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)

TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 1975

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

1089 ]

CONTENTS

Afternoon sitting Routine proceedings

Oral questions

Resignation of John Trask.

Mr. Fraser — 1089

Bridge link between Gulf Islands. Hon. Mr. Lea answers — 1089

Grant to strata body. Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1089

Hiring of Mr. Trask. Mr. Chabot — 1089

Rezoning of Casa Loma property. Mr. Phillips — 1089

Funds advanced to BCR. Mr. Fraser — 1090

Government in mine exploration. Mr. Gibson — 1090

Cambodian, Vietnamese orphans. Mr. L.A. Williams — 1090

Princess Marguerite purchase. Mr. Curtis — 1090

Drop in B.C. unemployment rate. Ms. Brown — 1091

Withholding of government advertising from CKNW. Mr. D.A. Anderson —

Committee of Supply: Department of Consumer Services estimates

On vote 31.

Mr. Phillips — 1092

Division on Mr. Chairman's ruling — 1121

On vote 32.

Mr. L.A. Williams — 1123

TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 1975

The House met at 2 p.m.

Prayers.

Hon. W.L. Hartley (Minister of Public Works): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the assembly to join me in

welcoming a group of students from the Hope School under the

direction of their teacher, Mr. Dahl, and his wife.

Oral questions.

RESIGNATION OF JOHN TRASK

Mr. A.V. Fraser (Cariboo): Mr. Speaker, I have a

question to the Minister of Economic Development. As

vice-president and director of the British Columbia Railway,

has the Minister been able to learn if John Trask, general

manager of the British Columbia Railway, has tendered his

resignation? If so, what reasons were given?

Hon. G.V. Lauk (Minister of Economic Development):

Mr. Speaker, I refer the Hon. Member to my answer to

yesterday's question.

Mr. Speaker: Did the Hon. Member ask that question

yesterday.

Mr. Fraser: Yes.

Mr. Speaker: I don't think you can continue repeating

questions.

Mr. Fraser: The Minister said yesterday that he

didn't have the information. I thought by today he would

have.

Hon. Mr. Lauk: Mr. Speaker, that's not what I

said.

Mr. Fraser: Mr. Speaker, just a supplementary.

Hon. Mr. Lauk: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. That's

not what I said yesterday. I said I could not and did not

confirm the resignation of John Trask.

Mr. Fraser: I have a supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to

the Minister. Is the Minister prepared, then, to deny that Mr.

Trask's resignation was tendered more than a week ago?

BRIDGE LINK BETWEEN GULF ISLANDS

Hon. G.R. Lea (Minister of Highways): Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was asked

a question by the Hon. Member for Saanich and the Islands as to whether my department

had any plans to build a bridge from Mayne Island to Saturna. The answer is

no. The department has no plans to build a bridge.

Mr. H.A. Curtis (Saanich and the Islands): Mr.

Speaker, I appreciate the prompt answer from the Minister of

Highways. Perhaps I read more into the word "my" department —

the emphasis given to that word in his answer. I wonder if he

is aware of any study within the government service with

respect to a bridge link in the Gulf Islands.

Hon. Mr. Lea: No, Mr. Speaker, I'm not aware of any

study.

GRANT TO STRATA BODY

Mr. D.A. Anderson (Victoria): To the Minister of

Housing, Mr. Speaker. Could I ask the Minister what was the

amount of the grant to the B.C. Association of Strata

Corporations, which is mentioned on page 18 of the Minister's

recent publication, "Housing for People"?

Hon. L. Nicolson (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker,

I'll try and have that for the Member tomorrow.

HIRING OF MR. TRASK

Mr. J.R. Chabot (Columbia River): A question to the

Minister of Economic Development. Is consideration being given

for the employment in the Department of Economic Development of

Mr. Trask from the B.C. Railway?

Hon. Mr. Lauk: Did I understand the question? Are we

going to hire him in the department?

Mr. Chabot: Is consideration being given to employing

Mr. Trask in the Department of Economic Development?

Hon. Mr. Lauk: No.

REZONING OF CASA LOMA PROPERTY

Mr. D.M. Phillips (South Peace River): Mr. Speaker,

I'd like to direct my question to the Hon. Minister of Housing.

Would the Minister advise the House if he has received an

answer to his letter requesting Burnaby council to approve a

rezoning petition with due diligence to permit Casa Loma to

proceed as a senior citizens' project?

Hon. Mr. Nicolson: I'll check on that, Mr.

Member.

[ Page 1090 ]

Mr. Phillips: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

Will the owners of the project be able to meet Burnaby building

bylaw requirements by May 31?

Hon. Mr. Nicolson: Mr. Speaker, I think that this

question has been asked to some extent before. I don't know

what the Member is leading up to, but perhaps he's leading up

to terms of the agreement. The terms of the agreement protect

the Crown and options to the Crown, and we see no difficulty in

terms of zoning matters.

Mr. Phillips: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. And

I'd like to thank the Minister again for not answering the

question. I wouldn't want him to change his tactics in the

House. But would the Minister advise the House if the contract

for finishing the project was to have the 32 motel units

finished as motel units or as senior citizen housing units?

Hon. Mr. Nicolson: Mr. Speaker, the Member is asking

for information from documents already tabled in the House, but....

Mr. Phillips: The document doesn't answer that

question.

Hon. Mr. Nicolson: Oh, the documents do. Mr. Member,

as has been mentioned, not only is the agreement in there but,

as an appendage to that agreement tabled in the House, so were

the terms of the mortgage. But, Mr. Speaker, the Crown can

request and could cancel the agreement should there not be a

rezoning. That is the prerogative of the Crown.

FUNDS ADVANCED TO BCR

Mr. Fraser: Mr. Speaker, a further question to the

Minister of Economic Development, in his capacity as

vice-president of the British Columbia Railway. With respect to

the $15 million loan to the BCR earlier this year, and the

recently announced $20 million advance, could the Minister

outline the reasons which made necessary these unprecedented

advances to the British Columbia Railway?

Hon. Mr. Lauk: I'll take the question as notice, Mr.

Speaker.

GOVERNMENT IN MINE EXPLORATION

Mr. G.F. Gibson (North Vancouver–Capilano): Mr. Speaker, a question

for the Minister of Mines. Is the Minister aware of reports circulating in the

industry that an official of his department has been telling classes at BCIT,

training people for the prospectors' assistance programme, that the government's

going to be setting up a Crown corporation to undertake mineral exploration

and to change the prospectors' assistance Act to give right of first refusal

to the government for a full year? Could he say whether or not that does indeed

represent government policy?

Interjection.

Mr. Gibson: Would the Minister, on a supplementary,

then, say that it does not represent government policy, Mr.

Speaker?

Hon. L.T. Nimsick (Minister of Mines): I've given no

such instructions. I have no knowledge that anybody has been

given that information or stated those statements to the

BCIT.

Mr. Gibson: On a supplementary, Mr. Speaker, I would

ask the Minister: does it or does it not represent government

policy? Those reports are circulating.

Hon. Mr. Nimsick: No, it doesn't represent government

policy.

CAMBODIAN, VIETNAMESE ORPHANS

Mr. L.A. Williams (West Vancouver–Howe Sound): Mr.

Speaker, a question to the Hon. Minister of Human Resources.

With respect to the children recently airlifted to British

Columbia from Cambodia and Vietnam, is it a fact that those

children had already been adopted by people in this province

and that they had been processed by their respective home

governments?

Hon. N. Levi (Minister of Human Resources): Yes,

that's so, Mr. Member. There are in Canada approximately 280

adoption homes that have been approved for international

adoption, and we recently had 62. One of them went to the

United States; the other 61 remained in Canada.

Mr. L.A. Williams: Supplemental, Mr. Speaker. Could

the Minister indicate whether through his department people who

were interested in adopting children from outside this country

can apply and receive assistance as to the procedures which are

involved?

Hon. Mr. Levi: Yes, it can be and is being done

through the department.

PRINCESS MARGUERITE PURCHASE

Mr. Curtis: To the Minister of Lands, Forests

[ Page 1091 ]

and Water Resources regarding the acquisition of land in

Victoria's Inner Harbour, and the CPR vessel Princess

Marguerite: can the Minister confirm that all aspects of the

purchase have been finally completed?

Hon. R.A. Williams (Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources):

I don't believe the final documents have been received, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Curtis: Thank you. A supplementary, Mr. Speaker,

to the same Minister and on the same subject. Would the

Minister indicate if docking arrangements in Seattle are

settled for the 1975 season? Is there any problem

anticipated?

Hon. R.A. Williams: I think everything is finalized

in that regard, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Curtis: A further supplementary, with your

permission, Mr. Speaker. Does the Minister have any indication

that the vessel Princess Marguerite will require any work other

than annual inspection and clean-up prior to the start of this

operating season, 1975?

Hon. R.A. Williams: I'll take the question as notice,

Mr. Speaker.

Mr. G.B. Gardom (Vancouver–Point Grey): A

supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the same Minister. Is the Hon.

Minister prepared to table in the House the financial

statements showing the operating expenses of this particular

vessel over the past year?

Hon. R.A. Williams: That's the property of C.P.

Transport, I believe, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Gardom: Well, in supplementary: has the Minister

received those documents?

Hon. R.A. Williams: I think that our staff have the

basic data. But we considered the information basically one in

the hands of the former operating company.

Mr. Gardom: A further supplementary: the Minister

having received the information, is he prepared to table in the

House the information he has received?

Hon. R.A. Williams: No, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: The Hon. Second Member for

Vancouver-Burrard.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: I think we've had about five supplementaries. Is it on

the same subject of the acquisition of the boat?

Will the Hon. Member defer?

Ms. R. Brown (Vancouver-Burrard): Yes, I will, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Curtis: I appreciate, Madam Member, your

cooperation. On the subject of the Inner Harbour land, which

is involved in the same acquisition: does the Minister intend

to ensure that there will be cooperation and consultation with

the City of Victoria in the long-range development of this

property?

Hon. R.A. Williams: I think we've indicated before

that the Department of Lands is a major owner in the Inner

Harbour already, as some Members may be aware. The former

Songhees Indian reserve is all leasehold land held by Crown

provincial. There have been continuing discussions, and the

Deputy Minister of Lands has made himself available to the City

of Victoria for discussion with both the elected and staff

representatives regarding those lands, and I'm sure that that

kind of process will be ongoing.

DROP IN B.C. UNEMPLOYMENT RATE

Ms. Brown: My question is directed to the Minister of

Labour. Would the Minister of Labour explain to this House why

it is that the unemployment rate across Canada is going up,

while in British Columbia it's going down?

Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! (Laughter.)

Interjections.

Hon. W.S. King (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, I

am amazed that the opposition is not very attentively listening

to the response. We find that they're very interested if any

indication of the converse is true. But I'm pleased to respond

to that question by the Member for Vancouver-Burrard.

I think that there are basically two reasons. I take the

question seriously. One is certainly due to the direct

employment programmes which the government has mounted in

recognition of high unemployment. Secondly, and I think most

profound and important, Mr. Speaker, is the display of

confidence which the business community has in the strength of

the economy in British Columbia; and jobs are increasing.

Mr. Speaker: May I point out to the Hon. Member that

it is irregular to ask for information which is readily

available in government documents,

[ Page 1092 ]

either federal or provincial?

Mr. Chabot: A supplementary question, in view of the

reduction of unemployment from 8.5 to 8.4 per cent in British

Columbia — one-tenth of one per cent. Could the Minister tell

us how many people are unemployed presently in British

Columbia? Is it 102,000 or 103,000?

Hon. Mr. King: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Columbia

River is consistently wrong — on this occasion as he is on

most. I think he's viewing the unadjusted figures that are

provided by the federal department. The number in actuality is

much, much below 100,000 at the moment.

