1973 Legislative Session: 3rd 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, SEPTEMBER 25, 1973

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page 207 ]

CONTENTS

Statement

Oil spill in Vancouver harbour. Hon. Mr. Barrett — 207

Mr. Richter — 208

Mr. D.A. Anderson — 208

Mr. Wallace — 208

Privilege

Release of message bills to the press. Mr. D.A.

Anderson — 209

Routine proceedings

Supplementary Municipal Assistance Act (Bill 26). Mr.

Smith.

Introduction and first reading — 210

Senior Citizens Home Repair Act (Bill 27). Mrs. Jordan.

Introduction and first reading — 210

An Act to Amend the Municipalities Aid Act (Bill 28).

Mr.

Curtis.

Introduction and first reading — 210

Oral questions

Recovery of oil spill costs. Mr. Morrison — 210

Proposed new truck ferry. Mr. D.A. Anderson — 210

Mincome. Mr. McClelland — 212

Report on natural gas distribution in B.C. Mr. Wallace

— 213

Throne Speech debate

Mr. Nunweiler — 214

Mr. Bennett — 221

Mr. Kelly — 223

Mr. Barnes — 226

An Act to Amend the Corporation Capital Tax Act (Bill

21).

Hon. Mr. Barrett. Introduction and first reading — 233

An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act (Bill 23)

Hon. Mr. Barrett. Introduction and first reading — 233

An Act to Amend the Coloured Gasoline Tax Act (Bill 25)

Hon. Mr. Barrett. Introduction and first reading — 233

An Act to Amend the Pacific Great Eastern Settlement

Act

(Bill 22).

Hon. Mr. Barrett. Introduction and first reading — 233

APPENDIX

Select Standing Committees reports:

Social Welfare and Education — 234

Agriculture — 249

Municipal Matters — 255

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1973

The House met at 2:05 p.m.

Prayers.

HON. D. BARRETT (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I would ask the

House to extend a very warm welcome today to a group of

residents of one of the finest areas of British Columbia, the

District of Coquitlam.

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

As many of you know, my wife is a regular visitor to the gallery, and

she's here today. About 16 years ago, my daughter visited the House for

the first time — she was dubbed premier for the day by the then

Premier, and she's here today. I would like to welcome the third

generation, my granddaughter, Sharon, who is also in the gallery today.

HON. E. HALL (Provincial Secretary): Mr. Speaker, I want to

draw the attention of the House to a distinguished visitor,

sitting on the floor of the chamber today, Mr. Barry Mather,

the MP for Surrey-White Rock.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON (Victoria): Mr. Speaker, I would like the

House to welcome a group of 35 students from Hamilton Junior

Secondary School, who are here in the charge of Mr. Cameron,

here to see the Legislature in action.

MR. H. STEVES (Richmond): Mr. Speaker, I would like to take

the privilege today of welcoming a group of representatives

representing tenants throughout the Province of B.C.: Bruce

Yorke, president; Frank Izzard, secretary; Mary Anderson,

full-time worker for the B.C. Tenants' Council; Dick Werlin,

president of Tenants' Council in my own riding, Richmond; Barry

Dean, Burnaby; Chris Miles, Campbell River; Marylyn Leyshon.

North Vancouver; Leonard Black, West Vancouver; Jack Campbell,

president of the Coquitlam Mobile Homeowners' Association;

Elaine Bennett, Surrey Mobile Homeowners' Association

president; and the delegation here today who are representing

the growing number of tenants throughout the province. I think

we share their concern, as a government, for the plight of the

tenants, and I'd like to welcome them here.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. No speeches.

HON. W.L. HARTLEY (Minister of Public Works): Mr. Speaker, I

would like to ask you and the House to welcome the town clerk

from the Village of Lytton and his wife, Mr. and Mrs. Karl

Model.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I would ask leave of the

House to make a statement related to the oil spill in the

Vancouver harbour.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, we are receiving reports by

the hour, and I'd like to inform the House of what we know at

this point. In accordance with an interim arrangement

established between the Province of British Columbia and the

federal government, the pollution control branch has dispatched

a representative this morning to observe containment and

clean-up action being taken by the Ministry of Transport.

Subject to confirmation from our on-scene observer, Mr. Paul

Griffin, the most recent telephone report from the Ministry of

Transport is as follows — and I have some additional

information after I read this statement, so a little bit of

this written statement has been brought up to date:

"A collision occurred at 3 a.m., Tuesday, September

25, between two freighters off Point Atkinson. The Erawan ,

9,000 tons, of London registry was struck amidships by the bow of the Sun

Diamond , 10,000 tons, of Japanese registry A 30-ft. hole in the Erawan

ruptured the fuel tanks containing 500 tons of bunker C oil. An

estimated 250 tons of oil escaped from the tanks into the open sea and

is not contained. No injury or deaths were reported.

"The vessels, still locked together, are surrounded by

4-ft. oil boom to contain any further spill. Oil remaining in

the ruptured tanks is being pumped into barges. Booms are being

used to prevent oil entering the small marinas."

And at the time this report was filed it stated:

"There appears to be no chance of oil entering Vancouver Harbour at

this time."

"The Vancouver-based contractor, Clean Seas (Canada),

retained by the Ministry of Transport for the clean-up. This

company is experienced and fully equipped; there is no lack of

materials at the site. At 12:40 p.m., Mr. H. Buchanan, Regional

Director of the Ministry of Transport, had just surveyed the

area, and gave us the following report:

" 'Most of the oil is broken into slicks. A slick

extends

from Fisherman's Cove to Ambleside, from 5- to 30-ft. wide, and

has hit the rocky beach at Dunderave and Ambleside. The City of

West Vancouver is being supplied with straw, et cetera, to

clean up beached oil and is supplying manpower for this job.

Ministry of Transport and Clean Seas will supply manpower for

shore clean-up as required. No chemicals are being used. Slicks

still on the water are under observation and will be headed off

and contained with booms wherever possible.'

[ Page 208 ]

That's from Mr. R. Rocchini, the Pollution Control

Branch,

and Mr. Paul Giffen, on-the-spot observer.

I'm also in receipt of two telephone calls from the Hon.

Member for West Vancouver–Howe Sound (Mr. Williams), who this

morning flew over the oil spill and was kind enough to report

directly his observations to my office in two phone calls, one

at 11 o'clock and one at 11:40. The Member phoned at 11:40

and said that the oil appears to be reaching the beaches — the

three-mile stretch from Sandy Cove and Ambleside will be

heavily affected. All they are doing is preparing for a mop-up,

and it is like trying to hold the tide out.

Mr. Al Richards of Surrey is on the way to West Vancouver to

advise best possible methods of clean-up. He will direct the

crew that is standing by.

Mr. Williams informed me through this phone call, and I'd

like to inform the House, that he will not return to the House

this afternoon, and that's quite understandable.

Then I received a message at 1:50 this afternoon as

follows:

"The situation has further changed. We've been in

with Mr. Herb Buchanan, Regional Director of the Ministry of

Transport; there is fear that the oil will possibly drift from

off-shore Ambleside, under the Lions Gate Bridge and touch in

there as well. The Ministry of Transport has informed the north

shore municipalities."

We have offered, that is the Province of British Columbia,

have offered our assistance to the Ministry of Transport, but

no request has been made to the present moment. We will be in

contact through the Minister of Lands and Forests' office

constantly.

I appreciate the Members giving me this opportunity of

reporting to them on this matter at this time.

MR. F.X. RICHTER (Boundary-Similkameen): Mr. Speaker, the

official opposition want to thank the Premier for his concern

and the efforts that are being made to keep the House aware of

the dangers that could be, and the measures that are being

taken to prevent further damage from the oil spill. It's hoped

by this group that this oil slick and spill will be cleaned up

at the earliest possible moment and with the least amount of

damage.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, the spill of a relatively

small amount of oil in good weather, in daylight and in an area

which has many ships available for assistance in cleaning up,

points out the real importance of taking steps to prevent

spills of perhaps many hundred times that magnitude in waters

more remote and more difficult.

At this stage, I find it curious that in the second time we discuss

such a situation by way of a statement by the Premier, no mention was

made of the previous mechanism which had been set up with the State of

Washington or of the other things of which he was pretty proud at that

time. I think it is clear that they have not succeeded. That is, of

course, why funding has been cut off by the Government of the State of

Washington.

I think it is important for us to realize at this time that

this small spill which is being well contained by the work

being done by the City of Vancouver and the Department of

Transport makes inexplicable the approach of the provincial

government in failing to support....

MR. SPEAKER: Order! I want to point out that the Hon. Member

has many times mistaken the purpose of statements. They are to

state a party position in regard to assisting in the particular

emergency but not, thereby, to launch a debate on a subject

that can only be done by a motion on the order paper. I would

ask him to confine himself to any helpful suggestions that do

not include starting a partisan debate in the House.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I would have thought the

protection of the coast was not a partisan subject, but perhaps

you do.

I point out, however, that the spill is an indication of the

problems we may well face due to the failure of this

government, among other people, to properly understand and

appreciate the difficulties we have had for the past two years

in opposing a far more dangerous, far more difficult problem:

that of the Alaskan shipment of oil from Valdez to Cherry

Point.

MR. SPEAKER: Statements of that kind evoke

counter-statements in reply and, in fairness to the House,

other points of view on your statement are obviously invited. I

don't propose to launch a debate in this fashion.

MR. G.S. WALLACE (Oak Bay): I assure you, I have no

intention of provoking a debate. I think it does point up the

fact, however, that spills can come very close to home and that

if we learn from the serious nature of even a so-called small

spill, then, indeed, we are making progress.

On the other hand, as I have said in this House before, we

have reached a stage of non-partisanship where at least we get

a statement from the Premier very promptly and very complete.

I, on behalf of our party, would also like to recognize the

effort of the Hon. Member for West Vancouver–Howe Sound (Mr.

Williams) and the degree of cooperation which shows that we

are all concerned about spills and it crosses party lines.

Thank you.

[ Page 209 ]

MR. D. A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege

for which I was attempting to get your eye prior to the

statement of the Premier — a question of privilege that is

required to be brought to your attention at the earliest

opportunity — I would like to ask for a ruling at some future

date, because it is a complicated question, on the propriety or

otherwise of releasing message bills to the press and public

prior to having these bills released in this House.

Mr. Speaker, we have discussed this in terms of reports of

the Energy Commission and other matters, but in the case of a

message bill, which is a direct communication from the Crown to

her legislators here in the assembly, the position is somewhat

different. It is a position which is different from the two

cases upon which you gave your grounds on Friday, February 23

of this year....

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, would the Hon. Member be

seated for a moment?

