9 last that it was the desire of the government to prorogue the

fourth session of the 30th parliament of British Columbia at 2

p.m. on February 17, 1975. Any communications from His Honour

or the executive, as defined in sections 3 and 8 of the

Constitution Act, are conveyed to the Speaker as a

representative of the assembly from the Deputy Provincial

Secretary who acts on the instruction of the executive

council.

Under the British North America Act,

section 9, the

executive government and authority of and over Canada is

declared to continue and be vested in the Queen, and the royal

prerogatives continue under our Constitution Act.

section 17, the royal prerogative is declared as follows — that is, in our Act: "Nothing in the last preceding

section

alters or abridges the power of the Crown to prorogue or

dissolve the Legislative Assembly."

At the same time, the Lieutenant-Governor by proclamation

summoned the fifth session of the 30th parliament.

Now Redlich's Procedure of the House of Commons,

volume 2 , at page 66 states:

"Prorogation is a solemn act of the Crown, putting a legal end to the proceedings of both houses of

parliament. The immediate effect is to put an end to the

sittings, to extinguish all the powers given by the House to

its committees and to annul all the legislative stages of a

bill which has not yet passed both houses and received royal

assent."

I'm sure that you may not want to know, but I assure you

that when the House and the Speaker is challenged as to the

conformity that he has with the procedure of the constitution,

I propose to inform the Members of that constitution. I would

not have it said that I defied the constitution of this

province.

The Legislative Assembly follows the laws and customs of the

United Kingdom parliaments, so far as they are applicable. The

prerogatives of the Crown are set out by our procedural guides,

who are Erskine May , 18th edition, at page 255 and

256:

"The prorogation of Parliament is a prerogative act of the Crown. Just as parliament can only

commence its deliberation at the time appointed by the Queen,

so it cannot continue them any longer than she pleases." See

also page 57.

It must be repeated: prorogation is a prerogative act of the

Crown. The Crown, as we know, is a legal entity.

Wade and Phillips, Constitutional Law , sixth edition,

at page 160 states:

"The term, the Crown, represents a sum total of governmental powers and is synonymous with the executive. In the exercise

[ Page 32 ]

of some of the powers of the Crown, the sovereign may be called

upon to exercise a personal discretion; others are exercised by the sovereign

on the sole responsibility of Ministers."

The Queen and the Queen-in-council could, so far as

prorogation is concerned, exercise the power through and on the

advice of the Privy Council in England.

Dawson states in Democratic Government in Canada ,

fourth edition, at page 55: "The executive......

MR. H.A. CURTIS (Saanich and the Islands): Point of

order.

MR. SPEAKER: I am speaking as the Speaker complaining about

a breach of privilege.

MR. CURTIS: I wondered if you were the designated speaker on

this item, Sir.

MR. SPEAKER: Would the Hon. Member be seated?

When the Speaker is likened to a dictator in regard to

whether he obeyed the constitution on Monday, I think it is of

some importance to the records, if nothing else, that the

matter be straightened out because there are many thousands of

people who gained the impression that I had disobeyed the

constitution and this House, and I don't propose to sit further

in this chair under such a cloud.

Dawson states in Democratic Government in Canada

fourth edition, at page 55: "The executive, through the

Governor-General, and sometimes on the initiative of the Prime

Minister alone, summons, prorogues and dissolves the

House."

See also: Anson's Law and Customs of the

Constitution ,

part 1, pages 68 and 09; O.H. Phillips'

Constitutional and Administrative Law , page 103; Keith's

sixth edition of Ridges' Constitutional Law of England ,

page 43; Cheffins' Constitutional Process in Canada,

page 98.

The prerogative power to prorogue is, as Cheffins points

out, contained in the letters patent emanating from the Monarch

given to Canada and to British Columbia. When Her Majesty is

present at the prorogation of parliament, wherever that is, her

command is signified by the Lord Chancellor or Speaker of the

House of Lords.

As May states at page 57:

"The effect of prorogation is at once to suspend all

business until parliament shall be summoned again. Not only are the

sittings of parliament at an end, but all proceedings pending at the

time are quashed."