Mr. Chabot: What is it?

Hon. Mr. King: I haven't got the precise figures with

me...

Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh!

Hon. Mr. King: ...but I'm certainly prepared...

An Hon. Member: You don't know!

Hon. Mr. King: ...to take that question as notice

and bring in the figures tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Gibson: On a supplementary to the Minister of

Labour, I would ask the Minister whether, if he was unemployed,

he would rather be adjusted or unadjusted. (Laughter.)

Hon. Mr. King: Mr. Speaker, that distinction is one

which the federal Liberal Party makes on the statistical

performance of the work force in British Columbia, and I find

it somewhat curious that a Liberal Member is questioning their

basis of providing statistics. I find that somewhat curious,

and perhaps he'll relay his concern for the unemployment being

handled in that particular way to his federal colleagues.

WITHHOLDING OF GOVERNMENT

ADVERTISING FROM CKNW

Mr. D.A. Anderson: To the Minister of Lands, Forests

and Water Resources: has the ongoing examination of B.C. Hydro

files disclosed evidence indicating that in the past efforts

were made to prevent B.C. Hydro from placing advertisements on

radio station CKNW because of the comments of that station

critical of the Columbia River Treaty by their hotliner, Jack

Webster?

Hon. Mr. Lea: He doesn't work there.

Mr. D.A. Anderson: I know he doesn't.

Hon. R.A. Williams: I think that in a cursory view of

the previous minutes, it seems apparent that it was a matter of

concern of the former board — that is, the editorial comment

with respect to B.C. Hydro.

Orders of the day.

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Dent in the chair.

ESTIMATES: DEPARTMENT

OF CONSUMER SERVICES

On vote 31: Minister's office, $88,796.

Mr. D.M. Phillips (South Peace River): Mr. Chairman,

I've just a few short comments which I would like to make with

regard to this department before we pass on to something

else.

I would like to say to the Minister (Hon. Ms. Young) that I

appreciate the work that she's endeavouring to do, but I am

also concerned that in her work in trying to protect the

consumer in this province all of her efforts are being directed

against the business community. I feel that some of her efforts

are meant to provoke a consumer against a small business and I

refer specifically to the pamphlet which the department put

out.

For instance, if I were an encyclopedia salesman I would

take offence to the drawing in here showing him as a

big-mouthed "bombasterous" sort of salesman who was out with

his mouth open and big teeth trying to chew off or rip off the

consumer. I don't really consider that fair. There are other

cartoons throughout the pamphlet which any common, ordinary,

honest businessman in the profession depicted here would take

offence to.

Certainly, as I said in this Legislature before and I'll say

again, any ordinary, honest businessman has to be thankful for

the Department of Consumer Services, because in every business

there are bad eggs and in every barrel there are rotten apples.

I think that the Minister is honestly trying to protect not

only the consumer from these unscrupulous businesses but also

the honest businessman from those who would use unfair tactics

and bring down the good business name.

As I looked through this pamphlet I was quite amazed at what

I felt was bias against the honest businessman. For instance,

here's a depiction of a meat salesman. There are many honest

meat salesmen in British Columbia in small businesses, and I

feel that it's biased in that regard.

I would like to point out to the Minister that I feel

[ Page 1093 ]

this book would have been much more effective had it,

without bias, pointed out to the consumer some of the areas in

which he may go wrong without picking specific businesses. The

Minister of Consumer Services laughs but there was nothing in

this book, for instance, that pointed out big government as the

greatest ripoff artist known to mankind today — known to the

taxpayer. Now had there been in this little booklet a cartoon

of our Minister of Finance with bags of money behind his back

and his hand in the taxpayer's pocket then it really would have

truly depicted what government is doing to the taxpayer

today.

While the Minister of Finance claims great surpluses, he

continues to increase taxes. I think, therefore, that this book

is biased. It would have been a much more credible brochure had

it pointed out what the government — the provincial government

in particular and in specific — of which she is a part, is

doing to the population of British Columbia.

On the contrary, Mr. Chairman, the government comes out with

what is, in my mind, completely misleading advertising,

depicting itself as the great saviour of mankind here in

British Columbia, telling what great social assistance, what

great reforms and what great things the government is doing for

the people of British Columbia. But it is misleading

advertising because it didn't tell the whole story.

Had I made up this ad, using the same principle that the

Minister of Consumer Services uses, you would have had cartoons

all over there showing, for instance, the Minister of Human

Resources (Hon. Mr. Levi) robbing the poor and giving to the

lazy. You would have had depictions of other Ministers with

untold numbers of civil servants around them, stumbling over

them, while the taxpayers were paying for it. We would have a

picture in here, for instance, of a person driving up to a gas

pump and asking the person at the pumps to give him 10 gallons

worth of automobile insurance — something, Mr. Chairman, which

is being hidden from the motoring public. They are paying a

subsidy to the Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, but there

is no mention of that in this ad.

Just for your indulgence, I want to point out to the

Minister of Consumer Services just how much the increase in the

cost of government is hurting the individual taxpayer. For

instance, Mr. Chairman....

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Before the Hon. Member

embarks upon a full speech on this particular topic, I would

ask him to try to relate his remarks more directly to the

administrative responsibilities of the Minister of Consumer

Services.

Mr. Phillips: Mr. Chairman, I feel it is the responsibility of the Minister

to protect the consumer. That's what the whole law is about. It is to protect

the consumer and point out where they are going wrong, how they are being so-called

"taken" by, for instance, encyclopedia salesmen, by travel agents, by used car

salesmen. I could go on in the areas that she would point out. What I am really

saying is that I feel she also has a responsibility to point out.... Are the

taxpayers receiving full dollar value from the taxes they pay or is the government

also ripping them off? The government is a business today. Don't forget we have

the Insurance Corp. of British Columbia.

Hon. D.G. Cocke (Minister of Health): B.C. Hydro.

Mr. Phillips: We have B.C. Hydro. We have Panco

Poultry.

Hon. Mr. Cocke: B.C. Rail.

Mr. Phillips: We have them involved in the lumber

industry; they are getting involved in the ranching industry. I

want to tell you, Mr. Chairman, this all relates to the tax

dollars. I'll tell you why. It is the high cost of government

that is the biggest ripoff of the people today. This money is

going directly to buy land and to buy industry which is not

only going to supply the consumer but is competing with those

businesses that are presently supplying the consumer. The whole

thing is relative.

Hon. Mr. Cocke: Rubbish.

Mr. Phillips: Now, Mr. Chairman, you changed the

rules. We didn't. You went into the lumber business and you

went into the insurance business, and it is that Minister of

Consumer Services' affair to point out to the consumers of this

province exactly what is going on.

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. I think the Hon. Member

is stretching the rules somewhat in this respect. I think,

therefore, that I should draw to his attention that even though

there are some overlapping responsibilities, it is the custom

in estimates to direct the questions to the most appropriate

Minister. Since, clearly, some of the matters that the Hon.

Member has raised would be more appropriately addressed to

other Ministers...

Mr. Phillips: Yes, well, I just asked you....

Mr. Chairman: ...I would ask the Hon. Member to

confine his remarks to the direct administrative responsibility

of this Minister.

Mr. D.E. Smith (North Peace River): Point of order,

Mr. Chairman. Would you be specific in what

[ Page 1094 ]

remarks the previous Member, the Member for South Peace

River, made when he was on his feel that you consider to be

inappropriate?

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. The Hon. Member was

expressing remarks in regard to ICBC and other areas of other

Ministerial responsibilities. I don't think the Chair has to

elaborate. I am just cautioning the Hon. Member to keep his

remarks relevant to the administrative responsibility of this

Minister.

Interjection.

Mr. Phillips: I feel, Mr. Chairman, that the

Department of Consumer Services was set up to protect the

consumer. Certainly, every person who owns an automobile, for

instance, in British Columbia today is a consumer of services

from the Insurance Corp. of British Columbia. It won't be too

long before any person who eats processed poultry processed in

the Province of British Columbia today will be a customer of

one of the government enterprises in the poultry business.

Mr. Chairman, I want you to realize that it is government

tax dollars that are going in to buy these ranches and these

poultry operations — the people's tax dollars. That is why the

increase in the cost of government to an individual has gone up

from $578 in 1972 to $1,313 in 1975. That's an increase of $735

per every man, woman and child in the Province of British

Columbia — an increase of 227 per cent in three years.

A lot of those tax dollars are going in to buy land on which

the government intends to operate ranches — this is their

policy, not mine — so that they are becoming involved in the

beef industry. Tax dollars are going in to buy other segments

of the agricultural industry.

I want to tell you, Mr. Chairman, that it is the high cost

of government that is the greatest contributor to inflation

today. It is not the high cost of food. This is all

relative.

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. In keeping with the

point that I made previously, that questions should be directed

to the most appropriate Minister, it would seem to me that this

matter which the Member is discussing should be more

appropriately have been directed to the Minister of Finance

(Hon. Mr. Barrett).

Mr. Phillips: What I'm pointing out, Mr. Chairman....

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Therefore, would the

Hon. Member attempt to relate his remarks to the administrative

responsibilities of this Minister?

Mr. Phillips: Well then, let me put it this way, Mr.

Chairman.

We have now an ombudsman who protects the consumer against a

small gouging businessman or salesman. Maybe I didn't make

myself clear. What I'm saying is that I recommend to her that

one of her responsibilities should be.... I'm making this in

the form of a recommendation — does that clear the rules? I'm

recommending that one of her responsibilities should be to

protect the taxpayer from government enterprises and from

ripoff taxation. To back up what I'm trying to say, and why I

am recommending this to the Minister, we've had cases...and

I'm not going to go back into the misleading advertising that

we've had put out by government agencies, but I do want to

point out and make the recommendation that if she is truly

concerned for the consumer, she should be taking a stand. If

the consumer doesn't have the tax dollars to buy merchandise

then she won't have to protect them. We'll be completely

relying on the government.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out a fact to you. In the

year 1967, the cost of government in British Columbia was $337

per man, woman and child. That increased in 1972 to $578 per

every man, woman and child — an increase in six years of $241

per every man, woman and child, or an increase of only 71 per

cent in six years. Now that is fairly along the lines of the

cost of increase in rents, or the cost of increase in

insurance, of the cost of increase in foodstuffs.

Now look at what has happened in the last three years,

bearing in mind that in 1972 to run the Government of British

Columbia it cost the taxpayer $578. In the last three years

that has jumped to the projection of 1975 that it's going to

cost every man, woman and child to run the government of the

Province of British Columbia $1,313. That is an increase, in

three years, of $735 per every man, woman and child in the

Province of British Columbia, an increase in three years of 227

per cent that nowhere compares, Mr. Chairman....

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. I think the Hon. Member

must surely realize that the Hon. Minister of Consumer Services

can't be administratively responsible for the impact of all

costs on the individual citizen as a consumer, including

taxation by federal, provincial or municipal governments. The

area of administrative responsibility must be restricted to

those matters which she has, strictly speaking, under her

administrative responsibility.

Mr. Phillips: I never, mentioned civic government,

nor did I mention federal government.

An Hon. Member: Taxes in this province are passed by

this Legislative Assembly.

[ Page 1095 ]

Mr. Phillips: I don't want to get into that area, Mr.

Chairman, of this government and this Legislature passing the

budget, and passing the spending estimates, because I've

already said in this House it's sort of a joke and we really

don't know where we're at.

But what I am trying to point out, Mr. Chairman, is that

I've only given you the cost of government per individual. Now

take a family of four. For the average family of four it would

have cost them $2,316 in 1972. Today the cost of government in

British Columbia for a family of four is $5,252, an outrageous

increase of 389 per cent in three years.