HON. MR. BARRETT: On a point of order, it is my

understanding that before a motion of privilege can be debated,

the prima facie case with evidence must be presented to the

House. Otherwise, we will be debating suppositions.

MR. SPEAKER: I do point out for the benefit of the Hon.

Members that we got launched on numerous occasions in the past

on points of privilege without adequate evidence being

submitted first that the Chair can examine with a view to

determining whether a point of privilege exists.

The only thing I really want to know at this moment is if

there is any satisfactory evidence as to the facts that the

Hon. Member is raising so that we can determine from there

what, if anything, arises from it and, indeed, whether it is a

point of privilege.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, this is why I raised it at

this time; I must bring it to your attention at the first

opportunity. I can, if you wish, get the tapes of the radio

stations which were discussing this particular measure prior to

it being released in this House. Of course, it will take time

to do that.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I would

appreciate the Member making the case the basis of evidence,

and I would be more than pleased to have the Speaker receive

the evidence so that it could be ruled on accordingly.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: That, Mr. Speaker, is precisely why I

raised it at this time.

MR. SPEAKER: If there is some evidence available upon which

the matter can be studied, I would appreciate your opinion and material

that would assist in the study. The fact that you produce it at a later

date will not, in any sense, be held against you if you have raised the

matter of privilege at this time — and you have.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Well, Mr. Speaker, certainly.

MR. SPEAKER: The only question, then, is: is there some

evidence which I can examine?

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Yes, Mr. Speaker, there is. My Hon.

friend from West Vancouver (Mr. Williams), who is not in the

House as the moment, came in yesterday prior to that

legislation being introduced, stating that he had heard it on

the radio. Had it been presented by the Minister of

Agriculture? Obviously, I had to say no, he is not in the House

today. My Hon. friend from Oak Bay (Mr. Wallace) supports that

statement.

I can, as I said, take the time and trouble to get the tapes — the

usual fob-off of this government in an attempt to raise a

serious question.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Order, Mr. Speaker. I find it an offence

to the Chair. We are launching the House into a debate on

hearsay evidence. The House rules must be obeyed. I'm

suggesting, Mr. Speaker, that without evidence before the

Speaker we cannot debate this matter.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I don't propose to indulge in

speculation on a very important question. As far as I am

concerned, my mind is entirely available to a study of your

evidence. If you will submit something to me, I can deal with

the matter and report back to the House.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I have to reserve my right

to speak. You know full well the other rule governing this

Legislature: I must raise the issue at the first

opportunity.

Now, I can get sworn depositions from that press gallery. I

have the Minister of Agriculture....

Interjections.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: What is the point of this type of

legalisms when we are in this Legislature...?

HON. MR. BARRETT: Surely, we are not going to do it on

hearsay. Let's have the evidence....

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I think the obvious answer is if

you give me a written statement

[ Page 210 ]

buttressed by some personal facts upon which I can

base

certain conclusions, I'll certainly look at it. You will not be

prejudiced in any way so far as the question of time is

concerned. You've raised the point but you haven't submitted,

as this stage, the evidence....

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: True. But, Mr. Speaker, I point out to

you that in the previous case of this nature, raised on

February 23, there was none of this rigamarole of sworn

declarations. A word of a Member was accepted in this

regard.

MR. SPEAKER: It is not the word of yourself at all that is

in question. You, obviously, are not aware of the facts

yourself and the Member who may be aware of the facts is in

West Vancouver. I would ask you, therefore, either to get

something from him, await his return, or produce some evidence

that I can look at before I consult and decide upon this

question.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: We can vary, then, previous procedure,

Mr. Speaker, to do it the way you suggest. But I would like to

reserve my position to raise this point at a future date.

Introduction of bills.

SUPPLEMENTARY MUNICIPAL

ASSISTANCE ACT

Mr. Smith moves introduction and first reading of Bill 26,

intituled Supplementary Municipal Assistance Act .

Motion approved.

Bill 26 read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders

of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House

after today.

SENIOR CITIZENS

HOME REPAIR ACT

Mrs. Jordan moves introduction and first reading of Bill 27,

intituled Senior Citizens Home Repair Assistance Act .

Motion approved.

Bill 27 read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders

of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House

after today.

AN ACT TO AMEND THE

MUNICIPALITIES AID ACT

Mr. Curtis moves introduction and first reading of Bill 28,

intituled

An Act to Amend the Municipalities Aid Act .

Motion approved.

Bill 28 read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders

of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House

after today.

Oral questions.

RECOVERY OF OIL

SPILL COSTS

MR. N.R. MORRISON (Victoria): Mr. Speaker, I would like to

address my question to the Minister of Recreation and

Conservation. I would like to say how much I appreciate the

statement that the Premier has given us, but my question is

concerning the oil spill. What action, if any, has the

provincial government taken to recover any costs of correcting

any damage to the recreational waterfront values as a result of

the oil spill this morning?

HON. J. RADFORD (Minister of Recreation and Conservation):

Mr. Speaker, we're looking into that matter. As you know, it

just happened this morning, and we are considering taking action

on that.

MR. MORRISON: You don't have the policy?

A supplemental then, Mr. Speaker. Is the government prepared

to assist the City of Vancouver, the City of West Vancouver and

any non-municipal area, in meeting the cost of any damage, or

in seeking damages through any legal action which might

follow?

HON. J. RADFORD (Minister of Recreation and Conservation):

Yes, we'll be considering that.

PROPOSED NEW TRUCK FERRY

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: To the Minister of Communications,

following up yesterday's exchange on ferry construction, may I

ask him whether a Canadian firm was requested to present cost

estimates to the provincial government, or to the provincial

government ferry authority, on a brief for submission and

subsequent presentation to the federal Canada Steamship

Inspection service on design changes and particularly safety

design changes for the proposed new truck ferry?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: No, for the very good reason that there

was a particular firm that had already constructed ships of a

design that, upon close

[ Page 211 ]

examination, was very close to that which, in the

opinion of

the ferry authority, would best serve the needs of the people

of British Columbia. Much work has already been done by this

firm. The ships are in operation, and we asked that firm to

prepare this submission based on their past experience.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, then supplementary to the

Minister, again subsequent to yesterday's statement by him

where he talked of competitive estimates being obtained in a

report dated May 24, 1973, some from a Victoria naval architect

and some from outside of the province. May I ask in what area,

if any, there was competition, in the light of the Minister's

reply to my earlier question today?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I would ask the Member to re-read Hansard

for yesterday, where he will find I described in succinct,

easily-understood terms, the fact that there are three phases

involved in the whole matter of drawings related to ferries. I

have explained to you the reason why we went to the firm we

did, to prepare the conceptual design — I will speak very

slowly — to prepare the conceptual design for submission to the

Canadian steamship inspection group. We went to them because

that particular company already have ships in the water which

we can examine, determine, look at, ride in, drive on, drive

off, measure, survey, picture and experience. (Laughter.) The

firm which is doing the complaining, to you and to me, has no

ship of any comparable size afloat anywhere. They are building

one now for the federal government for service on the Great

Lakes. Because of the fact that this design was particularly

appropriate to the objectives of the B.C. ferry system, we

asked them to make this preparation and make the submission to

Ottawa along with the members of the B.C. ferry management.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: I think that...

HON. MR. STRACHAN: That's step one. (Laughter.) That's step

one.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, the question I asked was: why

is yesterday's statement in total contradiction to today's

statement?

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh!

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Yesterday's statement said flatly that

competitive estimates were obtained...

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Just a minute, just a minute!

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: ...at the bottom of page 1045.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, I want to read into the

record, in reply to my friend, yesterday's Hansard .

MR. SPEAKER: I don't know why we have to repeat answers.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Well, he is a slow learner.

(Laughter.)

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. May I point out that if a

question has been answered on a previous day, it is irregular

to ask the question again. I would therefore, in fairness to

the other Members.... The Member for Oak Bay is next, followed by....

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: Oh, on the same...on the ferries? So long as

we don 't go over the questions and answers of yesterday

again.

MR. D.M. PHILLIPS (South Peace River): No, no, it's on the

same subject.

MR. SPEAKER: Is the Member for Oak Bay on the same

subject?

MR. WALLACE: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: Then the Member for Oak Bay followed by the

Member for South Peace River.

MR. WALLACE: It's rather an important question in the light

of the Minister's answer, always referring to the special type

of design. Could I ask the Minister if in fact the type of

the first brief to the Canadian Steamship Inspection Authority...they

said "no way," and turned down the request?

Would the Minister care to answer that?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: That is an absolute falsehood which was

related to me yesterday and which I checked on. There is

absolutely no validity to that statement at all.

MR. WALLACE: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is rather important

because, of course, I have a statement from an individual of

respect who says that he, as late as this morning, checked out

the same fact and was told by the Canadian Steamship Inspection

Authority that they did in fact reject the proposal from the

company which the government had asked to design a single

bottomed ship instead of a double hull, and with different

safety precautions and that in fact they

[ Page 212 ]

were having no davits on the ship. If the Minister

and I are

to give this the public exposure that it demands, could I ask

the Minister, Mr. Speaker, if he would consider tabling with

the House a copy of the specifications and proposals outlining

the kind of vessel that was required — this special design

that's referred to — so that the public can know whether or not

the proposal design was to have reduced safety standards?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: At no time was the proposed design going

to have reduced safety standards. The specific designs we are

looking at will have double hulls, exactly the same as the

present ferries have. They will be even more safe than the

present ferries, because some of our ferries have only one

compartment below water while the later ones have two; these

new models will in actual fact have three compartments as well

as the double hull.

MR. WALLACE: Mr. Speaker, it is rather important to know

what was in the original proposal for the original design that

was requested, not the design which CSI have finally accepted.

I would suggest that the Minister table with the House, and I

would ask him to consider this, the original specifications

which were sent by this ferry authority....

MR. SPEAKER: There is no provision in question period for

this course of action. It is merely a question-and-answer

session.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I don't mind answering his questions, Mr.

Speaker. The designs were taken down there for discussion and,

on the basis of discussions with the federal authority, the

design was arrived at...

MR. WALLACE: Changes were....

HON. MR. STRACHAN: ...with double hull. At no time was

there any intention of leaving a double hull off the ship. At

no time.

MR. PHILLIPS: I would like to ask the Minister if he has

applied to Ottawa for the usual shipbuilding subsidy so that

the people of British Columbia can take advantage of this. If

so, what is the amount of the subsidy? And, if there is no

subsidy, do these have to be built in Quebec in order to get

the subsidy?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I wish I knew the answer to that, my

friend. Just last week in a general way, in relating to my position as

Minister of Transport, I wrote a letter to a consultant that the

federal government has retained to examine — I think the wording is — the transportation requirements of the coastal areas, of this province.