Here in British Columbia in our unicameral House, the

Lieutenant-Governor's purpose was indicated by message on

January 9 last to the Speaker from the government, and that

command was discharged by the Speaker calling Members together

for the purpose of proroguing. The presence of His Honour was

signalled last Monday at 2:08 p.m. No delay by the House could

impede the due compliance with the command forthwith.

That a Member supposed he could delay His Honour at his own

pleasure does not accord with our concepts of constitutional

monarchy. The government, to be constitutionally correct, is

the Queen and her advisers. Here it is the Lieutenant-Governor

and the executive council together. It is presumptuous to

assume that when the advice given to the Speaker is "from the

government," this means other than the Crown and its

advisers. The House resolution of November 26 last refers to

the government.

The Speaker in the Mother of Parliaments at Westminster must

terminate all proceedings when the House is signalled by Black

Rod of the entry of the sovereign into parliament. For example,

at Westminster on April 13, 1960, Black Rod called when the

House was engaged in heated questioning of the Minister of

Defence. It was a most unwelcome interruption, and uproar

ensued. The Speaker, nonetheless, repaired to the bar of the

House of Lords forthwith on a signal from Black Rod.

As Wade and Phillips say at page 173: "The prerogative

powers of the Crown are, with very rare exceptions — for

example, choice of a Prime Minister — today exercised by the

government of the day." Also, at page 175 "...by virtue of

the prerogative of the sovereign summons, prorogues and

dissolves parliament."

When the sovereign sends Black Rod, the Speaker does not

defy the command, but complies with the constitutional

imperatives. Not having a Black Rod or a senate or upper

chamber, the vice-regal representative enters our chamber to

deliver his closing speech forthwith, escorted by the mace. I

draw your attention to the fact that the mace was not on the

desk. On every occasion in the past when the presence of His

Honour has been announced to me, I have forthwith complied with

the constitutional practice. To be criticized so unjustly by

one with so little rudimentary knowledge of good manners or

propriety can only be regarded as deserving of psychiatric

treatment, rather than...

MRS. P.J. JORDAN (North Okanagan): Shame!

MR. SPEAKER: ...contempt proceedings.

In conclusion, if anyone proposes to abolish or ignore the

constitution with respect to our Constitution Act,

section 17,

let him do it by

[ Page

33 ]

constitutional means and put an amendment to the

Constitution Act on the order paper.

MR. W.R. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker,

just on your ruling, or your explanation of your ruling of the

other day, I'd like to comment that one of the most significant

things the Speaker says on assuming the chair is:

May it please Your Honour, the House of Assembly have

elected me as their Speaker, though I am but little able to

fulfil the important duties thus assigned to me. If in the

performance of those duties I should at any time fall into

error, I pray that the faults be imputed to me and not to the

Assembly whose servant I am, and who, through me, the better to

enable them to discharge their duty to the Queen and to the

country, humbly claim all their undoubted rights and

privileges. Especially that they may have the freedom of speech

in their debates, access to Your Honour's person at all

seasonable times and that their proceedings may receive from

Your Honour the most favourable

interpretation.

I appreciate your comments, Mr. Speaker, but I, too, had no

reason to embarrass His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor the

other day. But raising a point in this House, in this assembly

which is separate from the Crown, was indeed disturbing to me.

But having been acknowledged by the Speaker, as I was — the door

was not barred; it was left open, and no direction came from

the Speaker's chair that the door be closed.... There is a

separation; as the Speaker has said for many years.... He

mentioned in accepting his own position as Speaker how many

Speakers were killed preserving the rights of the House and of

the assembly's rights against the Crown, that in this assembly,

no matter if it's a point of order, once a Member has been

recognized, that door must remain closed.

MR. SPEAKER: Not when the mace has left the table and is

going to escort His Honour to this chamber.

Interjection.

MR. SPEAKER: Because as a matter of courtesy I wanted to know what you

were raising your voice for. But that courtesy was obviously out of order, as

the Hon. Member realizes. But I point out to the Hon. Member that if the constitution,

as it exists, is accepted by you as being the truth — what I've told you today

— then you cannot raise it as a point of order unless you are prepared to change

the constitution and take away from the government the power to prorogue the

House. If you wish to do that, say so; but if you accept the law as it is, then

I think you should acknowledge that it is the law. You put me in an untenable

position in this House if it is to be believed in the country that I have violated

the constitution of British Columbia.