Now I think if the Minister of Consumer Services is going to

do her duty as an ombudsman to the consumers — and you must

remember that all consumers are taxpayers — she has to, in all

consciousness, speak out against this tremendous rip-off of the

taxpayer of this province.

You know, when I take a look at the figures and compare them

with inflation — and we are looking at 11, 12, maximum of 15

per cent in an average year....

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. I think the matter might

be cleared up if I read

section 4 of the Act assigning powers

to this particular department.

Section 4....

Mr. Phillips: Would you like me to sit down?

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. It's the Department of

Consumer Services Act. The Hon. Member may be seated while I

read this section, if he wishes.

"The duties, powers and functions of the Minister extend to

and include all matters relating to consumer affairs that are

assigned to this Minister under this or any other Act, or by

the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council, and are not by law or by

the order of the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council assigned to any

other Minister or department, branch or agency of the

government of the province."

Now the distinction is clear that those matters which are

should be more properly dealt with under other departments or

by other Ministers are not the administrative responsibility of

this Minister directly. Therefore the Hon. Member should

confine his remarks to the administrative responsibilities of

this Minister.

Mr. Phillips: Yes, thank you. I certainly don't want

to disobey the rules of the House, as you know, Mr. Chairman.

But is it a new ruling that it is impossible for a Member to

make recommendations during the Minister's estimates?

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. It is not permitted in

the estimates to ask any Minister to make recommendations to

another Minister.

Mr. Phillips: No, no, no, no....

Mr. Chairman: That question should be directed to the

appropriate Minister when the occasion arises.

Mr. Phillips: No, what I am saying is: is it not

possible for a Member to make recommendations to a Minister

during her salary vote? I'm simply making recommendations to

the Minister of Consumer Services. I'm not trying to involve

any other department. I'm merely making recommendations; and to

back up my recommendations, and to urge her to action, I'm

merely stating just a few statistics.

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. I think the Hon. Member

appreciates that the responsibilities that have been assigned

to this Minister are set forth in legislation. If the Hon.

Member wishes to make recommendations or proposals in order to

assign other duties, this should be done by introducing a bill,

or by legislation, and should not be dealt with specifically in

estimates.

Mr. Phillips: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think that maybe

the Minister.... I can tell by the look on the Minister's face

that she is feeling the error of her government's way, that

they must reduce taxation, and that she will go to cabinet at

the next meeting and make recommendations and say: "Look, it

was pointed out to me in the Legislature by the Member for...."

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. The Hon. Member is

persisting in a matter which I have ruled to be out of

order.

Mr. Phillips: Well, I certainly will desist and

decease right here and now, because I certainly don't want to

disobey the rules of the Legislature, regardless of how they

might affect the taxpayers that I was sent here to

represent.

But I would like to ask the Minister of Consumer Services,

Mr. Chairman, about the egg marketing situation in the

province. Now the Minister has been quite adamant in her stand

on marketing of eggs in the province. I'd like to ask her, in

view of statements she made in a press release last October 7,

1974, which, for the benefit of the House I shall quote so that

everybody will know what I am talking about.... I'm quoting

the Minister's words:

"I wish to speak tonight on the egg marketing situation in

the Province of British Columbia. As Minister of Consumer

Services it

[ Page 1096 ]

is my duty to serve the interests of the consumers in this province.

In my view, those interests are not being served by the B.C. Egg Marketing Board.

Rather those interests are being exploited beyond endurance by the board."

Those are fairly strong words, Mr. Chairman.

"From the letters I have received, from the representations

made to me by the Consumers' Association of Canada, B.C.

branch, and from the stench arising from 28 million rotten

eggs, it is obvious that, the B.C. Marketing Board, as it is

presently constituted and operated, has lost its credibility in

the eyes of the general public."

Our ombudsman for the consumers

of this province made the statement in October, 1974. The

Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Stupich) today is in Ottawa.

What is he in Ottawa for? He is in Ottawa to discuss egg

marketing in Canada with the other Ministers of Agriculture and

members of CEMA.

My question to the Minister is this: did she discuss this

situation with the Minister of Agriculture before his departure

for Ottawa? Did the Minister of Consumer Services make her

views known to the Minister before his departure for Ottawa? If

not, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that she leave the House now — we'll give her permission to go — and that she go and wire

the Hon. Minister of Agriculture and let him know. She is the

one whose responsibility it is to protect the consumer — not

only the consumers as they relate to the Insurance Corp. of

British Columbia but the consumers as they relate to the Egg

Marketing Board. Since her feelings are so strong on this

subject, I'm sure that she won't only want to go out and wire

the Minister of Agriculture but she will want to go out and

phone him. She goes on to say further:

"The B.C. Egg Marketing Board may say they are not

responsible for rotten eggs, that the Canadian Egg Marketing

Agency is the villain in the piece. I would remind them that

they have representative on CEMA, and so they share the

responsibility for that fiasco. As they have mismanaged orderly

egg marketing in British Columbia, it is no wonder there is a

mismanagement in CEMA."

I want the Minister to tell me today: did she make her views known to the Minister

of Agriculture? She has had several months since she made this statement and

I see no changes in the egg marketing in British Columbia. I wonder what promises

were made to the Member for Shuswap (Mr. Lewis) before he ran. What promises

were made to him by the Minister of Agriculture whom he's so disappointed in?

I was quite amazed yesterday when the Member said that certain promises were

made to him that there would be changes in the Egg Marketing Board in British

Columbia, and that's the reason he ran. Now he's disappointed. I wonder what

promises were made to him. Did the Minister of Consumer Services make the promises

to him?

Interjection.

Mr. Phillips: Now the Minister is getting angry.

However, this is a very serious matter and the Minister should

not get angry. The Minister has a great, fantastic

responsibility to the consumers, as she well knows. I want to

see her do a good job, Mr. Chairman, because, after all, it's

the taxpayers who are paying out the money for the

administration of this department. As a taxpayer and as a

representative of other taxpayers, I want to see that justice

is done.

She goes on to say:

"Therefore, I intend to recommend to the Government of

British Columbia to commence an investigation of the B.C. Egg

Marketing Board with a view to instructing it to include

consumers and processor representatives as well as producers.

The B.C. Egg Marketing Board is operating in the dark, in

camera, so much that, in my view, it has not served either

consumers or producers."

I would like to know what progress the Minister of Consumer

Services has made with her cabinet colleagues and, indeed, with

the Minister of Agriculture.

Mr. Chairman, we're opening, as you know, a number of

Consumer Services storefronts in British Columbia to give the

consumers ready access to her department.

Interjection.

Mr. Phillips: Yes, They've all been announced. It is

the taxpayers who are paying for the consumer storefronts, but

I don't disagree with them.

I'd like the Minister to answer me honestly. How many of the

complaints she receives in these storefronts are directed as

complaints against the government or government agencies? Is

there any record kept? Is there any liaison between these

Consumer Services storefronts in accepting complaints from the

government? If you do receive a complaint against some

government or some government agency, is that complaint relayed

to the particular, specific department involved or is the

taxpayer told that this storefront is not to deal with problems

of the government? Are the complaints relayed to the particular

MLA or cabinet Minister in that particular area?

I think it's very important that we know what happens when a

complaint is voiced in a consumer storefront office that does

not have to do with a complaint against a particular business

or salesman or something to do with the purchase. Is the

complaint

[ Page 1097 ]

passed on? Do the personnel in the office try and solve the

complaint by phoning the Minister or the department concerned?

I'd like very much to have the Minister's comment.

We have a fair amount of money in this budget for

administration, but I would like the Minister to advise me on

how much money is being spent on advertising by the department.

Maybe she could break this down to advise me on how much money

is being spent on advertising brochures and mailout pieces, of

which she's had several, and how much money is being spent on

advertising to the consumer that he must be aggressive.

I would like to recommend to the Minister of Consumer

Services at this time that maybe instead of advertising and

trying to tell the consumer that he must be aggressive, money

could be better spent by pointing out to the consumer some of

the pitfalls in a particular area and advising him of some fine

points of the law.

Really, I don't know what impact radio advertising would

have on a consumer other than to make him feel that he's got to

go out and try and find some loophole in his dealings in the

business community because he is being taken. So he will go

back over every purchase he has made and try and find some area

so he can go back to the business he has just done business

with. Would it not be much more constructive if, with that same

amount of money we're spending on that advertising, we were to

educate the....

Mr. Chairman: The Hon. Member for Vancouver-Burrard

on a point of order.

Ms. R. Brown (Vancouver-Burrard): The Hon. Member's

green light has been out for some time.

Mr. Chairman: I would draw to the attention of the

Hon. Member that his time is up.

Mr. Phillips: Yes, I didn't realize my light was out.

I thank the Member for bringing that to my attention. I am very

disappointed, as a matter of fact, because I thought that light

bulb might have a new idea. (Laughter.) I hate my light to go

out, but I'll certainly relinquish the floor to somebody

else.

Hon. P.F. Young (Minister of Consumer Services): The Member across the

way managed to get up before I was able to answer some of the questions before

he asked them. However, I found it amusing that he should use as a criticism

of our trade practices brochure the depiction of an encyclopedia salesman. He

wondered as to the reaction of said encyclopedia salesman being used as an example.

Well, interestingly enough, no encyclopedia salesman objected to that depiction.

However, it is further interesting that the first court case we have won against

any company is an encyclopedia company. We have an injunction against some of

their trade practices just recently.

In order to bring the Member up to date, I would like to

give a report on the department. I would like to report that in

rereading the debates of the estimates of our department for

last year, I am very pleased to find that we have accomplished

not only what we said we would do but also all of the

suggestions from the collective wisdom of the Legislative

Assembly.

First of all was the passage and proclamation of the Trade

Practices Act, the backbone of our department, and the passage

and proclamation of the Debtors Assistance Act, an important

adjunct to responsible consumerism.

It is of no benefit to have good consumer protection

legislation on the books unless the consumer knows about it. I

am reminded of my predecessor in this field, the former

Attorney-General (Mr. Peterson), under whose aegis the Consumer

Protection Act was passed. When asked by the press what he

intended to do about it, he replied: "We don't intend to lead

the consumer by the hand," In other words, let them find

out for themselves what their rights are. The Consumer

Protection Act was what their rights are. The Consumer

Protection Act was very narrow in application, and we intend to

remedy that.

To enable the consumer to know his or her rights under the

new legislation a booklet was prepared and disseminated to

every household in British Columbia. The brochure was entitled

"The Trade Practices Act and You" and was written in everyday

language for the average person. I'm glad the Hon. Member has a

copy and he's showing it to everybody in the House. I'm very

happy about that. I hope you take it to your constituency

meetings and show them too, because I take tons of them to

every meeting I go to.

A radio advertising campaign preceded the distribution of

the booklet to let people know that it was important to them

and that they should not throw it out with any other mail.

Approximately 810,000 booklets were distributed in this manner.

A follow-up radio campaign suggested that people retain the

booklet for reference, and if for some reason they had not

received theirs, to write to Victoria for a copy.

As we outlined in our programme last year, we opened four

storefront offices in various parts of the province to deal

with inquiries, information and complaints. In October, the

Kamloops office was officially opened for cover the interior of

the province. In November we opened the Victoria office and, in

December, the Vancouver office. In January of this year, the

Prince George office was officially opened. However, in all

cases, the offices were unofficially available for a month to

five months

[ Page 1098 ]

before their official opening to handle the cases that

poured in. Word-of-mouth advertising got around and the minute

our new staff walked into their offices, the phones began to

ring and people dropped in.

To give you a perspective of the impact of our department,

in the first month of 1975 we had 859 cases, compared to a

total of 801 for the entire year of 1972. We had more cases in

one month, January of this year, than in the entire year of

1972 under the previous administration.