I wrote a letter to that consultant pointing out the lack of assistance

that the federal government has been giving to the Province of British

Columbia, the discrimination against the Province of British Columbia,

and wanting him to convey to the federal government the feelings of

this government on this continued discrimination against the transport

needs of this province.

MR. PHILLIPS: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does

the Minister tell me that the federal government subsidizes

ships to be built for Greece and other countries in the world,

and doesn't subsidize shipbuilding for the Province of

Quebec?

MR. SPEAKER: The question is not relevant....

MR. PHILLIPS: With regard to government subsidies....

HON. MR. STRACHAN: In all probability we will be able to get

the 17 per cent, but we won't get any more than that unless we

fight like the devil for it. I would ask my good friend, as

these ships are going to be built in British Columbia, to

please get on the phone. Phone Ottawa.

MINCOME

MR. R.H. McCLELLAND (Langley): I would like to direct my

question to the Minister of Human Resources, Mr. Speaker. It's

interesting that we have on our desks today, a memorandum from

that Minister with regard to the new thrusts of Mincome in the

province. Some of the old thrusts have some of the people

confused in this province, and I would like to ask the

Minister, since he stated at the last session, I believe, that

it wasn't fundamental — I think his words were — for people to

fill out the so-called "blue form" Mincome. I would like to

ask the Minister if it is now considered compulsory to fill out

those forms and what action is taken if the recipient refuses

or doesn't wish to fill out those forms?

HON. N. LEVI (Minister of Human Resources): The question,

Mr. Speaker, is on the order paper. Is it in order for me to

make a response?

MR. SPEAKER: Oh, well, then. If it's on the order paper, it

will have to be answered in due course.

MR. McCLELLAND: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't think the

question is quite in that form. I would like to ask the

Minister what action is taken against the recipient, if there

is any action taken against a recipient, if he does not wish,

because he feels it is an invasion of privacy, to fill out

those forms?

[ Page 213 ]

HON. MR. LEVI: We have made an attempt to reach people on a

personal basis. There have only been, to my knowledge, three

outright refusals of this. Payments are continuing.

MR. McCLELLAND: Well, Mr. Speaker, the term "we have reached

people, attempted to reach people on a personal basis" has

taken a little different form in some people's minds. They feel

that they are being harassed on this matter. The question is

why are they being called into welfare offices if there are

going to be no alteration in payments? What is the reason for

that?

HON. MR. LEVI: Well if you recall at the end of last

session, I pointed out to you that this procedure was not a

procedure that we as a government wanted to conduct. The only

procedure that we as a government wanted to conduct is a

procedure that is demanded by the federal government.

MR. McCLELLAND: Because you didn't know how to get

cost-sharing.

HON. MR. LEVI: We mailed out some 100,000 blue forms; we got

back over 80,000. We found that 20,000 people had not replied.

During the employment programme over the summer we hired a

number of people to go out and reach these people. That's

exactly what we did. We have now almost completed to within a

couple of hundred this total survey of some 100,000 people,

which is a pretty fine effort, and I can assure you that where

there has been the odd problem in dealing with an individual,

by and large it's been a very successful operation.

MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Speaker, the question remains, though,

that many of those people have been cooperative under pressure

from the provincial government. I don't know whether my

question's been answered or not. Is there any action being

taken against the people who do not wish? You're indicating

that there is action of some kind being taken against these

people.

MR. SPEAKER: On the point made by the Hon. Member, you have

to be responsible for your statements in question period, if

you are saying that that is the case.

MR. McCLELLAND: Well, so does the Minister, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Minister has answered the question, as far

as I can see, and you're asking a repeat of the question.

MR. McCLELLAND: I'm asking a supplementary,

MR. SPEAKER: I think it's the same question that you asked

in the beginning.

MR. McCLELLAND: It would be nice to get an answer.

MRS. P.J. JORDAN (North Okanagan): To the Minister of Human

Resources on the same point. If the people reached by this

application form do not fill in the application form, will they

receive the benefits of the programme?

HON. MR. LEVI: They have been receiving the benefits of the

programme all the way along. We're trying to conform with the

request by the federal government to see that they fill out the

needs application form. And that's it. It's quite that simple.

We're not going out to punish anybody; we're trying to conform

with the law, and that's it.

REPORT ON NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION

IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

MR. WALLACE: I'd like to ask the Attorney General, in the

light of the very important report on natural gas distribution

in the province and the fact that throughout the report there

is frequent mention made of one very important solution as

through federal action, and since it would appear from public

statements that the government has decided to go the other

route of taking provincial control of the asset in the ground,

would he give us some idea, (1) if he is in fact approaching

the federal government directly and, if so, by what mechanism

will he travel to Ottawa; (2) or has it been decided without

question that the provincial route as described by a Crown

agency has been decided without even going to Ottawa and asking

them to invoke regulation 11(a), which clearly, in the Energy

Act , gives the federal government power to raise the price as

is outlined in the report?

HON. A.B. MACDONALD (Attorney General): In answer to the

Hon. Member, about a month ago Donald Macdonald, the national

Energy Minister, was out here and in my office, and we discussed

in a general way this problem. Prior to the issue of the Energy

Board report, I sent a copy to the Hon. Donald Macdonald and

invited his comments. I'm waiting for those comments. I'm

giving him time to read the report and, if any area of

cooperation requires a visit, that visit will be made either

by myself or some other Minister of this government.

Orders of the day.

SPEECH FROM THE THRONE

(Continued)

[ Page 214 ]

MR. A.A. NUNWEILER (Fort George): It's again a real pleasure

to be here with each and every one of you, the Legislative

Assembly of British Columbia. I congratulate you again, Mr.

Speaker, for the very excellent and competent manner in which

you maintain the procedural order in this House. I think you've

done a very fine job. I enjoy very much the occasional attempts

made....

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Are you reading that speech?

(Laughter.) I didn't write it.

MR. NUNWEILER: I assure you, you didn't write it, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. J.R. CHABOT (Columbia River): Williams did though.

MR. NUNWEILER: But I do appreciate the efforts made by some

Members across the floor to try and help you keep order. If we

can maintain that cooperation, I'm sure that we'll all be able

to have our say when we get up on our feet.

I'd like to digress a bit into my constituency, Fort George.

It's quite a widespread and far-flung riding. It's got very

many exciting features to it, and we have probably every type of

community that you would find anywhere, from the remotest rural

area to the denser urban areas. We have places like McBride and

Valemont to the east end of the riding towards Jasper. They're

very old communities in many respects, and they do have a very

interesting type of people who have a real rural culture among

them.

Sometimes there is a great feeling there that it is a part

of the province that has been almost forgotten at times. We

were successful recently in drawing attention to a difficulty

involving Hydro. Hydro policy in that area was such that it was

almost impossible for people to continue their normal

activities, whether it was industry or another aspect of their

lives. I did draw that to the attention of our government, and

recently the policy has been altered to bring the hydro rate

from what was considered a skyrocketing level to a level that's

equal to diesel-generating areas throughout the province.

This includes not only this area; it includes other areas

such as Fort Nelson and Atlin. I'm sure that people in those

areas appreciate that very much, and I'd like to congratulate

the government for that change of policy. This, to me, is a

clear indication that our new government is indeed interested

in a small community and can move very quickly when the urgency

demands it.

It is a major achievement because I might mention that my

predecessor the former Member (Mr. R. Williston) had been telling the

people that it just wasn't possible. We in fact proved that it was

possible, and we have done it. This has resulted in these communities

getting a clean, fresh breath of air among themselves. As a result now,

a number of sawmills and plywood mills will be able to expand, will be

able to get chippers in their operations to be able to conform with

forest policy and such other things. They found that they were required

to conform with certain things, but they didn't have the means, the

energy with which to do it.

Mackenzie is another community which is an instant town. It

is probably going to be the next city in British Columbia. It's

a very exciting and interesting town. Being an instant town,

it's much different than other communities in the province — and

some of you may know what instant towns are like. It is on the

Williston Dam — or the Williston Lake. It's entirely dependent

on forest products industries. It has two pulp mills, four

major sawmills, and with newly-announced plans for a major

sawmill complex, another $10 million sawmill is about to go

under construction.

As a consequence, the pressure on this community is

tremendous when it comes to providing housing. Municipalities

there are trying to do their best, but they have a very serious

shortage of housing, a very serious shortage of building sites,

of building lots. They just can't keep up with it, so I would

like to ask the departments involved, that communities like

this be given absolute priority when it comes to departmental

approval, whether Lands or Municipal Affairs or wherever. These

communities, being in cold-winter climatic conditions, time is

always very important when it comes to giving government

approvals.

There's also tremendous pressure certainly on other

facilities in filling the needs for medical and educational

services. Recently, there was a new public health unit opened

there, which was very urgently needed. These types of things are

a continuous concern to these communities, and I anticipate that

more attention will be given from now on to try to fill the

needs in the social services. It's very difficult sometimes to

keep medical doctors in communities like this. Some communities

are more fortunate than others, but there's always a continuous

pressure on them.

The recreational grant Act was of considerable help to

communities like this. I know that Mackenzie is one that has

benefited from this grant already, and they are well on their

way to constructing a major recreational centre.

The rapid growth in areas like this and the entire northern

part of British Columbia is also affecting places like the city

of Prince George. That city has continuous growing pressures

and, of course, has continuous pressures on keeping up with

land assembly for building sites as well.

[ Page 215 ]

The city council of Prince George is the biggest developer

in the region, because it develops its own building sites, its

own subdivisions. They do not have to rely on private

developers to fill this need. And here again it is the cold

winter conditions that many times make city and subdivision

planning very difficult. Delays in land acquisitions and

subdivision approvals can result in — and have in the past few

years — housing being delayed an extra year or an extra winter

just because of delays in approval.

So here again I would suggest, when our departments get

applications from regions like that, that they do try to

remember that we do have cold winter conditions, and delay can

often be very, very consequential.

Another matter that seems to be becoming a matter of

progressive concern is air pollution. Recently air pollution

from our pulp mills has been reported to have increased. The

reports that I have been receiving in recent months are that

the mills are operating at such maximum capacity that the

pollution control devices are having difficulty in keeping up

with the high production output. Now I would suggest that

closer scrutiny by our Pollution Control Board be made and

every attempt made to try and keep it within reason.

We also have experienced a pollution problem involving an

oil spill in the Cottonwood River area. This is near Summit

Lake, about 30-some miles north of Prince George, where late

last year the West Coast Transmission line had a pipeline

rupture and spilled considerable oil — approximately 120,000

gallons. The oil was immediately confined on the scene and it

was dammed up; so it was land-locked and supposedly not able to

get into a stream.

However, later on, some months later, earlier this spring, seepage

developed through the soil. It's a gravel soil condition in the area.