Introduction of bills.

BRITISH COLUMBIA

RECYCLING CORPORATION ACT

On a motion by Mr. Steves, Bill 13, British Columbia

Recycling Corporation Act, introduced, read a first time and

ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at

the next sitting of the House after today.

BRITISH COLUMBIA

COASTAL ZONE COMMISSION ACT

On a motion by Mr. Steves, Bill 14, British Columbia Coastal

Zone Commission Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered

to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the

next sitting of the House after today.

HON. L. NICOLSON (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, I ask

leave to file a report.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present

the 1974 annual report of the Dunhill Development Corp.

Ltd.

Oral questions.

BCR RAILCAR SHORTAGE REPORT

MR. D.M. PHILLIPS (South Peace River): Mr. Speaker, on a

point of order, could we have the report so it won't take up

the time of the question period from the Premier and president

of the railway (Hon. Mr. Barrett)? He said that today he would

have a report on all the cars we have leased and all the cars

we have purchased for the British Columbia Railway. Could we

have that report before the question period?

HON. D. BARRETT (Premier): I took the question as notice. I

have instructed the B.C. Rail to prepare such a report. I would

ask that the Members give me in further detail all the

questions they have on the cars; so that could be included. I

do have some information that there was indeed a car shortage

for a couple of days last week, but I've been told over the

phone that that's been corrected. A detailed report of leased

cars will be available by Monday, I've been instructed by the

railway.

MR. PHILLIPS: Mr. Speaker, on the same point....

[ Page 34 ]

MR. SPEAKER: Well, are you on question period now? I assume

you are.

MR. PHILLIPS: No, on the same point.

MR. SPEAKER: Well, I'm sorry, but question period started at

2:26.

MR. PHILLIPS: The Premier said yesterday — it's here in

Hansard : "I will give you a report tomorrow..."

HON. MR. BARRETT: Okay.

MR. PHILLIPS: "...of all the cars we have leased and all

we have purchased." That's today.

HON. MR. BARRETT: I just gave you the report.

MR. PHILLIPS: Some report! Is that the way you run the

railroad?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON (Victoria): To the Minister of Housing,

Mr. Speaker. Has the Minister commenced an inquiry into the

fact that the price...?

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Hon. Members, I just recognized

the Second Member for Victoria because he was the next person

standing. He caught my eye.

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: I just indicated that question period started

at 2:26.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: To the Minister of Housing....

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: What is your point of order?

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: Excuse me. Was the Hon. Member for South Peace

River (Mr. Phillips) on a point of order?

MR. R.H. McCLELLAND (Langley): Of course he was on a point

of order.

MR. SPEAKER: I didn't get that impression.

MR. McClelland: Well, he was on a point of order, Mr.

Speaker.

Interjection.

MR. SPEAKER: I would undertake to allow the Hon. Leader of

the Opposition (Mr. Bennett) to be recognized next after the

person I had already recognized, and who now has the floor.

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: I don't see that there is a point of order in

this case.

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for South Peace River did not

rise on a point of order.

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for Victoria has the floor on

question period. It started at 2:26. We'll give a couple of

minutes for all the interruptions in the sound.

PURCHASE OF CASA LOMA

PROPERTY

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister

of Housing. Has the Minister commenced an inquiry into the fact

that the price Dunhill Development negotiated for the purchase

of the property on Kingsway owned by Casa Loma Motels Ltd. is

substantially above — approximately $1 million above — the

price that was asked for the same property a few months before

the negotiations with Dunhill commenced?

HON. MR. NICOLSON: No, I have not launched an inquiry.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is

the Minister aware that this windfall profit was given to the

owners of the property?

MR. SPEAKER: May I point out to the Hon. Members that the

microphones throughout the House are not working?

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: That's why I'm shouting, Mr. Speaker.

Interjections.