In 1972 the consumer affairs officer under the former

administration handled 801 complaints. This year our department

has dealt with 3,839 complaints, an increase of 379 per

cent.

We have obtained in rebates, refunds and settlements for

consumers a total of $66,997. Our annual report showed only a

total of $54,000, but additional settlements made last year

were not brought to our attention until after the report was

tabled in the House.

Since the first of the year, the department has obtained

rebates, refunds and settlements for consumers — and this is

just for January, February and March — of $69,630.

Since July 6, 1974, we have obtained a total in rebates,

settlements and refunds on behalf of consumers of $136,628.

That's a pretty good record, I'd say.

In fact, I was in the Vancouver office chatting with the

consumer service officer there when the trade practices

investigator just popped in and said: "A lady just called to

thank us for getting a $4,000 refund from an automobile dealer

on behalf of her daughter."

Thanks to the government's student employment programme,

Careers '74, of last year, we were able to obtain some

invaluable research material. We sent teams of students to

review all of the existing legislation that has been assigned

to our department. Other teams were assigned to examine other

areas of consumer interest such as mediation and arbitration in

consumer complaints, consumer needs in the various communities

of the province and a thorough, in-depth internal investigation

into the mobile-home field.

In our study, done by a very competent and enthusiastic

group of students of the consumer needs in communities, three

important factors emerged. One was a desire and an interest by

the local educational community, school boards and teachers,

for consumer teaching in the schools. Another was the

willingness of the local media to carry consumer news. The

third was the disturbing fact of the high debt ratio being

carried by the local credit-granting agencies and the

consumer.

We now know that Canadians as a whole have one of the highest, if not the highest,

personal debt ratio of any people on earth. Every Canadian man, woman and child

has a debt ratio of $1,200 each. We also know that many of these debts have

been contracted for a variety of reasons.

Our consumer-oriented society has pushed: "Fly now, pay

later. Play now, pay later. Fulfill your desire on easy credit

terms. The world is yours for only $59.95 a month." Goods and

services have been pushed at us in every form of medium. A lot

of people, perhaps feeling insecure, believed these media

presentations that they were not fulfilling their roles in

society unless they had these consumer goods and went out on a

financial limb to acquire them. Now they are being caught up in

a world-wide recession. Instead of two incomes coming in, they

now have to depend on one. The cheque won't stretch that far

and many are on the verge of going under.

Our debtors' assistance division is coping with this

problem, to the benefit of the total society. By providing an

alternative to personal bankruptcy, a non-cost of debt

consolidation, and many other avenues, we are preventing

husbands and fathers from deserting, their families — often

unwillingly, but under necessity — and throwing these families

onto the province's social assistance programmes. By relieving

the family tensions that build up over money worries, we are

able to keep families together and to keep people working. The

credit industry has been most cooperative in this endeavour

because they recognize that one dollar on a past-due account is

better than the 7 cents on a dollar they might get on a

bankruptcy.

Obviously it is not sufficient to get people out of the glue

of their debts. Our responsibility does not end there, not only

to them, but to the total community who have to shoulder their

collective debt in the future. It is up to us to help people

stay out of debt, to learn to organize their expenditures

within the framework of their income — in other words,

budgeting. Thus our debt counseling service does not deal

exclusively with helping people with their debt problems, but

follows up and helps them organize their lives in a manner that

they do not get themselves into the glue again.

Although the debtors' assistance division was not officially

opened until December 1974, the word got around that we had a

facility going in August of last year. By the end of the year,

we had 1,320 complaints; we have had over 2,000 calls to date;

we have approximately 500 people on the

orderly-payment-of-debts programme. Each of our storefront

offices, with the exception of Vancouver, is staffed by a debt

counselor who can assist the over-committed consumer. In

Vancouver our debt counseling service is in a separate office.

It is the headquarters of our debt counseling service for the

province.

In addition to our obvious commitment to the consumer, our

department made other social

[ Page 1099 ]

commitments. One was to the affirmative action bill

submitted by the Hon. Second Member for Vancouver-Burrard (Ms.

Brown).

Forty-five per cent of the executive decision-making

positions in our department are filled by women. It was a

deliberate move on our part. Not only did very competent women

apply for positions in the department, but we sought out women

who may not have sought to apply due to the traditional

attitudes of the previous government under the civil

service.

Also, we determined early that we wanted to utilize the

talents of intelligent homemakers who could only give a few

hours a week to our department, and to the retired persons who

were aged 65 chronologically, but not physically or mentally, A

part-time programme was built into the department and we have

quite a few part-time consumer aides. They have a choice. They

may work four hours a day five days a week, or they may work

two and a half full days a week. It depends on what they

themselves find most helpful for them. In our Vancouver office,

we are finding that these experts are choosing to work the two

and a half days a week full-time because they feel they can

accomplish more as a conduit for consumer complaints, inquiries

and information. Our part-time people, who are called our

consumer aides, are very good with handling phone calls,

directing complaints and providing information.

Our third social commitment, but by no means the least, is

to the handicapped. We were only able to direct the

construction of one office in our four-office complex, but it

was a beginning. The building in Victoria is totally accessible

to the handicapped in wheelchairs. One washroom has been

designed for their accommodation with appropriate grab bars and

an offset commode. There are wide doors and no barriers to

entrance.

By now, everybody knows about the famous bed squad. These

are a group of long-term patients at a lower mainland hospital.

They comprise our ad project group. Originally, it was an

experimental programme to last six months, using severely

handicapped people for the project. Interestingly enough, they

were quite skeptical of us. They figured it was the usual

do-gooder type project and they were fed up to the teeth with

that kind of treatment, but they figured they would give it a

try. The results have been that they have become an integral

part of the department. We can't do without them. Their

expertise is surfacing and will continue to surface in the very

near future on several major cases that will be coming

forward.

In the matter of community programmes we are funding several community groups

throughout the province. These are small consumer association groups and small

consumer groups — perhaps one person with secretarial help — acting as a liaison,

giving information, helping to receive complaints and

resolving complaints in some of the more isolated

communities.

We're conducting seminars with the business community

throughout the province. We have been doing it for a long

period of time. We have a series of four seminars coming up

very, very shortly in conjunction with the University of

British Columbia executive programme. It will be over the next

two weeks, and they're all-day seminars. So we're doing very

well there.

In the matter of education, we will very shortly.... Over

200 teachers have asked for, and are getting, a consumer

education kit, and every school district will receive it this

coming week. This kit has been assembled with the aid of the

Greater Victoria School Board, in a summer project last year,

and the Department of Education. And our department has put

together this very excellent kit that will be sent to the

schools so that the teachers may use it.

I was privileged to meet with quite a few teachers in my own

riding and this was the one thing they really were asking for:

education information for their students. I found the students

very receptive to the whole programme, to the idea of

consumerism, and I was very impressed with the depth of

understanding that young people have today.

Relative to complaints about other departments of

government, we handle those the same as we handled any

complaint we receive about a private company. They are treated

just the same. If they're in the wrong, they get their knuckles

rapped.

Mr. D.E. Lewis (Shuswap): Fair government.

Hon. Ms. Young: Oh yes, on occasion this has happened

but, on the whole, I must say that wherever we have received a

complaint that has dealt with another department they have

immediately rectified it and advised us — or at least given us

the information so that we could pass it on.

Mr. G.F. Gibson (North Vancouver–Capilano): Can you

give us an example?

Hon. Ms. Young: I think there was one.... In this

particular instance I'm thinking of one department had, we

felt, perhaps not given the proper information, and they

informed us that in the future they would do so — that. It was

a mistake, an honest mistake.

Speaking of honest mistakes, we'll talk about the assurance

of voluntary compliance. Now it's interesting that in the

Victoria newspaper here they rather criticize us because we're

not tough enough on business. We use a carrot instead of a

stick. The federal people are using a stick. They're going

around

[ Page 1100 ]

throwing people in jail and fining them and everything, and

we use what we call the assurance of voluntary compliance.

An Hon. Member: Who's in jail?

Hon. Ms. Young: Who's in jail? A gentleman by the

name of O'Brien; James Stephen O'Brien of Dartmouth, Nova

Scotia. He was convicted of misleading advertising and I think

he was.... He was sent to.... I forget where it says how long

he was put in the jug for but....

Interjections.

Hon. Ms. Young: So if the Member for South Peace

River (Mr. Phillips) is worrying, actually I would suggest that

he confer with some of the top business leaders in the province

and he will find that they are very pleased with the manner in

which we have approached them. We've drawn them into

discussions where we plan to take action — with the assurance

of voluntary compliance if they have been in error.

In the case of Imperial and Texaco oil companies, they were

in error. However, it was quite apparent that it was an honest

mistake. They agreed to rectify the mistake by advising all of

their customers that they had made a mistake, and that is the

end of the matter as far as we're concerned.

This is a much better way, we feel, of dealing with matters:

to give alternatives. We attempt to mediate a dispute. If we're

unable to do that and we feel that it's serious enough, we'll

ask for an assurance of voluntary compliance. If there is a

refusal there, then we have recourse to the courts and so does

the consumer.

We're receiving about 10,000 calls per month in our five

offices. We have about 100 people per day dropping in at the

offices around the province.

The Member wanted to know about the Egg Marketing Board and

my comments last year. I feel that they were very constructive

and have been proven to be very constructive. I guess the Hon.

Member missed the last session, because there was a board set

up to resolve questions relating to the marketing board.

Mr. Phillips: The Member says it's not right yet.

Hon. Ms. Young: Well, there is a recourse to that board, and it is composed

of consumers, interestingly enough. I'm pleased to see that the Egg Marketing

Board in this province, when they had a surplus, instead of throwing the eggs

away or selling them across the border, dropped the price and got rid of the

surplus. A lot of people ate eggs who weren't eating them before. I think that's

a very sensible and commendable thing for the Egg Marketing Board to do, and

I give them full marks for doing it. I think it's fine. That was the point I

was trying to make, that they had to be responsive.

That is pretty much a

summary, Mr. Chairman, of the

activities of the department. We will be going into educational

programmes and informational programmes in the future. I think

that the well-informed consumer is the best consumer. An

educated consumer won't need the services of our department,

and that's our goal: to get the information to people — but

also that they have the legislative back-up in the event they

need it.

I'm pleased to say that we have received excellent response

from the business community. I'm thinking at the present time

of the problems we had in the travel industry. The travel

industry itself has come forward with a broadly based committee

and are submitting some excellent suggestions in helping us to

design the legislation. They have asked for legislation, they

are helping us to design it. We certainly welcome their

assistance and their input because they're appearing to be a

little bit tougher on themselves than we had planned to be. But

I give them full marks for it. This is the attitude we're

receiving from just about every segment of the business

community.

Mr. D.A. Anderson (Victoria): Mr. Chairman, I was

interested in the Minister's statement, but I was somewhat

amazed. Just to take one example of what she said, I wondered

whether or not she really genuinely felt we were going to

believe that the consumer problems with respect to marketing

boards had been solved by the creation of that superboard that

she seemed to think handled the whole thing.

For example, I have in my hand a Consumers' Association of

Canada newsletter for B.C. region....

Interjections.

Mr. D.A. Anderson: I have this newsletter in my hand.

It talks about "Inquiry: B.C. Marketing Boards." Just because

the Minister only mentioned that a few minutes ago, I'd like to

read what they say, the independent consumers — independent of

this government, that is. The headline is "Inquiry: B.C.

Marketing Boards," and it's January, 1975.

"A brief requesting an inquiry into B.C. marketing boards

was presented to a committee of the B.C. cabinet. CACBC,

Consumers' Association of Canada, British Columbia branch,

feels a speedy investigation to reassess marketing practices

should be made as a starting point for the work of the new B.C.