The oil appeared in the stream, at Cottonwood creek, about a

quarter-mile or a half-mile away. The company quickly set up an

oil-capturing device to skim the oil and try to keep the stream clean

to prevent the oil from entering downstream waters. This condition

still exists today.

As a matter of fact, I was by there the other day, and you can

actually smell the oil as you drive by on the highway. They are keeping

a constant watch on this, and I think it will take quite a while, from

all

reports, before this is cleaned up.

It would seem that much better precautions should be taken

to protect against these types of oil spills. First, there

should be a much more secure method of making sure everything

is done to not permit the pipe itself to rupture. Pipeline

construction should have a much more rigid inspection by the

federal Department of Transport, which has jurisdiction over

it.

Secondly, whenever oil spills or leaks occur, similar to what

happened in this case, the oil should be removed entirely from the

spill scene and should not be left to find its own way back to nature.

As a matter of interest, I am told that our Fisheries and

Wildlife people cannot convict anyone involved in oil spills

until they actually prove that fish have been killed from that

particular oil spill. So our Fish and Wildlife people are

actually paralyzed in trying to exercise any of their

jurisdiction.

Furthermore, the pipeline is subject to federal regulation;

it is questionable as to whether any provincial department like

the Pollution Control Board does have jurisdiction over it.

That is something that I think should get some attention. If

there is a conflict of jurisdiction or if there is a lack of

concern by the federal Department of Transport, then perhaps

they should extend their responsibilities and make sure that

pollution is protected whenever accidents or emergencies

occur.

I would like to thank the Municipal Affairs committee for

the work they have done this past season. The members on the

committee were very helpful. They worked very hard, and I think

they ought to be complimented for the work that they have done.

They were very helpful and dedicated and hardworking in

investigating and looking over the Gulf Islands. I think that

it was an excellent job they did. I don't think that they were

able to devote as much time as they would have liked to, but in

any event I think they did the best they could.

It has been a tremendous experience. The observations that

were made were quite revealing and, in many cases, rather

disturbing. The general public in the islands themselves

expressed a great deal of interest, and I would like to

congratulate them all for the special efforts they made in

trying to help the committee, and the manner in which they did

so. Public meetings were held throughout many of the islands.

The committee was pleased and impressed with the interest and

turnout by the local people, who expressed a vital concern

about the future of their islands.

It is very apparent to the committee that the islands are

very important to the Province of British Columbia and to

Canada as a whole. Their location is very crucial. They are

between the two largest cities in British Columbia. It was

generally felt among the committee that people are entitled to

use these islands and enjoy them to the capacity that the

islands are able to serve.

It is very interesting to note that each island is

different. They have a number of different classifications so

far as interests are concerned. There are the local residents,

many of them retired people, others being permanent residents

who try to make their living from activity on the island

itself. There are others who are summer residents — and this is

a large sector — visitors, you could possibly call some of them.

As well, a lot of the land is owned by large

[ Page 216 ]

landowners, usually absentee and corporate

landowners. Of

course, there is a lot of foreign land ownership that exists on

the islands themselves and, from all reports, there is more

scouting around going on right at this time to try and acquire

more land by corporations and by people from other countries.

Then there is the larger provincial interest, which is the

general public. Since the islands are very important to the

people of British Columbia, it is of provincial interest and

there is a major provincial responsibility attached to

them.

We have, of course, also the land developers and the land

speculators, who are very active in their own way to try and

gain whatever they possibly can from whatever is to be made

possible from their activities — and tree farm licence

holders.

It is also interesting to note the regional districts.... There

are seven regional districts involved, I believe — each of them with an

island or two or three or four. They each have a small

share of the islands, and there are difficulties involved there

with regional districts, some of them not having the financial

capability to do what they would like to do. A lot of their

jurisdiction, a lot of their machinery as such, is not oriented

in some cases to the best interests of the public on the

islands. There even seems to be the occasional regional

district director — with all due respect to the regional

districts themselves, I think they are doing a wonderful job — who

considers the islands as some sort of a liability...that

it just costs money, and you don't want to throw money away

after something that is not going to give that much return to

the regional district. So there is that problem involved,

too.

Jurisdiction also with Indian lands on Kuper — where local

jurisdiction and provincial jurisdiction just do not exist. The

only jurisdiction on Indian lands is the federal government. It

is also recognized that the 10-acre freeze which has been in

effect on practically all of them has served a purpose in

limiting subdivisions to certain sizes, but it is just not

enough in the long term to cope with the future development of

the islands. There is a need for more sophisticated and

imaginative planning techniques....

There is a need for more sophisticated and imaginative

planning techniques such as cluster developments, leaving

greenbelts and so forth. I also nave noticed that a lot of the

beach accesses, the beach areas, are privately owned, which in

effect alienates a large part of the public who would like to

use them.

There's one other thing that we noticed — that's the Howe

Sound islands having large log booms in just about all their

bays. It's very unfortunate to observe this condition; they're

being used largely for log storage and booming grounds, and

recreation, of course, is cut out to a large degree from this

part of the island.

We feel also that transportation is the key to the future of

the islands. It was felt that water transportation should

provide the emphasis on pedestrian water transit rather than

transit for vehicles — ferries to carry pedestrians instead of

ferries to carry cars. The planning of all the islands should

thus be planned accordingly.

We felt that regional districts are not being geared to

carry out all their responsibilities for the long term in the

future. They're quite well adapted to carry on the usual

functions such as hospitals, local improvements, special

projects, et cetera....

MR. SPEAKER: Excuse me, Hon. Member, there is a point of

order.

MR. CHABOT: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. You've made the

observation on a couple of occasions in recent days that

Members are not allowed, during the throne debate, to read

their speech. I was wondering if you could tell me, Mr.

Speaker, from what document the Member for Fort George (Mr.

Nunweiler) is reading?

MR. SPEAKER: I think that you are entitled to look at notes,

but the practice of reading it....

MR. NUNWEILER: Yes. I have notes, Mr. Speaker, if I may use

them.

MR. SPEAKER: I certainly don't object to difficult extracts

that one may wish to quote, being read. But, as a general

practice, although we reserve a certain tenderness towards

maiden speeches, we are ceasing to become maidens around here,

and I think it's time that everybody began to speak in

accordance with how they feel rather than what they see on the

printed page. The reason I mention it is that there is a maiden

speech coming next, which may be read, and undoubtedly we will

all reserve respect for the maiden speech, but I do hope that

Members will get away from the practice of too copious

notes.

Interjection.

MR. SPEAKER: Yes, entirely.

MR. NUNWEILER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I want to

point out that the future emphasis is such that it should be

placed on recreation, on moderate residential use, and

preservation of rural atmosphere. The committee felt that there

needs to be another vehicle to be able to achieve these things.

For this reason, it is recommended that an island commission or

an island trust be set up. In all sincerity, I do hope that the

House will give this very serious consideration.

Further, in dealing with municipal affairs, Mr.

[ Page 217 ]

Speaker, I just wanted to draw attention to a

convention of

the UBCM that we had a week or two ago in Prince George. It was

a very interesting event. There were many interesting

resolutions presented. It certainly became quite apparent that

there is a variety of many municipal needs throughout the

province of British Columbia. Many have demonstrated a real

need and interest for municipalities developing building sites

and getting into the housing and mobile home activity.

Mobile homes have become a lifestyle for many people for

various reasons, and accordingly, it has created a tremendous

demand in many regions for mobile home sites or subdivisions,

if you like. Many throughout the Interior and northern areas

are aware of this need, and large proportions accordingly are

encouraged to recognize and do their part to cope with it. It

should be noted that next year all mobile homes will be taxable

just like a conventional home, and certainly will qualify for

the homeowner grant. The municipalities will generate their

revenue from mobile homes the way they always have done from

conventional homes in the past. This now will make it much

easier, I'm sure, for municipalities to in effect develop

mobile home subdivisions, if they are so inclined. I think

there is a great need for this, and I would hope that

municipalities will get into this activity if they find that

the need exists in their area. They can look at this as a

profitable venture, I'm sure, and could look at other areas for

additional revenue as well.

The city of Prince George has been a model for developing

Crown land, developing subdivisions, and consequently, because

they don't develop building sites for profit, they develop them

for need. It's one reason why building sites in the Prince

George area have been kept down to a level that is not

comparable with the lower mainland. This is being done for

conventional housing, and certainly it can be done for mobile

housing as well.

The UBCM has agreed that the government should also take

another look at the Public Officials' Disclosure Act . I think

that most agree that there is a great need for new provincial

legislation on this, to prevent civic and elected officials

from having conflicts of interest, or interesting conflicts. I

think it is important that local government standards remain

high. If the standards drop in one community, it does damage to

them all.

A number of reports have erupted throughout the province

where elected officials, or appointed officials, or consultants

have vested holdings, interests in certain parts of the

community; or you may find individuals who have partners who

happen to be on the city council, or who happen to be involved

in the city administration, who have been using confidential

information, such as sitting in on in-camera meetings, and

acquiring information for possible financial gains.

MR. D.M. PHILLIPS (South Peace River): Name names.

MR. NUNWEILER: We know of a certain activity going on in

Surrey right now, and there is indeed a very great need for

disclosure legislation. I would strongly urge that not too many

restrictions be placed on this type of legislation; when it

comes, we don't want to see it wind up being ineffective.

Disclosure information is a very simple question, I feel. If

you don't want to disclose what you hold, then don't run for

public office. In regard to local government elections, I would

also suggest that corporation agents be restricted to the

concept of one man, one vote. I can remember one person having

14 votes in one civic election because of multiple

directorships in local corporations.

Getting back to the growth of northern regions, my friendly

neighbour, the Hon. Member for Cariboo (Mr. Fraser), apparently

is opposed to northern British Columbia in some respects. I

notice he complains about the railway plan in the north; he

doesn't want this. Apparently, he's against orderly

development. He says it costs too much money to serve the

industrial activity in the area. He complained about sawmill

chips moving 600 miles from his area and from my area to Prince

Rupert.

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): You should be

complaining about it too.

MR. NUNWEILER: I would suggest that he check his facts. No

chips have ever been directed from that area to Prince Rupert.

In fact, one would have to go all the way to Houston to find

any chips moving west. Even then, there's only 50 per cent that

moves west from Houston; the other 50 per cent moves east to

Prince George. I would point out that there is a commitment

between Ottawa and this government to construct a rail link

between Ashcroft and Clinton, and this is also going to be of

great benefit to the Cariboo.

Interjection.

MR. NUNWEILER: The Lillooet-Clinton area over to Ashcroft

to tie in the British Columbia Railway with the trans-Canada

railways, and this is going to be a big factor in assisting the

transportation of chips from southern British Columbia, where

there is a surplus, and be of major help to the Cariboo. I

think this government has taken a very progressive step in that

direction.