[ Page

35 ]

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Well, I'd like to ask whether the

Minister is aware that this windfall profit was given to the

owners of the property despite the fact that the tradesmen and

subcontractors who built the building were forced to settle

their claims for work done at 40 cents on the dollar on this

project.

HON. MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Speaker, all liens were settled

before Dunhill Development purchased the Casa Loma project.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: As the Minister, Mr. Speaker, apparently

knows something about this deal, could he tell us whether he

was aware that the liens that were settled were settled at 40

cents on the dollar, and the people who received the purchase

price and the substantial profit there from were those who

originally owned the building and originally owed money on

those particular contracts with subcontractors?

HON. MR. NICOLSON: I was aware that the purchase took place

after all liens and settlements had been cleared from the

title.

MR. BENNETT: Are we in question period, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Yes, we are on question period. Either the

Clerk or the Speaker can announce question period.

LOAN TO BCR

MR. BENNETT: My question is to the Premier as president of

the railway. Yesterday the Premier said the $15 million is a

short-term loan to the railroad to make up for the loss of

revenue during the period of the work shortage. Could the

Premier advise the term of the loan and the interest rate?

HON. MR. BARRETT: The terms are in the order-in-council.

MR. BENNETT: Because the Premier's answer was at variance

with the order-in-council, which called it a grant, I was

described in his answer yesterday.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, it is a loan which is

repayable with no interest to the Crown.

MR. PHILLIPS: The order-in-council states specifically that this $15

million is a grant. Now, the Premier and president of the railway changed the

terms of that grant in this Legislature yesterday afternoon to a loan. Mr. Speaker,

in the dictionary I have, a grant is a gift or bestowal given by one having

authority over it. There is no interest rate on a grant; a grant does not have

to be repaid.

The president of the railway and Minister of Finance in this

Legislature yesterday changed the terms of this

order-in-council. I want to know, Mr. Speaker, if it's going to

be a loan, what interest rate the British Columbia Railway is

going to pay on this $15 million, when the loan will be repaid,

and under what terms.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! You cannot ask for the answering

of a question which has been answered twice already, yesterday

and today.

MR. PHILLIPS: But the question hasn't been answered.

MR. BENNETT: Perhaps, then, if the Premier doesn't

understand the difference between a grant and a loan, he may

wish to change his answer of yesterday.

HON. MR. BARRETT: In answer to a question about the $15

million, it is a grant by way of a loan. It will be repaid.

There is no interest.

Interjections.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, if that's not clear to the

opposition, then that's their difficulty.

CBC REFERENCE TO

HYDRO COMMITTEE

HON. R.A. WILLIAMS (Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was asked in question period by the Hon. Member for

West Vancouver–Howe Sound (Mr. L.A. Williams) with respect to a secret committee

within the B.C. Hydro and Power Authority. He referred to that committee being

referred to in a previous CBC programme of last Sunday.

I should like to confirm to the House that, yes, there was a

secret committee of senior officials within B.C. Hydro...

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

HON. R.A. WILLIAMS: ...that worked over a period of two

years on the question of re-allocating costs with respect to

the Columbia River treaty projects.

I have not had the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to review the

data which I have just now received with

[ Page 36 ]

the Hon. Premier. I should like to do so and report back to

the House further.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS (West Vancouver–Howe Sound): Supplemental

to the question to which the Minister has responded: is the

Minister in a position to name the committee at this time?

HON. R.A. WILLIAMS: I think the minutes of the committee and

its activities should be tabled in the House, Mr. Speaker, but

I have not had the opportunity to review it, as I

indicated.

LOAN TO BCR

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): A question to the Hon.

Premier with respect to the B.C. Railway. He indicated that $15

million went to B.C. Rail by some arrangement which he doesn't

seem to be too sure of as to whether it was a loan or an

outright grant. But in replying yesterday, he indicated that

the money would be used to make up for revenue lost during a

work stoppage, plus other smaller items as detailed.

Is the Minister prepared to file a detailed list of these

other smaller items or give us a breakdown as to what amount of

the $15 million refers to loss of revenue from work stoppage

and other small detailed items?