Marketing Board (superboard). We recommend that the proposed

new superboard be separate from the Department of Agriculture,

that the

[ Page

1101 ]

government clearly define the purpose and terms of reference

of the board, and that hearings be public. The Consumers' Association of Canada

(B.C.) was disappointed that recent appointments to the superboard did not include

consumer representatives."

That, I think, sums up pretty clearly the joy with which the

consumers have really greeted this great superboard and how

they feel that this superboard, which the Minister puts so much

emphasis on, really doesn't take into account consumer

problems.

Mr. J.R. Chabot (Columbia River): What about the

advisory board?

Mr. D.A. Anderson: Well, the Food Advisory Board, my

friend mentioned. I'd just like to say a word about the Food

Advisory Board. We had two members of the Consumers'

Association of Canada, B.C. branch, on the food council — Ada

Brown and Ruth Lotzkar. Now these two ladies — as we all know,

because they came to Victoria frequently and they did their

level best to give us all the information at their disposal —

were very, very frustrated by working on what they termed a

producer organization, and only a producer organization. They

complained about a number of things, the close connection with

the Department of Agriculture in particular.

Mr. Chabot: Quit in disgust!

Mr. D.A. Anderson: You just let me get in my own

lines. (Laughter.)

They pointed out that the council was chaired by the Deputy

Agriculture Minister, Maurice King. Most of its members are

producers and distributor representatives, and there were only

two consumer representatives. The council members, apart from

those two, were not making recommendations against the

businesses they represent. Therefore, in the view of the

Consumers' Association of Canada, B.C. Branch — and I quote

their newsletter: "In our opinion, the council fails to fulfill

its intended purpose."

For example, I mentioned this business of inquiry into

marketing boards. Last September, Ms. Brown and Miss Lotzkar

asked for an inquiry into all B.C. marketing boards, but the

move was blocked by the producer representatives on the

council. The two consumer association representatives have

simply, to use their own words: "...found it impossible to

persuade the council to consider any criticism of any segment

of the industry or launch any in-depth investigation into

critical parts."

Now this is the type of thing which we discover coming from private individuals

who are banded together in this private association. Yet we hear the Minister

get up and say all is rosy, everything has been solved by the superboard. Oh,

yes, there might have been troubles before, but not any more.

Well, I question her candour. I think that she should be a

little more candid with the House and point out that there are

a lot of problems and that her original criticisms, before she

got so wound up in being a member of the NDP executive council

of this province, may be a little more on point than some of

her weak defences that she's giving as a Minister.

The fact is, whether she's the Minister or not, she should

at least recognize her responsibility to consumers and not just

say all is well, simply because she happens to be in the

government in that particular department.

Well, that's one point; I'd like to mention a couple of

others. I'd like to ask the Minister what is happening with

respect to children's toys. Children's toys can often be very

dangerous things. They are quite frequently purchased by people

who know little about the child involved, namely friends or

family or things of that nature. Bachelor uncles are noted for

buying toys for their nieces and nephews. These people may not

know what particular toys are dangerous and what are not. I

wonder whether there have been any developments in this area.

There's no question that we have a serious problem every

January and late December when these toys get out there and

kids start trying to play with them or use them.

Second question is that of child-resistant containers.

Between 1966 and 1972 — the figures are somewhat out of date

but the trend is there — British Columbia's accidental

poisoning rate jumped to just under 500 per cent. We went up

from 1,192 to 7,019 accidental poisonings, and 61 per cent of

these poisonings involved children under the age of five years.

I apologize to the Minister for not having up-to-date figures,

and I will tell the Minister something she's undoubtedly being

told right at this very moment by her Deputy Minister who's

leaning over to fill her ear full of all sorts of bright ideas

(laughter) and that is this: As of January 1 the Pharmacy Act

requires that B.C. pharmacists use child-resistant containers.

But I'd just like to point out that in that period when our

poisoning rate went up five times the Essex County, Ontario,

rate dropped by 91 per cent. A fantastic drop — from 100 per

cent down to 9 per cent. In that period, in that particular

area of Essex County, the Palm-'n'-Turn safety container was

being used.

Now certain other Ministers may regard this as frivolous but

I think it's tremendously important to find out from the

Minister the success of those amendments to the Pharmacy Act or

the regulations under the Pharmacy Act requiring the

child-resistant Palm-'n'-Turn containers. Has there been any

dramatic change? Are these containers being fully used

throughout the province? What is being done to make

[ Page 1102 ]

sure there is a phase-out of all those containers that

normally sit in medical cabinets or in bathroom cabinets,

sometimes for many, many months and sometimes, indeed, for

years, but which may have the old type, dangerous container? I

wonder whether she would answer something on that second point

as well.

I'd like to congratulate the Minister on the consumer

education programme. She has mentioned the fact that it will be

going to the schools, and I think that's excellent. I wonder

whether she'll give us some information on the basic consumer

reference kit which I think should be made available not only

in the schools but also in other adults as well. She probably

will know what I'm talking of and can inform us of that

particular thing.

I've given a few questions for the Minister. I might just

say a word or two also about warranties and guarantees. Really

and truly, no matter how many laws we write in this province or

nationally, the real guts of good warranty and good servicing

that follow come from the companies involved.

I wonder if she would like to give us some insight from the

experiences of her department as to how successful they are

being in making sure that warranties are lived up to, or making

sure there can be wording which is legally enforceable. In so

many cases of warranties and guarantees there really is nothing

that can be done except by the company concerned, there is no real way to legally enforce a warranty or guarantee in many

instances. I would like to know whether she is having success

in discussions in that carrot-type approach that she talked of,

in making sure that the companies in British Columbia and the

manufacturers, here as well as elsewhere, are indeed doing

their best to make sure people get a decent product.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, the Minister said something about

10,000 requests for information and/or complaints a month

coming in. Well, I've got some figures from her department

which were very kindly provided to me, and I have here

indications that complaints filed in 1974 totaled 3,839, of

which the vast bulk were in Victoria. In 1975 we've had, so

far, 2,042 complaints filed, of which 595 are in Victoria, 785

in Vancouver, and some from Kamloops and some from Prince

George.

However, the more interesting statistics, Mr. Chairman,

which I can see you are fascinated in, are the phone calls that

came in, of which there were 32,743, and there were 3,117

visits in the period we are talking of — November through to

March 27, 1975, just a short time ago.

I find it interesting that a relatively small percentage of phone calls and

visits lead to the opening of a complaint file. It is fine to talk about the

vast numbers of people storming in, but are about nine out of 10 of the cases

which are brought to your attention frivolous? From the statistics, it appears

that only about one of 10.... I'm using rough figures, and

perhaps it is about one out of eight or one out of nine, but

only about that many are worthy of opening a file. It strikes

me that the Consumer Services department is receiving a lot of

contacts with the public but either they are passing the buck

on to some other department, some other level of government,

some other agency, or else the public are coming forward with a

whole pile of complaints, the vast bulk of which are falsely

based. I wonder whether she could say something about that.

You know, Mr. Chairman, when you start dividing the number

of complaint files opened into the amount of money involved

with this department, you get a staggering amount of money

being spent by the public for every complaint file being

opened. Some hundreds of dollars are spent by this department

for every single complaint which they feel it is worth opening

a file on. I think a little more information as to whether in

the Department of Consumer Services we are getting value for

money would be in order from the Minister, because it appears

to me that in this very Department of Consumer Services, where

we are allegedly in the area where we are trying to get good

value for money for the individual member of the public, the

public as a whole is not getting particularly good value for

money in terms of the number of complaints dealt with in files

opened. Perhaps the Minister would like to indicate something

about that.

If we are on the subject of consumer services, if we are on

the subject of the public getting their money's worth, are we

really getting our money's worth from the Department of

Consumer Services? The quick figures I gave you, the hundreds

of dollars per complaint file, would indicate there is some

reason to question this area, and I wonder whether the Minister

would like to comment on it.

Hon. Ms. Young: Mr. Chairman, in reply to the Hon.

Member, I would like to point out that not every phone call is

a complaint. In fact, most of them aren't; they are just

seeking information. They may ask whether they have a

complaint: "Is this illegal?" It may be something that happened

five years ago and does not come under our purview because the

legislation didn't come into effect until July 6, 1974.

Unfortunately we've had some tragic situations where we were

helpless; we couldn't do anything about it because the Act was

not in force at the time.

Mostly people are just asking for information. They would

like to know where they can find out what kind of a product to

buy and we can refer them to the library which we have in each

centre, or we refer them to the public library or various

publications. They may be asking about insurance, they may be

asking about registered retirement savings plans, they may be

asking about everything

[ Page 1103 ]

under the sun, and they usually do. Most people are just

seeking information, just asking what this comes under.

A great many of the complaints we get deal with things that

come under the federal legislation, and we refer them to the

federal authorities because that is properly where it belongs.

I suggest to you that that is where toys belong — hazardous

products.

These are products that cross provincial boundaries and

therefore, quite obviously, the jurisdiction and the care

should be taken at the federal level because they cross

provincial boundaries. Many of them are imported and that's

more properly where the authority there should rest.

As far as child-resistant containers, the Department of

Health is responsible for that and we immediately refer these

cases to the Department of Health. I would like to comment

though on the Ansodent and Orbadent incident, if you'll excuse

the alliteration there, and that was that when the fire hazard

of these particular products came to my attention, I

immediately — and I mean immediately, within a matter of

minutes — wired the federal Minister and told him in some

detail what we had found, with this material igniting with just

a little bit of moisture, and that people had been burned and

that there was reason to believe that fires had been started by

the use of this powder. Subsequent to that, he turned it over

to the hazardous products branch and they in turn did a

thorough analysis of it.

In the interim, we discovered that a child in the Prince

George region had been severely burned about the scalp by

rubbing this mixture on his head and had been badly scarred on

the head. I discussed the matter with Ottawa and they have

required these two companies to reduce the acid chemical in the

product from 20 per cent down to 19 per cent. Apparently at 19

per cent there is no ignition factor; at 20 per cent there is.

Also, they will be capped with child-resistant caps henceforth.

So that takes care of that. As I said before, the Department of

Health administers the Pharmacy Act and we have received very

good cooperation if anything comes to our attention.

On the marketing board, I'd like to point out that one

member is the head of the Vancouver Community Legal Assistance

Society and he is extremely active in community consumer

affairs. The chairman of the UBC School of Agriculture is on

it. It's quite obvious that these people have just been

appointed, it's going to take some time for them to work out

their terms of reference, work out what they intend to study,

and I believe the legislation requires and calls for public

inquiries if need be.

As far as information, we are putting out our new bulletin

now, "Consumer Aware," and information regarding

anything that comes to our attention, or reference books —

things of that nature — will be published in this publication

for the general public.

Warranties and guarantees. One thing we did shortly after

the legislation, the Trade Practices Act, became effective, was

write to just about all business concerns that had contracts

and pointed out to them that there was certain contract

language that was now illegal. These would also be in the

matter of warranties. When there was an implied warranty

naturally on the goods and then when they exempted themselves

from that implied warranty, we reminded them that they could

not do this and to kindly change the wording of their contracts

and their warranties.

Inasmuch as warranties and guarantees go back to the

manufacturer, we appreciate that right now the onus is on the

retailer, through the Sale of Goods Act, and in many cases it's

not rightfully there, in my view, because he didn't make the

product. He didn't make the automobile, he didn't make the

tire, he didn't make the refrigerator, et cetera. We appreciate

that there's a certain obligation of the manufacturer and we

are working quite hard on this problem.