Some parts of the province are starving for wood chips, while

others are burning wood chips or maybe even exporting them. The

northern areas are all short of sawmill chips to feed all those

pulp mills. Some of the southern areas seem to have a surplus,

and there's got to be a reason for that, I'm sure. The timber

[ Page 218 ]

there, but the sawmill activity is not.

Merely because of the planning and coordination that just

wasn't done a few years back when it should have been,

sufficient sawmills were not developed, and pulp mills were

thus encouraged to chip round logs instead of waste from

sawmills. A sawmill programme to produce enough chips to feed

the sawmills was never set up. Stumpage was also reduced to

make it easier for pulp mills to chip good logs.

Chipping good logs gives the poorest and lowest return of

the resource, so real value of the resource has been diminished

as a result. When you talk to the forest industry...they've

explained on occasion to me that the best value out of a log is

for plywood. A log that earns $100 worth of plywood will earn

about $80 worth of lumber and will only, if you chip that log

into chips for pulp, earn $40 for pulp.

But if you can make lumber out of that log and get your $80

out of it and if you can chip the waste, which could be about a

quarter of it, it would give you another $10 or $15 for chips

out of that log. You would then almost get $100 out of that log

for a combined use of lumber and for pulp. But if you just chip

that log for pulp, all you'll ever get out of it is $40.

So that's good evidence for me to realize that you must get

the best value out of a log. If the companies can't get the

best value out of a log, they're certainly not going to be able

to pay the stumpage. So I think resource planning is a key to

getting the value out of the timber resource.

MR. CHABOT: Are you suggesting that Can-Cel should be

closed?

MR. NUNWEILER: Well, I would suggest that the old government

kept Columbia Cellulose alive with giveaway stumpage rates.

That's why Columbia Cellulose couldn't make money; they never

got the earnings out of the resource. They were getting

giveaway stumpage rates. They failed to get the company to

provide sawmills to generate enough chips to get the real value

out of the resource.

When the railway gets completed, you'll find access to the

timber and sawmill potential to get the real value out of the

resource for the people of British Columbia.

What the Hon. Member, I feel, should have been complaining

about is the former Social Credit practice of shipping chips

from the Kootenays to the United States.

Interjections.

MR. NUNWEILER: There's a surplus of chips in that region,

which again means poor planning and poor coordination in the

past. The Hon. Minister is trying to rectify that.

MR. CHABOT: Nonsense.

MR. NUNWEILER: I'm sure that the new rail link from Ashcroft

to Lillooet can move some of these chips into the Interior,

where they're starving for the product.

Interjections.

MR. NUNWEILER: Of course, this link is going to serve the

Cariboo better than anything else that's happened there, as far

as your lumber, your pulp and your mineral activity are

concerned. You need to get the product out to the eastern

markets rather than funnelling it through to the Vancouver

terminals and losing about three or four days in

transportation.

Another thing that I wanted to touch on, Mr. Speaker, is

energy. People in northern regions are, generally speaking,

prepared to accept some inconvenience and expense due to their

geographical location. Living in the northern region, there are

many of these. There are higher freight rates because of

climatic conditions, higher fuel consumption because of

climatic conditions, and the like.

In accepting the disadvantages, we often feel that we should

be able to take advantage of any good things we may happen to

have, to enjoy the occasional advantage of living in that area.

We should experience some of those benefits. We feel that if we

accept the minuses, we'd like to accept a few pluses as

well.

In the case of natural gas, our consumers are paying a price

that seems to ignore the shorter distance and lower

transportation cost on the resource. This energy resource comes

from our northern regions — Fort Nelson, Fort St. John and

Monkman Pass — and should be of some advantage and should

reflect that advantage in the rates for fuel used during our

long winters.

It's also regrettable to note that industry in our region is

actually paying more for the natural gas which is on our

doorstep then their counterparts in the United States are for

the same gas.

Natural gas is a very essential fuel to make plywood

production viable in that region. There's a strong feeling

among many in our communities that the resource belongs to the

people. Many even feel it belongs to the people close to the

source of that resource. But certainly there should be no

mistake: no subsidy to the users in the United States should be

prolonged — which I see is now happening.

According to the energy report, users in the U.S. pay almost

half of what the U.S. energy market value is; they're paying 32

cents at the border, 26 cents below the market energy

price.

These feelings are reflected by the larger and the smaller

communities in our region and also by the smaller industries

and the larger industries in our

[ Page 219 ]

region. To illustrate this, I would like to draw

attention

to several briefs that were presented to the hearings in Prince

George early last month, one of them from Northwood Pulp and

Timber Ltd. I'll make some quotes here:

Northwood Pulp and Timber Ltd. owns and operates a

kraft

mill and a sawmill near the City of Prince George and consumes

significant volumes of natural gas, which is supplied through

the system owned and operated by Inland Natural Gas — which, in

turn, is supplied from the nearby pipeline of West Coast

Transmission.

Northwood proposes only to make submissions in respect

general policy and does not propose to examine witnesses.

Northwood agrees and urges the desirability of establishing a

minimum reserve of British Columbia natural gas requirements as

a prerequisite to any increase in the amount of B.C. natural

gas exported from the province, and suggests that the amount of

such reserves be determined from time to time on the basis of

estimated B.C. requirements.

Such estimates could be undertaken by the government

of B.C.

from time to time for such a purpose. Subsequent sales to

export customers should be virtually eliminated and the

availability of natural gas to consumers in B.C., except on a

firm basis, should be considered.

Northwood agrees and supports the desirability of a

commission in cooperation with the National Energy Board in

regulating the wholesale price of natural gas within Canada so

that Canadian natural gas is available to consumers in Canada

at prices significantly lower than the price for export natural

gas, particularly to regulate the price of what West Coast

sells to Inland within the province.

Northwood supports and urges the commission to confirm

and

declare as a matter of policy that the assurance of the supply

of natural gas to consumers within B.C. will take priority over

any applications for export volumes, and in particular will

take priority over the proposed agreements between West Coast

and El Paso. This conclusion is supported by reference to past

export sales, which were the prime cause of the incongruous

result of Northwood and, presumably, other B.C. consumers

having to pay more for natural gas than others more distant in

eastern Canada and in the United States.

Northwood urges the commission to accept and declare

as a matter of policy that the price to consumers of natural gas should

take into account the geographical location of the consumer and, in

particular, the price of natural gases in the province. To consumers

located in northern parts of the province it should also reflect the

geographical proximity of the consumer to the source of B.C. natural

gas.

MR. PHILLIPS: Who wrote that speech?

MR. NUNWEILER: I'm quoting from the hearings. It's not a

speech; it's a quote, I might add.

The principle of one general area rate for industry in

all

British Columbia should be disapproved. The distance of the

consumer from the gas field should be an influencing factor

determining the price and should be to the benefit of those

consumers located near to the source.

I'll also mention one other brief that's made by a smaller

industry, a plywood plant, which depends heavily on natural gas

for their operation. I quote from North Central Plywood Ltd. of

Prince George:

Our company is based in Prince George and is owned 100

per cent by local residents. The company was started about four years

ago. One of the determining factors in our decision to locate in Prince

George was the availability of a good source of economical natural gas.

We now find that the rates and supplies available to us as a

Canadian-owned industry are greatly affected by the exports to the U.S.

markets. We strongly feel that the Canadian consumer's needs should be

fully satisfied before exports are allowed, and that the Canadian

consumer should also be given preference within the pricing structure.

The area north-central British Columbia has far

greater fluctuations in temperature which require great differences in

consumption. The possibility of a guaranteed volume of delivery is far

more difficult in this area than in the U.S. We feel we are penalized

by the guaranteed volume per diem rate as we require large volumes in

the winter months and considerably smaller volumes in the summer

months. We find that if we calculate the requirements for the summer

volume we are forced to reduce operations in the winter, and if we

calculate the winter volume we pay for unused gas all summer. It is our

feeling that gas should be supplied as required to manufacturers as a

local resource, and only excesses should be exported. Also we should

not be compelled to have an average daily volume based on a year's

usage as this is impractical with the winter conditions that prevail in

this area.

The present rate structure also includes a requirement

for an alternate standby fuel supply which is extremely expensive. If

alternate standby fuel requirements are essential to the natural gas

distribution companies, then we feel that the standby arrangements

should be made by the U.S. customers rather than by the Canadian

customers.

[ Page 220 ]

This will allow the Canadian customer to have natural

gas fuel available when required and not befaced with either curtailed

production or having to have an expensive alternate system installed to

use other fuel.

If we are forced to curtail production under such a

system, such curtailment comes at a time when the country's

unemployment is already high and when we should be taking every

possible step to see that all possible jobs are available during the

winter months. Providing the necessary natural gas at an economical

price is one method of seeing that we do not add to the unemployment

rolls.

I should like to make a few quotes from the City of Prince

George's brief. It points out:

The stubline from the Westcoast Transmission Company

to Prince George was 4.5 miles, but our rates were structured to help

subsidize the 400-mi. line from Savona to Nelson. The present rates

differ somewhat, and we haven't had time to compile them. The old rates

are noted to prove that the natural gas industry and the different

decisions of the various provincial and federal commissions and

governments have combined to discriminate against northern communities.

Most of those closest to the resource pay the most, which is in direct

contradiction to most other goods and services. A substantial amount of

the wealth of this province is in the north, produced by a relatively

few people. The majority of the consumers are in the south, beyond our

boundaries, and thus use their wealth and influence to ensure that they

will receive the most preferential treatment possible. This must be

continued. People must be encouraged to live in the north, not

discouraged.

On the Trans-Canada Pipeline system the costs

gradually become more expensive as it flows to the eastern markets.

This is why we believe the wholesale price at Prince George should be

much cheaper than at Bellingham. Likewise, the theory produced by the

oil industry that those who use the most natural gas should pay the

least is not totally defensible. The larger users are the very ones

which make it necessary to go further afield at an earlier date and at

a higher cost to discover more gas. Since the northern residential

users consume more natural gas per capita to keep warm, then they are

again paying more money into the provincial treasury to be spent

elsewhere in the province. Likewise, industrial gas prices are

increased, and this could discourage industry to locate in British

Columbia in the northern areas, particularly by reducing the

opportunity for new jobs.

However, there certainly should be a fair return to

the province on natural gas which is exported to another country.

Exports of gas should be subjected to higher field prices, higher

transportation costs and higher royalties, not only as good business

practice but in the interests of conservation.

The next item is from Fort Nelson. The community of Fort

Nelson, through the municipal council, also presented a

brief:

Fort Nelson, being in the extreme northeast portion of

the province, is the centre of natural gas production in British

Columbia. Accordingly, that industry has a relevance and significance

to our community which is far greater than that which the industry has

to other municipalities.