HON. MR. BARRETT: I will inform the House of the details of

all of the accounts of B.C. Rail under a new accounting service

as soon as the annual report is available. The information

asked for yesterday will be tabled as soon as I receive it from

the railway.

NEGOTIATIONS FOR

FERRY PURCHASE

MR. G.S. WALLACE (Oak Bay): Mr. Speaker, could I ask the

Minister of Transport and Communications whether, in fact, the

government has made a commitment to buy the Princess Marguerite

ferry?

HON. R.M. STRACHAN (Minister of Transport and Communications): I am

not in a position to make any statement publicly at this time. I'll take the

question as notice and the House will be kept fully informed of any developments

that may take place.

SHORTAGE OF BCR

RAILCARS

MR. A.V. FRASER (Cariboo): A question to the Premier as president of

the railroad. He announced earlier in the question period that there was not

a shortage of cars on the BCR as of last week. I have been informed as of today

that there is a severe shortage and has been all this week. I'd like you to

investigate this further because it's quite serious.

HON. MR. BARRETT: My advice by phone this morning was that

there was a shortage last week, as I have already said in the

House.

MR. FRASER: The firm, this morning, ordered 22 cars and did

not receive a car. The firm was P & T Sawmills, Williams

Lake.

MR. SMITH: As of today, Peace Wood Products, Taylor, British

Columbia, have a shortage of chip cars to move 250 cars of

chips to Mackenzie. They're receiving five cars a day. This

does not keep up to their production, let alone take care of

their 250 cars accumulated during the time the railway was on

strike.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I have been advised one way;

the Member is advising me another way. I will attempt to

correct the information in terms of what they're saying and

what the railway is saying. But it pleases me to note that

there is an economic recovery in the province, especially in

the forest industry.

LOAN TO BCR

MR. McCLELLAND: I would like to ask the Premier a question,

too, with regard to the $15 million loan or grant. I wonder if

the Premier could advise the House as to what the borrowing

limits are of the British Columbia Railway...

Interjection.

MR. McCLELLAND: ...and whether or not this $15 million,

which now appears to be a loan, exceeds those borrowing limits.

If so, what legislative authority does the government have to

make such a loan?

HON. MR. BARRETT: The legislative authority exists through

the order-in-council. The borrowing power of B.C. Rail was set

by statute in this House.

MR. McCLELLAND: Does the $15 million, which is now set as a

loan, exceed that borrowing authority?

HON. MR. BARRETT: It is public information, and you can look

it right up there in the legislation.

Interjections.

HON. MR. BARRETT: I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Do a little bit of thinking and get

[ Page

37 ]

it together over there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

REVIEW OF

FILM CLASSIFICATION

MR. WALLACE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the

Attorney-General....

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WALLACE: I'd like to ask the Attorney-General, in view of the violence

that he's concerned about in our society and the current showing of a movie

in Victoria, entitled "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre," described by the director

of film classification — and I have the clipping, Mr. Attorney-General — as

"an extremely gruesome, disgusting picture," has the Attorney-General's office

received any complaints from the public regarding this film and does the Attorney-General

have any periodic review of film classification?

HON. A.B. MACDONALD (Attorney-General): Mr. Speaker, the government's

responsibility is set out in the Act; the policy has been formulated by a legislative

committee. I will check to see if there are any complaints about this particular

show. I'm not aware of one at the present time. Ray MacDonald is the classification

officer, really, not really a censor. But I will check and see if there are

complaints.

MR. WALLACE: In the light of the Minister's answer, is he

then saying that the terms of reference of the director will be

brought under review?

HON. MR. MACDONALD: No.

SAFETY IN BCR

CAR SHOP

MR. PHILLIPS: Mr. Speaker, a question to the president of

the railway and Premier of the province. On the afternoon of

February 7, 1975, three men narrowly escaped death in the new

car shop which the British Columbia Railway is building in

Squamish. Evidently there was a car pushed into the car shop

which crushed and damaged beyond repair a $2,000 welding

machine before running into another car which three men were

working on.

Are these safety meetings which were held once a month in the car shop being

continued? Does the general car shop foreman give the employees regular safety

instructions? What action will be taken by the British Columbia Railway and

the general car shop foreman to alleviate and see that this type of accident

does not occur again?