You may be aware of the Green Paper that's been circulated

in the Province of Ontario — it has been for over a year now. I

don't know what's the matter with them, getting them off the

dime. And we are looking at legislation that has been passed in

other jurisdictions on this matter. These are all areas that we

are definitely working on. It's a little tricky when, say, the

manufacturer is in Ontario and you're here, to put the onus

back onto the manufacturer. How do you file an action against

the manufacturer in Ontario? These are real niceties that have

to be resolved. I appreciate all those lawyers over there; they

understand that, but it does present problems.

Hon. W.L. Hartley (Minister of Public Works): You

don't have to worry about that; they're corporate lawyers.

Hon. Ms. Young: Oh, they're not consumer lawyers, so

we don't....

As far as consumer information, we hope to have the

education kits ready by next week. We will be more than happy

to present each MLA with a copy of the kit.

Mr. D.A. Anderson: Give her hell. Tell it like it

is.

Ms. Brown: I would really like to congratulate the

Minister of Consumer Services.

Some Hon. Members: Ho, ho, ho!

Ms. Brown: ...for the very excellent job that she is

doing in this department. Probably I should start out by

congratulating the government for having this department. You

know, Mr. Chairman, the

[ Page 1104 ]

opposition stand up and they make speeches about protecting

the consumer against government and asking questions about the

marketing boards and one thing and another. What kind of

consumer protection did the consumers in this province have

before this government became the government of this

province?

Mr. A.V. Fraser (Cariboo): How do you know? You

weren't born here.

Ms. Brown: I've been living in this province for 21

years and there was no protection for the consumer in this

province until this government became the government and

implemented this very excellent department.

The leader of the Liberal Party (Mr. D.A. Anderson) brought

up issues which are covered by federal legislation. What kind

of protection does the consumer have under federal legislation?

The kind of farce that they have with their little consumer

services board which isn't doing anything!

Mr. Gibson: What about the food prices board?

Ms. Brown: But that is an aside, because I do not

want to embarrass the opposition any more by pointing out to

them that they should have been congratulating the government

and congratulating the Members instead of standing up and

exposing their weaknesses.

This Minister mentioned an area of particular interest to

me: the whole business of employment in her department. Again,

I want to congratulate her on making a real effort to see to it

that there is some kind of equity in terms of the number of

females as well as males employed in her department. I keep

tabs on all the departments and she has the best record in

terms of trying to implement an affirmative action plan in

terms of her employment. She should be congratulated on

this.

I also want to thank her for opening a consumer services

office in my constituency which is used by a large number of

people. It is in a very central location at the corner of

Broadway and Kingsway and it is very well utilized. I would ask

her whether she would consider, since it covers such a large

area, a zenith number for people living outside of the city who

have to use this office too and now have to make long-distance

calls in order to do it.

I was very intrigued by the class action taken against the

business of door-to-door sales practices with Colliers

Encyclopedia. I would like to see the Minister expand and do

more on these class actions. How about, for example, class

action on behalf of all of us against some of the large oil

companies in this province and against some of the misleading

kinds of advertising that are going on on the CBC? I know that

the federal Member from B.C., Stu Leggatt, the New Democrat, will be very happy to let her have his file

dealing with this particular issue so that we can take a class

action on behalf of all of us. I know that her department is

responsible for dishonest or misleading advertising.

How about the kinds of misleading advertising that we have

with breakfast cereals and the whole areas of food? It is not

only a matter of counseling, Madam Minister, and the whole area

of nutrition. How about really cracking down on misleading

advertising?

I know that most of this should be done by the federal

government, but I know that it is not going to be done by the

federal government because, quite frankly, they've never been

interested in the consumers in this province. Maybe we will

have to do it, Madam Minister. Maybe your Consumer Services

department will have to get into the whole area of misleading

and dishonest advertising and bring more class actions on

behalf of all of us.

The other thing that I would like to mention is that I was

really pleased in the budget speech to see that there is going

to be improved liaison between the community groups and your

department. I think this is a very necessary area. Throughout

the entire period of the past government we had to rely almost

exclusively on community groups like the Better Business

Bureau, for example, operating without any kind of even token

support from that government. I am glad to see that you are

committed to see that community groups like the Consumer Action

League and groups like that have a better liaison with your

department and continue to work with you on behalf of all of

us.

In your advertising for officers I notice in the

qualifications required for investigators you said that they

should have experience in commerce, law or police experience. I

would really like you to elaborate on this and explain why it

is necessary for people filling this particular job, which is

mediating consumer disputes, to have police training? Why is it

necessary for them to have a commerce or law degree?

This penalizes so many people — women as well as men — who

would certainly be interested in this job. Certainly your

hiring practices outside of Victoria would seem to indicate

this. In Kamloops you've hired an ex-RCMP and an ex-policeman,

and in Vancouver an ex-RCMP. Maybe you could elaborate for us

why you have to have so many ex-RCMP or why you need to have

ex-RCMP training and ex-police training to be a consumer

officer.

The other area I would like you to talk about, Madam

Minister, is the whole area of the building standards of mobile

homes. When the special committee looking into taxation and

assessment travelled around the province, this was a complaint

from people living in mobile homes, which we certainly heard

everywhere we went: there didn't

[ Page 1105 ]

seem to be any very good building standards and the homes

were just not standing up to wear and tear. Certainly, in terms

of living in the northern part of the province, the heating

wasn't good enough and the homes weren't warm and there were

all kinds of complaints about the quality of the homes being

built in this province as well as homes coming into the

province. I would like to know what, if anything, your

department is doing about this.

That is all I have to say, because the fact of the matter is

that you are doing such an excellent job that it's very

difficult to find too many things to complain about. One just

spends their time congratulating you. I would like to add that

I really would like to see the work of your department expanded

to deal with class action in terms of the whole business of the

income tax rebate, for example. How about launching a class

action on behalf of all of us on that and, again, dealing with

the dishonest advertising, looking at the whole area of

built-in obsolescence in the manufacturing of goods, not only

in the province but also goods that come into the province,

rather than dealing with individual complaints, and working

much more extensively on a class level on behalf of all of us?

Thanks very much.

Mr. Phillips: Mr. Chairman, that's a difficult act to

follow, but I, too, would like to thank the Minister for her

very comprehensive report when she was on her feet a little

while ago. But I would just like to point out to the Minister.... I don't know where you got the idea I was worried about

your department, because I am certainly not worried. I

congratulated you on your department and said that no honest

businessman is going to be concerned about your department.

As a matter of fact, I might point out to the Minister that

consumerism really did start before August, 1973, and I am

proud to say that I had a great deal to do with consumerism and

the start of consumerism and making the consumer aware in the

business that I happen to be involved in. I was very proud to

be on a particular dealer council at the time where several

consumer programmes were started while I was on the dealer

council, and I am certainly very proud of the

part I have

played in making consumers in a particular business more

aware.

That brings up the point that I'd like very much to bring up

and discuss and have the Minister's views on, People today have

been taught, not only by governments but also by manufacturers,

to expect and demand more. They've been taught by certain

manufacturers that they should demand perfection, because the

people who have perfection, or close to perfection, in their

products are saying that you shouldn't settle for less.

Consumerism really started with Mr. Nader way back in the States, and it has

spread into Canada. I think the age of particular consumer complaints will reach

a crescent probably within a couple of years, because manufacturers, business

people and salesmen who are in the business to take the consumer will realize

that this is no longer their bag. I think you will see a definite decline in

the amount of consumer complaints that you will have after the next two years.

Once consumers become aware; once, as the Minister has said, she is sending

brochures into the schools; once the consumers in the province become educated

and the business people realize that they can't get away with shoddy practices,

I think those people will move on to greener pastures somewhere or go out of

business. I think you will see a decline, and at that time I think the Minister

must be prepared to.... If there are no complaints, what is she going to do

with her good offices?

But I was very disappointed that the Minister didn't report

to us on her trip to down under. We've had the experience in

the past in this Legislature of Ministers of the cabinet taking

these extensive trips. I think that these trips are being paid

for by the taxpayer and I think that the Legislature certainly

has a right to know what benefits will accrue to the consumers

of this province because of the Minister's trip. I think it's a

perfectly legitimate question.

We have the case of the Minister of Economic Development

(Hon. Mr. Lauk), for instance, taking a trip off to Japan.

Today we have not seen one single concrete piece of evidence

that the taxpayers of this province derived any benefit.

We had the Premier off to China and several other junkets.

We can't run a department of tourism here for the cabinet

Ministers. There must be some solid benefits, and I would like

the Minister to advise the Legislature just what benefits will

accrue to the taxpayers of this province from her trip down

under.

Mr. Lewis: More than Bennett's.

Mr. Phillips: Now I have to go back once again to

refer to this brochure. It still makes me mad. She stated that

one of the first court cases she's had involved an encyclopedia

salesman.

I want to tell you, Mr. Chairman, that I know several dear

ladies who are encyclopedia salesmen.

An Hon. Member: Oh.

Mr. Phillips: Some of them are widowed. Some of them

are mothers who are trying to increase the take-home pay and

provide something better for their children. And there are more

of these honest ladies, worthy, selling encyclopedias than

there are any as depicted by this cartoon as having big teeth

and going around trying to take somebody in on the sale of

books. I think it's despicable, absolutely despicable, that

these conscientious ladies, trying to provide a

[ Page 1106 ]

supplement to the salary, some of them even trying to put

their children through college, working after hours...

Mr. Lewis: Yes, I've heard that one — working your

way through college.

Mr. Phillips: ...that they should be depicted in

literature such as this in such a derogatory fashion. I don't

think it's becoming of the government at all; I don't think

it's becoming of that Minister. I'm warning her that in the

future she should be very careful about how she depicts people

and personalities in business or she might have a lawsuit on

her hands.

The Minister mentioned that the average debt per individual

in the Province of British Columbia — and I think I heard the

figure right — is something like $1,212. Well, that's average

for man, woman and child. This year, the average tax bill per

man, woman and child in British Columbia is $1,313.

Interjection.

Mr. Phillips: Well, according to the budget of

$3,223,420,000, the expenditure this year, and on a basis of an

increase in population based on an average of 3 per cent per

year, it works out to 24 million people. The debt works out to

an average of $1,313 per person. When you consider the debt and

when you consider what the tax load is in British Columbia per

person.... I'm not saying that the debt is great, but what I'm

pointing out to you is that the cost of running this government

in the Province of British Columbia is severe indeed.

I wonder, since the Minister has some good economic advisers

who are going to be around telling people how to budget their

affairs, if she would loan some of these advisers in her

offices to the government. Maybe the Minister of Finance could

use some of these people because he hasn't learned how to

balance his budget yet. Last year in one department alone he

had over $ 100 million overrun, so how can the government

advise people to budget when they can't budget themselves? Is

that a reasonable question?

That's one of the problems with debt in our society today.

When people see the government spending these vast amounts of

money and having no regard whatsoever for the taxpayers'

dollar, then a lot of them take the attitude, well, why worry?

We might as well go live it up while we can because the

government...

Mr. Lewis: That's garbage.

Mr. Phillips: ...is going to have to take us over to look after us

anyway in the long run. I think that's the attitude that socialist governments

create among the population of a province. This concerns me greatly.

Mr. Lewis: You should have been a holy-roller

preacher.

Mr. Phillips: There's the Member for Shuswap (Mr.

Lewis), you know.

An Hon. Member: The egg man.

Mr. Phillips: The egg man, yes. One thing about him,

he'll never have a brainstorm. The closest he'll come is a

small drizzle. (Laughter.)

Ms. Brown: Mr. Nader was better.

Mr. Phillips: Governments today are sort of leading

the people down the garden path by spending these and wasting

money. People say: "Well, the government wastes money. They

have no regard for our taxes." So they go out and they incur

these, debts and they try and live like the government with no

regard for money or planning. I'll tell you, if we're going to

restore some fibre to our society, it's time that the

government started leading the way and setting an example.