The gas literally lies beneath Fort Nelson. It is

pumped from the countryside around Fort Nelson, and transported to

Westcoast at Fort Nelson where it is cleaned and processed and then

transmitted to the southern portion of the province.

There is an extremely strong feeling in the community

that the resource belongs to the people of British Columbia but that it

especially belongs to the people of the north. Obviously this resource

and its production affects everyone in the northeast portion of the

province to a much greater extent than it affects those in other areas

of the province, and not only in terms of employment. Our climate is

not a hospitable one; we experience winters of long duration and

extreme severity. The furnaces which heat our houses are powered by

natural gas, and they seldom cease running. In addition, our hydro is

provided by generators which are operated on natural gas.

In these circumstances described it is a matter of

great concern to our village that we in Fort Nelson have the highest

gas rate structure in British Columbia. If for any reason wellhead

price increases, will the community of Fort Nelson be obliged to pay

even more for its gas? Specifically, the council wishes to be reassured

that a royalty increase will not be passed on automatically to the

consumer. Likewise, council wishes to ensure that a gas shortage in the

U.S., whether imagined or whether real, is not used as a justification

for higher prices being charged to the consumers of British Columbia

and specifically Fort Nelson. Council feels that under no circumstances

should the cost of British Columbia resources increase to the consumers

of British Columbia because of the conditions existing in a foreign

country.

Mr. Speaker, I think the Energy Commission should be

complimented for their work so far, determining that our gas is

being exported to the U.S. at a price of about half of its

value on the U.S. energy market. Consequently the people of

this province are losing $100 million a year.

Mr. Speaker, also I would like to point out that this

government should be congratulated for creating the Energy Act

last spring, setting up the commission to try and come to grips

with the issues on energy in

[ Page 221 ]

British Columbia, to protect consumers of B.C.,

whether

they're domestic or whether they're industrial, and also to

protect us from the energy thirst of the United States and from

the escalating energy prices in the U.S. market.

Also, I would like to urge the commission to recognize the

severe conditions, the highest consumption per capita in the

northern regions and the shorter transportation involved, when

making their final recommendations to this government and

ultimately to the federal government through the National

Energy Board.

Furthermore, Westcoast has indicated its intent to reduce

its supplies by 10 per cent this winter, and I also urge that

steps be taken to ensure that this supply in the Province of

B.C. is maintained so that our furnaces and our industries are

not affected, but if such must be done the cut of supplies must

be confined to U.S. Industries only and not to the people of

British Columbia.

MR. W.R. BENNETT (South Okanagan): Mr. Speaker, it is an

honour and a privilege to be seated among such illustrious

company to deliberate the future of British Columbia. As the

newly-elected Member for South Okanagan, I bring you all

greetings from my constituency and especially to those MLAs and

cabinet Ministers who found time to vacation there or found

business there during the month of August. Some of them were so

eager to get to our sunny skies and sandy beaches they even had

to use a government jet. (Laughter.) However, I might point out

that a healthy Okanagan tourist industry is based on continuity,

and so I would welcome you all back next year. While I can

guarantee that the sandy beaches and sunny skies will be there,

I can't guarantee the same degree of heat. (Laughter.)

Having just come through an election, I've had the privilege

of continuous contact with the citizens of South Okanagan who,

I believe, represent all of the people of British Columbia.

They've expressed concern over a number of things of both a

constituency and a provincial nature, and I would like to pass

these concerns along to the Members of this assembly.

The first concern of the citizens of South Okanagan is the

implementation of the Okanagan Basin Study, of which the final

draft of task force 7 is now available and the completed

version will be available by March of 1974. This study has

taken almost five years to complete and cost almost $2 million.

It's interesting to note what it set out to do:

"The Canada-British Columbia Okanagan Basin Agreement

was

signed on the 29th of October, 1969. The objective of this

agreement was the creation of the framework of a comprehensive

plan for the development and management of water resources for

the social betterment and economic growth of the Okanagan

Basin."

This agreement, Mr. Speaker, recognized the major

significance of the Okanagan Basin in British Columbia and in

Canada. The terms of reference included: water demand and

supply studies, including quality and quantity; public

involvement; water re-use and waste treatment; ecological and

aesthetic studies; economic studies; and studies of a financial

and organizational structure, And we might come to the recommendations

of this committee

because I think they're most appropriate at this time:

We recommend that, upon conclusion of the

Canada–British Columbia Okanagan Basin Agreement, an Okanagan Basin

authority be established by the provincial and federal governments with

the responsibility for management of water and other resources in this

valley; that such an authority be given real powers in the field of

water management and the responsibilities arising therefrom — these

responsibilities to include implementation of the recommendations of

the Okanagan Water Basin Study and the recommendations of the public

involvement programme.

Further in that report, Mr. Speaker, they established a

timetable of necessary things to be done if the Okanagan

environment is to be preserved and protected — if we can

achieve this. This report is a blueprint for the preservation

and the orderly development of the whole Okanagan region and it

is a credit to the cooperative planning of the federal and

provincial governments of 1969, I would urge that the Hon. Minister of

Municipal Affairs

(Hon. Mr. Lorimer) initiate immediate discussion with the

federal, municipal and regional governments to create this

authority as soon as possible, with the necessary financial

contributions of both a capital and an operative nature spelled

out along with the necessary powers and direction to bring the

recommendations of this study into being.

Secondly, Mr.

Speaker, the people of South Okanagan have told me they are

concerned about congested and unsafe traffic movement within

and through the Okanagan. Increased local movement, plus the

peaks of tourist and commercial traffic through the Okanagan, is

now at an unsafe level and is getting worse daily.

Use of Highways department surveys taken in the past would

suggest that the solution is twofold. The Highways department

should immediately continue the four-laning of Highway 97

throughout the whole of the Okanagan, not because we want a

freeway or a super-freeway, but because those of us who live

there recognize the multiple use of this road and, recognizing

the agricultural nature of the valley — and I wish to preserve

it — we know that farm-related vehicles use Highway 97

continuously. These vehicles move slowly and require that extra

lane for both

[ Page 222 ]

safety and so as to not impede the regular flow of

traffic.

With part of this four-laning, specific communities in the

Okanagan where the highway runs through their built-up areas — and I

would use the community of Westbank as just one example — should have

the road rerouted around them for safety and for

even traffic flow. Simultaneously with this four-laning, Mr.

Speaker, I would recommend to the Hon. Minister of Highways

(Hon. Mr. Lea) that his department should continue and make use

of such preliminary surveys as are available to construct a

complete Okanagan bypass. This road could link to the

Hope-Princeton and Fraser Canyon Highways to the lower

mainland, and also to the proposed new Coquihalla route,

connecting north to the Cariboo Highway and east to the Rogers

Pass and Yellowhead routes.

The people of South Okanagan are also concerned with the

economics of agriculture. I'm pleased to see the introduction

of the Farm Income Assurance Act , but I am concerned about the

specific details, as farm stabilization was a major part of my

election programme.

My constituents, Mr. Speaker, also showed a concern about

housing, a problem not just unique to the Okanagan but to all

of British Columbia. I would urge, through you, Mr. Speaker, to

the Hon. Minister for housing (Hon. Mr. Nicolson) to look

beyond just the subsidization for leasing of building lots but

to also consider subsidization for the sale of lots.

I believe that most British Columbians prefer ownership to

leasing and that ownership of land on which a house is built is

one of the few hedges against inflation available to the

average citizen. I would also urge the Minister that, beyond

continuing the homebuyers' grants and second mortgages provided

by previous governments, he should further look to lowering the

price of housing at source.

I've noticed that this government appears to announce many

new federal-provincial plans in advance of actual discussion

with the federal government, as witnessed yesterday by the Hon.

Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Stupich) hoping that the

federal government will contribute to the new Farm Income

Assurance Act when he tells them about it sometime later this

week; or the apparent lack of discussion with the federal

Minister over the new Mincome benefits so hurriedly announced

during the South Okanagan by-election. So I would urge the Hon.

Minister for housing to initiate another federal-provincial

action to lower home prices by the simultaneous removal of the

federal 12 per cent sales tax on building materials for housing

only, and the provincial removal of the 5 per cent sales tax on

all building materials for housing only. This, Minister, would

greatly reduce the price of new housing and, by advocating

removal of these tax burdens, would being the price of new

housing to the reach of many more people.

I found great concern, Mr. Speaker, about the creation of

new jobs, and, while I commend the Hon. Minister of Industrial

Development (Hon. Mr. Lauk) in setting up the British Columbia

Development Corporation, I disagree with investment of public

money in common shares of private corporations.

Having the government as a partner will stifle the

initiative of these industries. On one hand, they may feel a

false sense of security. Surely the government would never let

them go broke now that it is a partner — and it's hardly an

atmosphere conducive to those ingredients of drive and

initiative needed to launch a new enterprise. Or they may feel,

why succeed? If it gets too good, this government will only

want to take their interest away anyhow. How can the government

dispassionately administer the laws over companies they have an

interest in and bring them to public accountability? It's not

very likely.

A better way would be a B.C. development fund for secured

loans at subsidized low-interest rates during the early

formative years, when most new endeavours require help, with

incentives to pay the money back quickly. I would point out now

that we wouldn't want to see an incentive programme similar to

the federal incentives Act that forced industry into the

Okanagan without proper safeguards for the Canadian taxpayer so

that his money would be protected.

We have the unusual circumstances of Canadian Fibreform

receiving a federal grant, selling out to an American company,

burning down, and it was beyond the accountability of the

federal government to recover that grant. The company has not

rebuilt in the Okanagan, and they're seeking a further federal

grant to relocate somewhere else in this country.

I don't advocate that; I advocate, as I say, subsidized

interest rates. It is our party's policy that such a fund would

bear interest at 1 per cent the first year, 2 per cent the

second, increasing until such a time as the industry can pay it

off either with profits or conventional financing.

There are many other areas of concern, such as health

services, social legislation, possible integration of the

public and private educational systems, the heavy

administrative cost of the multitude of social benefits, and a

general feeling that the federal and provincial governments

should get together with a re-alignment of their financial

jurisdictions to bring about the implementation of the

guaranteed annual income, a programme long advocated by our

party. I urge this government to work towards this end.

As a new Member, I recognize that in a healthy democratic

system it is not just the right but the duty of the opposition

to criticize those policies of the government which deserve

criticism. I intend to exercise very fully this right and duty,

but I hope to do so always in a constructive manner and in a

way that offers good alternatives to bad policies. Certainly

[ Page 223 ]

there can be some areas of agreement among us,

because I am

sure that every Member of this assembly genuinely seeks, as an

individual, to serve the best interests of the people of

British Columbia.