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased that the Member

has asked the question. Prior to our election as government,

there was no Workers' Compensation Board protection for the

workers of B.C. Rail. Since we've been elected we've afforded

them that protection.

MR. PHILLIPS: There was no car shop. (Laughter.)

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I know the opposition has it

all together and they want the answers. As for the specific

accident, I will take it as notice.

Orders of the day.

SPEECH FROM THE THRONE

(continued debate)

MR. W.R. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker,

I'm pleased to take my position in this debate. In doing so, I

too would like to pass along the regrets of this side of the

House, the British Columbia Social Credit Party, on the passing

of the former Clerk of the Legislature, the late E.K. (Ned)

DeBeck, and also on the passing of the late Senator Arthur

Laing, who served in this House as leader of the Liberal Party

so well and served this province in so many ways. The record of

Mr. DeBeck as Clerk and his knowledge will be appreciated by

all, and, of course, Senator Laing's record of service to the

province will always be there to guide and direct all of us in

our continuing commitment to our province and our country.

I also noticed in the throne speech and am aware that 1975

was proclaimed by the UN as International Women's Year. We in

the British Columbia Social Credit Party join all others in the

pursuit of any action to promote equality and eliminate

discrimination to achieve the end of equality for women, not

only in this province or in this country but in the world.

In moving the Speech from the Throne yesterday, the Member

for Alberni (Mr. Skelly), if one closed his eyes, sounded

almost like the Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources

(Hon. R.A. Williams). In fact, as I watched the television late

last night and watched the Minister being questioned on

"Hourglass," I realized that there were almost the same

slogans, the same phrases, the same speech. Indeed, yesterday

we had the Charlie McCarthy to the Minister's Edgar Bergen

giving us the same old slogans against the companies or against

anyone, as long as they didn't accept blame for this

government

[ Page 38 ]

for their own actions in the forest industry and dealing

with the resource industries of this province.

I think perhaps the Member for Alberni should have taken a

leaf from the book of the Member for Dewdney (Mr. Rolston), who

was not quite prepared to speak to this Speech from the Throne.

He rode as far away as he could from the speech on a Trident

missile — anything to divert attention from what wasn't in this

Speech from the Throne and what actions weren't promised for

the people of British Columbia in these trying times of

But I appreciated the Member for Dewdney's comments. Indeed,

he has continued, as has been a tradition in this House, a

concern for events beyond the provincial boundary, a concern

for international events about which all people should be

concerned. I share his concern and so do those of my party and

so do all of those citizens of British Columbia who must take

note of the buildup of missiles and weapons internationally in

this world of ours.

I commend him for his speech, and I commend him for also

staying away from the provincial issues and the defence of this

government, which is really indefensible.

I've noticed in the past that this Legislature has taken

some action on international events. It was just a few years

ago that the Member for Alberni, then Dr. McDiarmid, no longer

in this House, passed a resolution dealing with oil

tankers.

MR. SPEAKER: The microphones are not working very well. Are

they recording anything at Hansard ? Yes, they appear to

be recording. I'm sorry, something appears wrong with them.

MR. BENNETT: Dr. McDiarmid at that time, Mr. Speaker,

introduced a resolution which was endorsed by all of the House

that we go against oil tankers plying off the coast of British

Columbia.

Since that time, without the Legislature, I understand the

government, through its executive branch and direction of the

Crown corporations or the Liquor Control Board, has made its

own move into international affairs and banned South African

wines. I think that we should go further in this House, while

we're concerned with international action and international

positions, and pass a resolution at some time during this

sitting of the Legislature stating that for all moneys borrowed

into B.C. the lenders must identify themselves and be

identified to British Columbians.

Many of us are aware that there is international money

available that would not be acceptable to the people of British

Columbia. There are always stories of Mafia money,

international gangster money, and I believe it is the duty of

this House that while it has always been traditional in most

Legislatures and by all public bodies that they announce to

their citizens from whom they are borrowing and what the amounts are and

the terms of repayment, it is interesting that recently there

have been loans in which this information was not

disclosed.