That's what's happening with our society today, exactly what's

happening with our society today. Governments who have no

regard for money, no regard for tax dollars, go on a big

spending spree....

Mr. Chairman: Order, please. The Hon. Member is

wandering away from the administrative responsibilities of the

Minister again. I would ask the Hon. Member to return to the

Minister's responsibilities.

Mr. Phillips: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I'm still concerned about the complaints that are going in

to these consumer storefront offices. The Minister said yes,

she refers these complaints to the proper departments. But I

certainly wouldn't want to see these consumer storefront

offices eventually deteriorate into a propaganda office for the

government where, if a person has a complaint, they take it to

the consumer storefront office. That's what we have MLAs for;

that's what we have government representation for.

I think we're getting into a very dangerous situation. I

think that when complaints, legitimate complaints, against the

government — unless they're against one of the government Crown

corporations, which, as I pointed out, should be looked after

by this department.... But if she's going to act as a liaison

in the areas where these storefront offices are

[ Page 1107 ]

open between the MLAs or the cabinet Ministers in that area

and start taking an ever-increasing number of complaints against

the government instead of complaints against consumers which

she is supposed to protect, this could deteriorate into the

office just becoming a propaganda office for the

government.

Interjection.

Mr. Phillips: No, I'm just saying that I'm concerned

about it. If you're going to act as an ombudsman in all forms

of government and take government's complaints, then you're

going to have to do exactly as I said. You're going to have to

come out and you're going to have to start advertising. If

you're going to solve the complaints, then you're going to have

to start advertising in the media and telling the truth about

your government as well as solving their complaints in your

offices. You can't have it both ways. You're either going to do

one thing or the other. You're going to come out and you're

going to tell the truth about your government — how your

government's ripping off the people of British Columbia.

That's about all I have to say on this department. I think

that if it's carried on and some of the suggestions that I've

made are adhered to, why, the department can serve the

consumer. But certainly, Mr. Chairman, this department, if it's

going to act as a true ombudsman and take complaints from the

government, then they're going to have to come out and speak

out against the government and speak the truth. Maybe the

Minister would like to comment on that, because it really

concerns me. If you're going to have it one way, you're going

to have to advise and do the same type of advertising on your

government. Put out your brochures, tell them how much the cost

of government is increasing, tell them how ICBC are ripping

them off, tell them how much gasoline tax you're paying into

ICBC, tell them the story, tell them how much Panco Poultry

cost, tell them how much it's costing to buy these ranches.

Tell them the whole story, tell them where their tax dollars

are going and tell them the truth.

Mr. Chabot: Truth in government!

Mr. Phillips: Truth in government. Open government,

You can't have it both ways. If you're going to try to solve

the problems in your offices, you had better come out and put

out some brochures and tell the truth about your government.

Don't be afraid to stand up to your government, because if

that's going to be your job, you should do it all the way.

Mr. P.C. Rolston (Dewdney): Mr. Chairman, I was honoured to take

part

in the opening of a...I think it was the first community services legal aid

information centre in the province. It was run by a private society, the Mission

Community Services Council. This was, I guess, a year ago now. This is funded,

I think, at about $1,200 a month to keep a very capable trade practices or consumer

services officer and legal aid counselor in Mission working out of a public

services building — a multi-agency building. This fellow has really been incredibly

busy. I think that this was a very exciting first for my riding. I know that

this fellow is doing a lot of preventive work and a lot of counseling. I pay

tribute to the Minister for giving me that service in my riding.

I think I've asked the Minister before and I asked the House.... I remind the House that one of the problems that

constantly recurs, if I look at the monthly schedules of the

Consumer Services officer in Mission, is on the used-car sales

business. I hope the Minister by now has had a very close look

at what the Province of Ontario is doing and has done for quite

a few years regarding the Used-Car Dealers Act, which requires

road certification prior to the licensing of a car for the

highway. In other words, a car just can't leave the lot.

This, incidentally, is also true of new cars, but obviously

it is a more serious problem with used cars. Occasionally, of

course, a new car has a serious fault.

I have just reread some of the complaints in my riding that

our people are processing. It's pretty horrendous — complaints

about used cars.

In Ontario a mechanic would have to guarantee and certify

that car in the shop — and that's what I really want to

emphasize, in the shop — before that automobile ownership is

transferred and licensed for the highway. I would like to hear

from the Minister a little more detail of the experience.

There's some history now of experience in Ontario of this

programme. I'd gladly give the Minister the names of people who

were in the industry in Ontario, who are now out here in the

industry in the Vancouver area, who really commend this

programme, who like other Members of the House have said, are

in the industry and they want credibility, they want their

industry to be strong.

They admit there are some bad apples in the industry, not

many but some bad apples. As with the mobile home industry,

there are a few, not many, but a few very bad apples. We've

heard in this House before how this has caused disease and

blight to other members of that industry. So I'd like to hear

that. I'd like to hear how well it's worked. I'd like to hear

how close we are to instituting something like that. I assume

this is a consumer matter, not merely something under Transport

and Communications.

I'd like to hear also from the Minister the degree of

certification of mechanics, which is another concern somewhat

related to the same issue — the competency of the mechanics,

therefore the real

[ Page 1108 ]

ability of these people that see the new and used, in fact

any car that's being serviced, is really getting quality work

done on it.

I think all MLAs have heard from the automotive retail

association who usually annually come to the precinct here and

talk to us about consumerism as to mechanics and the quality of

work that's being done. We're paying $15, $16 an hour to these

people and even they are concerned.

So those are two kind of related questions. Maybe in your

trip down to New Zealand you already heard what they are doing

there regarding automobile certification. Like the other

Member, I'd certainly like to hear from you.

Now, generally I would certainly like to commend the

Minister. I think that a lot of the work is preventive. I

really think there should be a tremendous amount of advertising

with school children. I gather we're only just starting in the

most preliminary way to work in schools, let's say in junior

high schools for sure, developing sound, prudent, consumer

practices with kids. You know, as one who was marrying 45 young

couples a year as a United Church Minister, it is pretty

revealing to see the patterns of consumerism by the time the

couple are ready to get married. You know, we're talking of a

$5,000 car already purchased; the 24,000-mile warranty is

usually already gone. Those kids are paying for a car which has

probably already depreciated very considerably and that car,

plus other pretty extravagant purchases, are going to never

allow them to have the kind of liquidity of money to get into a

house or something else.

So thank you, and I'll have some other questions later.

Mr. G.B. Gardom (Vancouver–Point Grey): I'd like to

make a few comments here and ask a few questions, Mr. Chairman.

It was very interesting to hear from the lady Member for

Burrard (Ms. Brown) who seems to be conducting the bulk of her

federal campaign within the confines of this Legislature, but

she, notwithstanding that fact, made a few valid points and

complimented her delegates and did a very fine job of doing

that. (Laughter.)

I would like to compliment the little lady Minister over

there as well, because I think she has tried with the

capacities that are available and I would very much like to

compliment those in her staff, certainly in the higher levels

of her staff, who seem to be very well-trained, intelligent and

well-motivated individuals.

I cannot, though, really justify a vote increase of 100 per cent or over 100

per cent. We find the department increasing from $1.2 million to $2.5 million

and I'm not saying that this is not a needful service. It is indeed a needful

service, but I do feel — and with all respect to the lady Minister, there's no

personal reference to her whatsoever — I do feel that it is

an unneeded portfolio and an unneeded Ministry.

I think there's a great duplication of facilities and there

must be no end of duplication of effort. I would really have

thought that this service that is being provided, and should be

provided in the Province of British Columbia, is one which with

any reasonable exercise of administrative capacity could have

better fallen within the aegis and responsibility of a separate

department of the Attorney-General. But this government always

seems to have the consuming desire to constantly expand its

cabinet, with out without reason or really proper public

requirement.

I somewhat subscribe to the remarks of the Hon. Member for

Peace River (Mr. Phillips) who was speaking earlier today

dealing with one aspect, that is, the language that is utilized

by the department or whoever is responsible for flacking out

these press releases. Really and truly it does consist of

pretty loaded rhetoric and it always appears, Mr. Chairman,

through you to the lady Minister, that a successful lawsuit or

a protest seems to be followed by an enormous press release

which seems to censure by innuendo not only the flagrant trade

practicer — who should certainly be able to take his lumps and

should have to take his lumps — but also censors by innuendo

those who may be involved in a similar vocation but operating

fully within the law. I think it was a very valid premise and

point that was made earlier by the other Member.

Now I also had great interest in reading "The Trade

Practices Act and You." It's a very useful little brochure, and

it is written in the language that most people can understand,

which is the way it should be done. I was specifically

interested in some of the

definitions in here on the fourth

page, I guess it is, talking about deceptive practices.

It says that one or more of the following constitutes a

deceptive practice, under the Act, and it refers to

section

2(3). This is the example that is given:

" A representation that the subject of the consumer

transaction has sponsorship, approval, performance,

characteristics, accessories, ingredients, quantities,

components, uses or benefits that it does not have."

And it gives an example:

"27 miles per gallon, if such mileage could only be obtained

by a highly skilled professional driver, under controlled

conditions."

Now the object of this is very clear and very patent; it is

to prevent misleading advertising, which everybody subscribes

to. But we should not have misleading advertising by the

instrument that has incorporated this Act and which has given

you,

[ Page 1109 ]

Madam Minister, the opportunity to exist and do a job.

We all recall this very interesting advertisement "Are you

eligible for property tax benefits?" And it talks about tax

deferrals. "Tax deferrals are in effect loans from the

provincial government." True. "The interest rate is a modest

8 per cent, per year." False. Had this advertisement,

Madam Minister, been under the hand of a private individual,

that private individual could have faced prosecution under the

Act, and under

section 25 of the Act, under

summary conviction,

if proven guilty, to a fine of not more than $5,000 or to

imprisonment for a term of not more than one year, or both such

a fine and imprisonment.

Now I don't think, really and truly, it is playing ball with

the people in the Province of British Columbia to go ahead, and

the government to falsely advertise. The interest rate in this

situation is not a modest 8 per cent per year. The interest

rate is a compound rate, and a little bit of very quick and

simple arithmetic will find that in the ninth to the tenth year

the principal will double. That is not modest interest, Madam Minister; that is

compound interest. Surely to goodness the government, I think,

would have the greatest responsibility of all to act in a

completely ethical manner to the general public and let the

general public know exactly what it is receiving from

governmental advertising.

The second government advertisement that is similarly

abusive of the statutes was the one dealing with the Insurance

Corp. of B.C. when it talked about "The Buck Stays Here." And

it says: "Autoplan funds will be used to pay claims,

administration, and will work to keep premiums down this year,

next year and the year after. Autoplan — insurance at cost;

that's the whole idea."

Well, it's not insurance at cost, as everybody knows. It has

had to be subsidized; furthermore, it is reinsuring.

Now if the government intends to go ahead and become

involved in pitch advertising to promote programmes, either for

the betterment of the programme or for the betterment of the

government in its own hopeful continuity, my question purely

and simply, to you Madam Minister, is this: let it at least be

honest advertising. Let it at least not violate the Trade

Practices Act. Let it at least not be a deceptive practice, and

let the government not be involved in the very kind of shady

advertising that your statute is supposed to prevent.

Mr. J.R. Chabot (Columbia River): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are

two short points I want to raise with the Minister. One has to do with the publication

from the Minister of Industrial Development Trade and Commerce, (Hon. Mr. Lauk)

dated July 27, 1973, when he was new in the portfolio, and

energetic and thought there was a need for examination of

certain problems.

In the press release of that day the report suggested the

government would be considering ways to alleviate the special

problem of the cost of living faced by people who lived there —

he was talking about the North.