Often there is a difference between individual goals and

party philosophy. Any party which claims an exclusive franchise

to righteousness is deluding its own members and performing a

disservice to the people of British Columbia. Any party which

claims to represent one segment of society to the exclusion of

others does a disservice to all segments of society. Any party

which consciously singles out one so-called economic class for

threats and ridicule and harassment will surely repeat that

same ridicule 10 times over.

I have said that no one party has a mandate on

righteousness. In that support I think it is fair to say that

both the government and official opposition share a social

conscience and the desire for social reform. We differ only in

our viewpoints and the means of accomplishing this goal and

achieving it.

My party believes, quite obviously, that the correct course is

through a vigorous, disciplined and healthy economy based on

the principle of private initiative. We believe that such an

economy, responsive as it must be to the public interest and

rooted firmly in the atmosphere of confidence of government and

the private sector, offers the one best hope of financing the

continuing process of social reform.

My party does not believe that the proper role of government

is more government. We believe the proper role of government is

that of an arbitrator, a guardian of the public interest. We

believe that a government should always be flexible, always

willing to innovate and never tied to a political doctrine that

sees only the blacks and whites but never the greys of life. We

believe in the freedom of the individual to build his own life

in his own responsible way. We believe it is the most precious

freedom that we have, and one well worth fighting for.

We believe that in this time of need we are our brother's

keeper, but we believe that neither in his time of need nor in

his time of plenty are we ever our brother's master.

Further, Mr. Speaker, I hope to offer to this House as its

newest Member some contribution in support of what might be

called cooperative opposition — to support those measures

which I believe to be good legislation and to offer amendments

to those measures which I cannot. In doing so, I hope to serve

properly the best interests of this assembly, my constituents

in South Okanagan and all the people of British Columbia.

Thank you.

MR. D.T. KELLY (Omineca): Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to

be here today to represent the constituents of Omineca, and I

bring you greetings from them. I bring all Members of this

House greetings from my constituents.

I would like at this time to congratulate the previous

speaker, the new Member for South Okanagan, on his very fine

speech. I welcome him to this House.

I was very pleased, Mr. Speaker, with the

Lieutenant-Governor's Speech from the Throne.

MR. G.B. GARDOM (Vancouver–Point Grey): Why? (Laughter.)

MR. KELLY: Do you know that two of my major towns, one

Vanderhoof and the other one Fort St. James, have excellent

economies? Building permits in each of those towns are in the

several hundreds of thousands of dollars. For example, in Fort

St. James 40 new homes are being built. When you look at the

size of these communities, those are considerable numbers. The

demand for housing throughout the riding is ever-demanding in

terms of the number of units needed.

We, of course, have been informed by the government of the

plan in the northwest — this includes my riding — and of the

great expansion that is going to take place in the forest

industry. I know that many of my constituents, even some of

those that were a little dubious before, are very pleased with

what is going on. I expect that when the plan does get

functional we can expect great things for that part of the

country.

I would also like to read a little quote here, Mr. Speaker,

from the Vancouver Sun of Thursday, September 13, referring to

the amount of work that is available in the north. It's

datelined Prince George, by Canadian Press, and it says:

It has been a particularly good year for construction

workers in northern British Columbia, and the

region's construction workers will probably enjoy their busiest

winter ever.

That's really something when you consider that it

is traditional in the north to have a lot of unemployment

during the winter season.

Leaders of building trade unions in northern B.C. say

that most unions have all members at work and some

are even short of men to fill jobs in Prince George and other

regional centres.

Bud Owens of the International Union of Operating Engineers

said, "Next year...looks to be just as good for us."

Bill Flowers of the Painters Union said: "Everybody is

working" and "it looks like we'll be keeping everyone at work

through the winter, something unusual for painters."

Again, Mr. Scholtz of the International Brotherhood of

Carpenters and Joiners agreed that there will be more work this winter

for construction trades than in any recent year.

So, Mr. Speaker, just to answer those who would bring doom

and gloom to our government's policies, I think these words

have done more than anything to

[ Page 224 ]

obliterate any attempts to belittle our government

attempts.

I will admit, though, that inflation has affected us, as it

has affected everybody. Because it is in the north, it hurts us

even a little more. It costs more to get these commodities into

the north, and the wages, basically, for the work force there are

not as good as they are in the more southern regions of the

province, at least in the main centres. Also, with regard to

purchasing power, there is very little competition in the

northern centres because there is usually only one store of

that particular type, so when you go to buy a commodity there

is only one. It might be poor quality or it might be an

excellent-quality article, but you have to pay, in most cases,

top prices for these commodities.

The wages that the earner gets are burned up. By the end of

his pay period he has no money left because it requires all you

make and sometimes even a little more to live from payday to

payday.

The oil industry have been increasing their costs to us by

several cents per gallon in the gasoline trade and also in the

fuel oil trade. Last spring I went home from the Legislature

here to find that propane had been increased by over 10 percent per

gallon. You know, Mr. Speaker, they don't even tell

you of the increase by letter or by the news. All you find is

an increase on your bill after they have filled your tank

up.

Interjection.

MR. KELLY: I don't believe he did. These people are not

unionized, and they negotiate a contract once every five years.

They get a little increase here and there, but they are very

poorly paid in that industry up in that region.

I have made representations to the energy board about this,

but of course, at the time they were unable to proceed with

it. I demand that they have hearings to see if the amounts by

which they increased it were justified. Companies have been

using the fuel shortage thing as a scare tactic and are able to

increase their prices by intimidating people: "You pay or

else." Well, if you have a propane tank in, it's pretty hard to

say, "Well, I'll convert to oil," especially in the

north. It is just literally impossible.

Many of the food costs have spiralled, and because we live a long

way from the main distribution centre, they use the excuse that freight

is the reason it costs so much. There are commodities — for example,

cherries and tomatoes — which, if you go to your local supermarket, are

20 cents and 30 cents per pound more than in the large store in the

main centres. Yet we know that the actual charge for trading this

commodity into that area is only 2 cents per pound, or even less in

some instances. How they are able to charge these extra amounts, Mr.

Speaker, I do not understand.

Clothes. Of course, anybody who comes from the north would

understand that clothing is an important commodity up there

because of the severe temperatures. If you want to buy good

clothing you must expect to pay a high price. For example, the

northern worker must, in the course of one winter, wear out

three or four pairs of heavy mitts. He'll buy extra warm boots,

pants, underwear and headwear, and this in itself, compared to

his southern counterpart, is many, many dollars more than what

the gentleman from the south would wear. I find that these

extra costs are very taxing on this northern citizen.

I believe the government should help these people, the

people who are responsible for the large contributions that are

made to the profits of our province, which help run it. We

should in fact try to help them in terms of their income tax.

We should have a rebate or some percentage that could be

allowed for our northern cost of living. Certainly this would

be a very nice thing as far as my constituents are concerned,

and, I am certain, all northern members in this House would

want that for their constituents.

I believe, also, that there should be an equalization of

gasoline prices throughout the province to ease the burden for

all these people in the north in trying to meet their monthly

payments. Gasoline is of major importance up there because it's

absolutely necessary for people to get back and forth to work.

There is no bus system up there to take people from work and to

their homes, or even to the major centres. If I were to go to

Prince George I would either have to leave at twenty minutes to

five in the morning, or at I o'clock in the morning. It is very

unreasonable. You can't expect a person to go there to shop.

It's 105 miles from my home to Prince George, so when you are

referring to these long distances, Mr. Speaker, it is a very

costly item to our citizens.

I would like the government to plan and build trailer parks

for our citizens in the north. It just seems to be that nobody

is doing it, that it is almost a nasty thing to talk about. I

think that there are many lovely locations in the north where

people should be able to live and work, and even retire if

necessary, in the northern part of our province. At least

somebody should have the initiative to go in and create these

parks and then charge, of course, what would be reasonable

rates to live in them. The ones that are there are usually very

inadequate with poor sewer systems for water. In many instances

they are in areas that were poor locations in the first

place.

[ Page 225 ]

[Mr. Dent in the chair]

MR. KELLY: I would like to speak about some of my

constituents, and when I refer to "some of them," I refer mostly to the

native Indians. These Indians have been affected indirectly, and in

some cases directly, by our present logging methods.

They have also been affected by the building of dams.

Although there haven't been any dams built in my area recently,

it was only three or four years ago that a dam was built in the

northern area of the province, and in these areas were many

traplines. The traplines belonged to the Indians, or so they

thought. But, when a logging company comes in and denudes the

forest of all the timber, or if the dam is closed off and the

water rises and drowns his trapline, the Indian gets not one

cent for his trapline which was drowned or damaged by

logging.

I can't understand that, Mr. Speaker, because in fact these

people were making a part of their living at this trade of

trapping, something that they have done for hundreds of years.

And then all of a sudden there has been this damage. In many

cases the damage is related to burning of cabins, the pushing

down of cabins for making way for powerlines, and certainly,

when you remove the habitat for the fur-bearing animals, then

of course that also is a form of damage.

In no way have the native Indians of this province ever been

rebated, or given any allowance, for the damage to these

traplines. I would like to see our government recognize this

situation, to recognize for the first time and to continue to

recognize the damage that has been done to the traplines of our

native Indians, so that they can continue to try to make a

living on their own, with some respect; to make a decent

living, and a normal one.

AN HON. MEMBER: What about leg-hold traps?

MR. KELLY: Just a minute, Mr. Hon. Member, I will tell you

about that. I had a letter delivered to me just a couple of

days ago, Mr. Speaker. This letter was by the Indian

information centre in Burns Lake, and it referred to an Indian

who lives 115 miles north of Fort St. James, on the Wolverine

Lake. The families of these Indians have lived on this lake

since before Confederation.

One day this summer they had been away to town. When they returned

home, their cabin and smokehouse had burned down. I believe the

Department of Mines had put in some camp tables and they were clearing

the ground off where this cabin was to make a little campground for

trailers. I find this absolutely sickening that our citizens — our

first citizens — who have and their families before them lived in an

area long before white man was even here — come home and find that

their house has been burned down because it is in the road. I find this

an absolute disgrace. And this is going on in many spots through this

province. The forest branch is going through the northern regions of

our province and, because they find a cabin that they think might

contribute a little trouble sometime in the future, they will burn that

cabin down. And many of my constituents' cabins have been burned down

in recent years.

MR. GARDOM: Don't you think those people have the right to

seek legal redress?

MR. KELLY: I really believe they do, Mr. Member. I am hoping

that this will be looked into. I am leaning to all departments

to ask their support in delving into this and to finding out

who is responsible and who should be compensated.