I think this House should express an opinion, Mr. Speaker,

on whether the citizens of British Columbia are going to have

some say with whom we deal with financially on the

international level, and that all loans in future shall be made

public to the people of British Columbia for whom this money is

supposedly being borrowed.

This throne speech, Mr. Speaker, really didn't give us a

very good outline of the plans of this government for the

coming year. What was missing from this speech was three key

words which I think express the concern of all the citizens of

the Province of British Columbia in this year, 1975. The three

words are "unemployment," "inflation" and "restraint"

because, Mr. Speaker, the big issues facing British Columbia

are just those issues.

Unemployment, while it may be amusing to some people who

haven't suffered unemployment, and some who may be here in the

best job they've ever had, and some people with fat salaries,

luxurious offices and the opportunity to travel to faraway

places, is very real to those well over 100,000 people that

cannot find work in this Province of British Columbia. It's a

very real problem to them, and it isn't very reassuring to them

that some make light of it, and some may smirk and some may

laugh. I'm sure they will remember it when they have the only

opportunity that they will get to express their disfavour at

the polls of this province.

The Dominion Bureau of Statistics figures released for

January on unemployment in British Columbia are 9.1 per cent.

Seasonally adjusted to lower the impact of such a figure, there

is still a whopping 7.5 per cent, Mr. Speaker — not the 7.1 per

cent, as given in this Legislature yesterday by the Premier

that he threw out as the unemployment figure for this province

yesterday in this Legislature. It appears that his lack of

knowledge of the railway also extends to the percentage of the

number of the unemployed in this province, a lack of concern

that I'm sure they are noting in the response he made to this

Legislature.

The Dominion Bureau of Statistics states that the rate is

9.1 per cent, seasonally adjusted to 7.5 per cent, and they go

on further, Mr. Speaker, because this is where I got my

information. As of yesterday, DBS commented that unemployment

outside the metro Vancouver area for the month of January was

in excess of 10 per cent. Unemployment in the greater Vancouver

area was less than 9.1 per cent, but for a very great area of

this province the unemployment rate is over the 10 per cent

that I quoted in the Legislature yesterday. That percentage

figure becomes even more alarming when you add it to the

numbers of individuals that it represents.

[ Page 39 ]

One person desiring work and seeking it is not desirable —

one person who wants to work in this province. But when you

take the official figures of 81,000 unemployed, add to that

those people who are normally self-employed who do not qualify

for unemployment insurance benefits but who are unemployed at

this particular time due to the slowdown in the British

Columbia economy, particularly in the interior, add to that

those figures that have been quoted in the speeches to the

throne before by the former Leader of the Opposition — what he

called the hidden unemployed on the welfare rolls — add those

people to the 81,000 figure and you come up with well over

100,000 British Columbians unemployed. Mr. Speaker, 100,000 is

an unacceptable amount of people in British Columbia, which has

had a history of trying to create jobs for Canadians desiring

to live in this most favoured part of Canada.

Then we see even more disturbing news in the Vancouver

Sun of Monday where it says "Alberta Drops B.C. Job Plan," and Alberta is no longer going to pick up the

unemployment slack that the Human Resources Minister of

British Columbia (Hon. Mr. Levi) has asked them to do to take

care of the unemployed from this province, that our province,

our government and our Ministers say they are incapable of

solving.

Alberta is going to stop picking up the marbles for the

fumbles of the British Columbia government of the day, and

that's unfortunate because the people of British Columbia are

looking for hope and they're looking for leadership and they're

looking for a plan of action. They just want the opportunity to

work in the province. They do not want to go on welfare; they

do not want to be wards of the state. They want to make a

contribution.

Yet, Mr. Speaker, the dignity of employment is denied them.

The opportunity of employment is denied them. It may be that

they just don't qualify under the peculiar set of rules that

apply in British Columbia for employment with the civil service

these days and these people want a chance for gainful

employment in this Province of British Columbia. Over 100,000

unemployed. It is shocking; it's disgraceful and in British

Columbia it needn't happen.