" At the request of the Northern Development Council the

Hon. Phyllis Young, Minister without portfolio responsible

for consumer affairs, has been requested to do a study on

special costs in the entire northern region, which will

certainly include the Peace River region."

I'm wondering whether the Minister has, in almost two years

now, undertaken the study which was suggested in this press

release from the Minister of Industrial Development at that

time, the Minister of Economic Development now (Hon. Mr. Lauk),

whether it's been undertaken, and what the results of that

study have been.

What are the costs in Prince Rupert? What are the costs in

Terrace? Are the costs such that maybe the Chairman of the

House, the Member for Skeena (Mr. Dent) needs an additional

expense allowance as an MLA because the costs of living are

high up there? What are the costs in Dawson Creek, Prince

George? What kind of action does the government propose to take

if the costs in that region of the province are such that the

turnover of employment is substantial? I would very much like

hearing from the Minister on this subject.

Now I would like to mention another matter which I've

discussed with the Minister, not at length but briefly, and

that has to do with Budget Freezer Foods Processors Ltd. of

Burnaby. This firm apparently has been bilking the people of

British Columbia — how many I don't know — but I am aware of

four in my constituency who have been defrauded by Budget

Freezer Foods Processors of Burnaby. One was defrauded of $250,

another $137, another of $111 and another one of $498.55.

They were defrauded on the premise that they would deliver

freezer foods to these people after having signed a contract —

and these are merely down-payments. They signed contracts with

an anticipated delivery of the meat within 30 days. This never

materialized. They approached the company, and at the time the

company suggested that all the records had been thrown in the

garbage and destroyed — accidentally moved out by the cleanup

man and had been burnt and destroyed. It appeared to me at the

time that it was a stalling tactic on the part of Budget

Freezer Foods Processors, asking these four individuals who

have come forth and indicated they have been taken by Budget

Freezer Foods. It indicates that it was a stall on the part of

this firm, a

[ Page 1110 ]

firm which apparently had no intention whatsoever of

fulfilling their contracts.

Of course, these constituents have sent the contracts on to

Budget Freezer Foods. A little later on they received another

letter, and Budget Freezer Foods requested that they send in

the cheque which they had issued, or a photostat copy of the

cheque, to justify that not only the contract was legal but

also the fact that the payment which was on the contract had in

fact been made. This all took place and they fulfilled the

request of the supposed supplier. At the time, they were

advised they would have to wait up to 90 days for delivery of

the meat.

In the meantime this firm is winding up its affairs. I have

tried with great difficulty to approach them, trying to get

through the telephone answering service. I finally reached the

individual at Budget Freezer Foods and was given this story of

the destruction of records.

In attempting to assist these people by either getting their

money back or getting the meat, I found there is little action

that can be taken because this firm has wound down its affairs.

But they had the gall, despite the fact that they have gone

into bankruptcy, to send an individual up to visit these four

constituents who I have taken the matter up with in an attempt

to secure the balance of the payment — and this is only the

down-payment I've mentioned — and to attempt to get the balance

of the money owing with another false promise that the meat

would be delivered.

I have taken the matter up with the consumer services branch

on numerous occasions. I understand there has been a series of

meetings between individuals. I don't know if there are

meetings with Mr. Martin or Mr. Cassand of Budget Freezer

Foods. I would like the Minister to tell me if there is a hope

that these people who appear to have been defrauded of their

money will either get their money back or the goods delivered.

I also want to make sure that this same firm, which has

apparently gone into bankruptcy, hasn't started up another

company under a different name and is going on bilking the

people of British Columbia with false promises of delivery of

cheap meat. I want to make sure that these people never get in

business in British Columbia again. I want to make sure that

the Minister, as well, takes the necessary legislative action

to ensure that these kind of people don't defraud British

Columbians again.

Hon. Ms. Young: I think I'll go back-to-front, if I may, just to reply

to the Hon. Member for Columbia River (Mr. Chabot) in the matter of the Budget

Freezer Foods situation. We are aware of that situation and we are on top of

it. Our department people have met with the principals. I would refer you to

section 12 of the Trade Practices Act. I am not at liberty to discuss the matter

further as action has been taken under other sections of the Act,

[Mr. G.H. Anderson in the chair.]

As soon as we are aware that there is a problem such as was

brought out in the Budget Freezer Foods — and we have had

several other situations like this — we advise very strongly

that the company refrain from taking any more money from the

public, and stop immediately until their affairs are in order,

We have forced four companies into bankruptcy just to find out

where the money went. So we are not timid about that.

Mr. D.A. Anderson: Explain that.

Interjection.

Hon. Ms. Young: Yes, we did. In cases where it

appeared they were going to close down but they were still

accepting money from the public. We got word that they were

going to do it right up to the minute, then close their doors

and walk away. We went in and forced them into bankruptcy in

order that the consumer creditors would find out if there were

any assets and, if there weren't, where the money went.

Heretofore in this province they could just walk away and leave

everybody hanging: their creditors, the consumers, their

customers, everybody. They could just walk out, and they were

doing it. We say: no more of that! No more! You are going to be

responsible. If consumers have got to be responsible in regard

to contracts, then, by golly, business had better be

responsible. So much for that situation.

Interestingly enough, I am glad that the Member for Dewdney

(Mr. Rolston) brought up the concern he has with used cars. The

automotive trade is the highest area of complaint in our

department. It just tops the list. New cars are up there, auto

repairs and credit dealings with cars: those are the four top

items. He asked what our feeling was regarding the Ontario type

of legislation where road worthiness is something that they have

had. We don't feel that this is the total solution at all, a

road worthiness certificate. Suppose they do obtain a

certificate and then the car still has a defect in it that

doesn't show up? For instance, in the transmission you can't

find out unless you disassemble the transmission. That is not

the total solution. Also, in this province you just don't have

the facilities in every area of the province for that kind of

detailed inspection.

The Member for South Peace River (Mr. Phillips) wanted to

know what information we obtained on our trip to Australia and

New Zealand. I want to tell the House that it was a most

fruitful trip. I met every Minister with the exception of one.

I met the Minister of New South Wales and had a discussion with

him. I

[ Page 1111 ]

met the Commissioner of Consumer Protection of that state.

I'll give you the agenda for the day that we met with the

Minister in South Australia.

We met with the acting commissioner, Mr. James Leeker, at

9:30 a.m., and with his branch officers who were involved with

the administration of the Second-Hand Motor-Vehicles Act. They

have had legislation on the books for a year now dealing with

second-hand cars. At 11 o'clock we met with Judge White, who is

the Chairman-Registrar of the Credit Tribunal, and his aide,

Mr. Noblette. At 12 noon I met the Attorney-General and

Minister, the Hon. L.J. King, and an hour later we had

lunch.

At 2:30 P.m. we met with the Automotive Chamber of Commerce,

which is the trade organization, and we spent a very fruitful

hour-and-a-half with these two gentlemen. They were extremely

helpful. Their views on the legislation were interesting since

they had lived with the Second-Hand Motor-Vehicles Act for a

year. It was interesting to get the trade association reaction

from it. It was very favourable. They think it works out well

for both the consumers and the dealers.

At 5 p.m. we met with the Royal Auto Association, which is

like our BCAA, and asked for their opinion. That was a

typical day. We had six appointments in one day. In Melbourne

we were not quite so successful because it was over the Easter

weekend. We met with the Deputy Minister there. He invited us

to his home for dinner and we had a very good discussion.

In New Zealand we talked to the Minister there and also to

the dealers association. We talked to them in New South Wales

also. They were very, very helpful in New South Wales and in

New Zealand we talked to them. We also talked to the Consumers

Institute, which is quite a unique organization. They have

about 172,000 members out of a population of three million

people. I think that really speaks very highly. They do a lot

of product testing, but they are very, very up on representing

the consumers.

Of course, the object of our going there was to attend the

eighth congress of the International Organization of Consumer

Unions. Mr. Jim O'Brady, the president of the Consumers

Association of Canada was there. "Marketplace" — the CBC show — was there, and we were the other Canadian representatives

there.

There were over 45 countries represented and over 100

consumer organizations from all over the world represented.

Although we were interested in many of the views we listened to

and we discussed in the various seminars and symposia, we were

mainly interested in talking to the many officials from the

states. I think we must have talked to between 20 and 25

various government officials in both Australia and New

Zealand.

New and used car legislation they have in every state of Australia but two.

South Australia, as I said, has had it for a year. It's been quite successful.

New South Wales has just passed the legislation and are now setting up the regulations

to be able to proclaim it very shortly.

Several of the states have house warranties and we were very

interested in obtaining their legislation. We also talked

extensively about the credit-and-debt problem especially with

Judge White who is a very interesting man — very helpful.

Guarantees and warranties. It's interesting that when we

arrived in South Australia we found that the previous night the

Legislature had passed

an Act on warranties and guarantees. So

we're going to examine that closely to see how they get the

responsibility back to the manufacturer.

Prior to our going to Australia and New Zealand we wrote to

the Automobile Dealers Association and to the Automotive

Retailers Association, advising them we were going. We said

that we would be talking to their counterparts in New Zealand

and Australia. In all cases their counterparts welcomed

correspondence from them. They all of them feel the legislation

in their respective states is good, that it is constructive,

that it is helpful to the automotive industry and they are

working with it.

In fact, in New Zealand we questioned them on some pretty

tough wording in the legislation and found that they were the

ones who had put it in — who had suggested it. We were quite

surprised that the industry itself would suggest such tough

rules. But they felt very deeply that it would benefit their

industry as well as the consumer.

Another thing they have in New Zealand is certified

mechanics, but it is under a voluntary certification programme

which the dealers themselves run. It works very well. They're

very strict about how it's run. I believe there is one other

state that has it.... Oh no, it was New Zealand. It is done

pretty much on the same idea as an apprenticeship programme

here. In the matter of certifying mechanics, this would have to

be co-ordinated with the Department of Labour in their

apprenticeship programme, and, of course, the Department of

Transport and Communications.

So we gained a great deal from the legislation down south of

the equator. It was most helpful. It was pretty exhausting,

too, I'll tell you that.

The Second Member for Burrard (Ms. Brown) — I thank

her very much for her kind words and her encouragement. I do

know that there was some question as to the qualifications for

investigators in our department .. One of the possible qualifications is

police experience. This is necessary because we need people who

know how to prepare evidence for court proceedings. This takes

a certain skill and a certain training which is usually found —

in fact, it's darn near always found — among police. Heretofore,

[ Page 1112 ]

police, as you know, have been predominantly male.

Hopefully, we'll be seeing a change in that very, very

soon.

An Hon. Member: Hear, hear!

Hon. Ms. Young: As far as some of our other people

go, one of our Consumer Services officers here is a former

social worker. Another one in Kamloops was with the Civil

Liberties Union, so we have a good input there.

In the matter of mobile homes, we are working with the

Department of Housing on this on a comprehensive examination of

the whole field. The details are yet to be worked out. I've

been away and have not been able to discuss it too much with

the Minister, but I hope to very shortly.

You discussed the matter of class actions. We can take class

actions, it's true, but also others can take them. We're very

happy to see that, for instance, the Vancouver community legal

assistance society has availed itself of the class action

features in the legislation. So has the Consumers Association

of Canada in one of their actions. Anybody can take a class

action in a particular case.

In the matter of the tax rebate situation, we're not at

liberty to discuss that because that matter is still before the

courts. But I would venture to say (I don't know) but a

decision rendered in that case would be a precedent. It would

probably be applicable in similar circumstances elsewhere but,

of course, it would require legal opinion for that.

I think I've answered just about everybody's questions.

Mr. Chabot: Just one question that the Minister

didn't answer is that elaborate study she made on the cost of

living in northern British Columbia in 1973.

Also, regarding Budget Freezer Foods, the Minister has

expres