The second word that was left out of this throne speech was

"inflation." What of inflation? Well, Mr. Speaker, that's the

cruelest tax of all on the purchasing power of the citizens of

this province. All of the increases in pension, all of the

increases in wages mean nothing, absolutely nothing, if the

inflation rate proceeds at the galloping rate that it has in

British Columbia.

All of our citizens, and particularly those in need, those citizens who are

on fixed incomes, those citizens who are on pensions, those young families,

young parents raising a family...yet the cost of the necessities of life have

escalated beyond their ability to buy them out of their current salary, if they

are lucky enough to be employed in British Columbia, or perhaps even eroding

those savings that they have effected during years when inflation was not the

problem that it was.

MR. D.M. PHILLIPS (North Peace River): The Premier told them

to spend their savings. "Take a trip," he said. "Take a

trip."

MRS. P.J. JORDAN (North Okanagan): Become wards of the state — starve.

MR. PHILLIPS: Sure, spend it. "Don't save it, we'll look

after you. Trust us."

MR. BENNETT: Inflation, Mr. Speaker, is the cruelest tax of

all; yet while we have inflation for our citizens this

government gets the benefit of record revenues, record revenues

to waste from inflation — revenues which soared to over $2

billion last year. Our people were poor because of inflation —

worse than ever before, but the government coffers in 1973...and the budget was there to spend willy-nilly and waste, none

of it solving the real problems of people in this province

because that spending hasn't created jobs and it hasn't helped

inflation.

Our British Columbia citizens are concerned over those two

words because food prices, with inflation, are worse in B.C.

than in any other part of Canada. This does become a provincial

problem. It does become a problem of this Legislature. Recent

studies conducted by one of the federal Ministers indicate that

food prices are higher in British Columbia than any other part

of Canada: yet no mention of the word "inflation" in this

Speech from the Throne.

The third word I would like to discuss that was left out of

this speech is "restraint." How loudly must the word

"restraint" be shouted, Mr. Speaker, for governments to hear

and for people to hear and recognize that in this difficult

time in British Columbia in 1975 restraint is not only

desirable but a necessity?

But nowhere in this speech is there a mention of restraint

from a government that has overruns in all departments,

self-confessed overruns: overruns in a single department of

$100 million, overruns from lack of restraint that this

government seems proud of. It was defended in the moving and

seconding of the Speech from the Throne yesterday. The

government Members publicly declared they were proud of the

overruns. They were proud of the lack of restraint.

MR. SPEAKER: Excuse me, Hon. Member, I wonder if you could

try the next microphone on your right. Hansard , would

you activate the next

[ Page 40 ]

microphone, please? I don't know where the fault lies in

this particular matter.

Interjection.

MR. SPEAKER: I wonder if the Hansard desk would try

to activate the second microphone, which normally belongs to

the Member for North Peace River (Mr. Smith).

HON. D. BARRETT (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I would like to

suggest a five-minute adjournment.

MR. SPEAKER: I don't know that we can clear it that quickly,

but we can try.

I declare a short recess.

The House took recess at 3:03 p.m.

The House resumed at 4 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Members, the problems with the sound system are going

to take perhaps overnight to cure, by reason of the printed circuits that have

to be checked in the cabinet, down in the equipment itself. In view of this,

it's rather impractical, very impractical, to count on the sound system working,

as you've just seen demonstrated. Therefore, I have proposed to the party leaders,

in meeting with me, that we adjourn the House, and this debate by the Hon. Leader

of the Opposition, until tomorrow. They've agreed to that proposal, and this

would not prejudice the times that were set under the rules under standing order

45(a). In other words, this time today that has been taken will not....

Interjection.

MR. SPEAKER: I'm not saying anything as far as his speech is

concerned. But the length of time of six days for this address

and reply will not be prejudiced by the fact of this unhappy

circumstance.

I would ask the Hon. Leader of the Opposition, in view of

that, if he would adjourn this debate. I would ask first if the

House will agree to this proposal.

Leave granted.

Mr. Bennett moves adjournment of the debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. Mrs. Dailly moves adjournment of the House Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 4:04 p.m.

[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright © 1975, 2001, 2013: Queen's Printer, Victoria, B.C., Canada