Well, I have another problem, Mr. Speaker, and it is a major

problem in my area. I refer to the game situation in Game

Management Area 22. This incorporates some of southern sections

of my riding. There is more than one management area in

Omineca, but the one I refer to specifically is GMA 22.

The farmers on the prairies, Mr. Speaker, speak of wheat and

refer to it in a term daily and hourly; so do the orchardists

in the Okanagan refer to fruit, because that is the main

commodity; it's their very lifeline. Their life blood

practically is the commodity that they grow, and they refer to

it on a daily basis. And so it is in Omineca, especially in GMA

22, which is the area that I reside in. Our wild ungulates are

certainly on the tip of everybody's tongue. We are referring

mainly to the shortage of these animals.

We refer to it because it's a way of life with these

residents in Omineca. They depend on moose and deer for food. I

do have a considerable number of natives in Omineca, and they

also require moose and deer meat for food.

Two years ago we had the heaviest snowfall in living memory.

During that snowfall there was considered to be the greatest

moose and deer die-off — or kill, as you would want to call it — because of this amount of snow in recent years. In fact, I

don't believe that there's ever been recorded a worse year.

Concerned citizens in the riding — and I include

conservation clubs, guides, farmers, native Indians — have been

voicing their objections to the present season as it is on the

antlerless animals in GMA 22. I have made representations to

the Minister of Recreation and Conservation (Hon. Mr. Radford)

in attempting to have this antlerless season closed right

[ Page 226 ]

down. I admit that the hunting season has been

shortened,

but in some cases even just shortening it, Mr. Speaker, isn't

good enough.

The fact is that I'm afraid that the seed stock required to

bring our herds of animals back to reasonable levels will be

taken by these hunters before they have a chance to multiply.

The hunting season, which has been opened for two weeks now in

GMA 22, has every logging road and back road in the country

just smothered with hunters.

The fact is that meat prices are high. You can hardly blame

the individuals for going out to try to get an animal,

something to chew on for this winter, especially in the era of

high meat prices.

I can't understand the Minister in this particular case.

After all, he's being guided — or I think that he is — by

knowledgeable citizens who really know a bad situation when

they see one. Even I.... I consider myself an expert on game;

but no, he'll listen to this single biologist in Prince George.

This man decides the path that the Game Branch will take on

game management in the whole northern

section of British

Columbia.

If we are to continue on this path, I would suggest that

within a short time the only way our children will ever get to

see moose and deer will be in parks and in zoos. They are

definitely on the way out, just the same as the buffalo were in

the last century, and that will be a sad, sad day. I refer to

one other instance in this game management: if the animals are

in short supply, Mr. Speaker, I think that these animals should

be reserved for Canadians — in fact, if not for Canadians, for

British Columbians. I think that this is the way we should be

looking now.

I have one more item that I would like to speak on, Mr.

Speaker. For many months now I have been receiving a

considerable amount of mail concerning the leg-hold trap. I

know that all Members of this House have been receiving that

same kind of mail. This mail has been forwarded by, I think,

some of the most responsible people in this province, and I

commend them for what they've been doing.

I was a trapper at one time, Mr. Speaker. I don't suppose I

was a very good one, because I was a very callous trapper. I was

totally blind to what I was doing. In fact, it took all this

literature from these trapper-organization people who are

trying to conserve animals or who were looking for humane

methods of trapping, and it made me feel very guilty for what I

had done in my younger days.

I had trapped animals, and you know, in many, many cases, I

found the claws or the paw of some small animal that had

finally got away by twisting and turning and had finally

managed to get out of that trap. Either that or it had been

taken by some other animal and the animal was, in fact, lost

anyway for all value.

Would you excuse me just a minute, Mr. Speaker? I didn't really mean

to.... Well, Mr. Speaker, this is a leg-hold

trap. It's a terrible looking thing, Mr. Speaker, but I should

tell the House that this trap is not legal any more. This is a

bear trap, but it's still a leg-hold trap, big enough to catch a

human being or a bear. Finally, even in those days, they

decided that it was so horrible and gruesome that it was to be

banned.

The thing was, you see, they had this huge chain and you

used to chain it or wire it to a big log. After you caught your

bear, the bear would pull it through until it finally got

snagged or hooked up between two trees. What happened was that

many people were mauled and some killed because these animals.... After

all, if you caught a bear in a trap, what were you

going to do? You couldn't kill it with a stick like you do a

small animal. These bears had waylaid and mauled many, many

people. Finally, because of the big teeth that you can see in

the trap, it was barred, or outlawed, and to this day you

cannot use one of these traps.

What I suggest, Mr. Speaker, is that even though this is a

big trap, and that trap was outlawed, the small animal with the

small trap is no different. Just because the small animal isn't

attacking the human being is the only thing that's different

between this trap and that small trap, or the bear and the small

animal. In fact, it's the only excuse we've got to compare the

two traps.

You know, it did take a lot of prodding for myself; my

conscience was bothered. I did see the show, It Took Them So

Long to Die , and it's taken me up until now to really

come forth and make an effort on behalf of these small

animals.

There are many crucial problems facing our government today,

but I don't believe any of them are any greater than the

importance of banning all leg-hold traps in this province.

There has been some work done in other parts of Canada, in the

other provinces; Ontario and Manitoba have educational

programmes going on. But when you look at the situation today

and the effort that has been made to ban the leg-hold trap, I

think that we can look at many, many years before anything will

really ever have been done.

So I'm urging our government to be the leaders in Canada to

do away with and outlaw the leg-hold trap. There have been

several people who have individually and without any financial

help designed humane traps, but for some reason or other it has

never seemed important enough to support these people.

I am sure that with any amount of help whatsoever, and

especially with the facilities that we have available, we could

design and exchange all leg-hold traps in this province with a

humane trap. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. E.O. BARNES (Vancouver Centre): I'm just

[ Page 227 ]

looking over a note I received from somebody. I

can't read

the initials, but they are asking me to deputize somebody to go

and find my fellow colleagues. As you know, I am the government

Whip, and I guess since I'm stuck taking my turn as the final

windup speaker for the day, everybody has taken off — and I

can't do anything about it because I'm stuck here.

Maybe one of the first things I should request from my long

list of concerns is to ask the Speaker to arrange in future for

me to have an extra long mike stem, because I can't be bending

over with my back problem.

Let me also take leave for a moment, Mr. Speaker, and

welcome a couple of friends of mine who are in the gallery.

These are two people I have known for quite some time and who

have been very active in the welfare of the province and

particularly in helping me work in youth programmes — Tom and

Jenny Simons.

I'd also like to congratulate the Member for Omineca (Mr.

Kelly) who, I thought, presented a very visual and effective

presentation in describing the problems that we face in trying

to make some humane decision about catching animals for

commercial purposes for livelihood as compared to other

responsibilities from the humanitarian standpoint. For the

first time I was able to see the impact of this leg-hold trap.

It is really a frightening thing to think we are still using

that. He said you could even catch a human being; I'd hate to

see that — especially one candidate trying to get away from his

constituents. (Laughter.)

I have a long list of things, and I'm not quite sure where to

begin except to say to you that this is the throne debate and,

as such, we are permitted to speak at random about all kinds of

things. I'm going to spend a bit of time on a couple of points,

but I hope to mention quite a few, because the concerns are

immense in my riding of Vancouver Centre.

Just today we have a fairly large contingent of tenants who

are presently visiting the Legislature in the hopes of

presenting their case, and, of course, their case is not

unknown. It is one that those of us in the main metropolitan

areas are very cognizant of, but certainly people all over the

province in the various aspects of housing know some of the

difficulties that tenants face. I don't intend to elaborate on

the details of their many briefs, except to say that we can't

keep dilly-dallying around forever because the cost of living

is reaching such proportions that the desperate nature of

living competitively is beyond the economic capacity to keep

up. I think I would like to see tenants looked upon as citizens

with a right to survive in this society in a non-competitive

way, not having to struggle for shelter the same as we are

apparently having to do for food, the same as we are apparently

having to do for the basic essentials in life.

When I say "competitive," perhaps this doesn't sink in too well with

some people. But just stop and think that if it was not for a whole lot

of fighting by a lot of people we would be paying for hospital beds,

for certain medicines — which we are still doing but we are hoping to

improve in this area — and we would be paying for everything that we

receive, for our very basic existence.

One other item that the Minister, perhaps in the Attorney

General's department, will consider. These are, Mr. Speaker,

some random things that I'm sort of warming up to, but I want

to get them on the record and just make a comment or two about

them. One is in the area of anti-litter.

I've driven in the countryside in this province — and as a

matter of fact, in downtown Vancouver — and I find far too many

abandoned vehicles all over the place, even in people's yards.

I guess because automobiles are privately-owned there is some

notion that there is nothing we can do, that they can abandon

these things any place as long as they are on private property

and not on public thoroughfares.

I think we can take another look at this. If we are going to

give a licence then a licence should be supervised; licences

for vehicles should not be something that is allowed to die. In

other words, it should either be revoked or turned in or

transferred or something, but it shouldn't be allowed to die,

which apparently is often the case now.

There are too many cars that are not being renewed with a

new licence plate and therefore abandoned. I don't think that

should happen. I think the onus should be on the owners of

motor vehicles and any other vehicle requiring a licence to be

dealt with so that we can clean up. What is happening now is

that an automobile that fails to return a profit or is no

longer of use to an owner is simply abandoned because it costs

them too much money to have it hauled away. You find these cars

all over the place, in vacant lots, in backyards, over the

banks on highways.

I would like to see some legislation in this area: if you

have to get tough about it, maybe we should have a tax; if you

don't want to apply for a licence maybe it should be taxed. But

there's no leaving automobiles in an abandoned state.

Now in the case of antiques — something so old that you just

want to keep it — maybe you should apply for a special permit

to keep that without having to pay for it.

But in any event I think we should do something in that

area.

Interjection.

MR. BARNES: Fine, as long as we organize it.

One other beginning thing that we are doing is the

rehabilitation of old housing. The United Housing Foundation in

Vancouver recently purchased a

[ Page 228 ]

number of old, broken-down hotels. One was the

Central Hotel

at which I and the Minister without Portfolio responsible for

housing (Hon. Mr. Nicolson) attended, and I was quite pleased

with the approach. Instead of tearing down — especially with

the cost of construction and so forth — they are beginning to

recognize the advantage in reclaiming and recovering some of

these structures that, by their very natures, have value to the

community in terms of a mosaic. The United Housing Foundation

is one of the organizations that is carrying out this kind of

project.

I should add that they are doing this in the Central Hotel

down on Cordova Street in the Gastown area. The present tenants

are being accommodated elsewhere while the renovations take

place. They don't have the same options as you would under this

strata-title situation where you may ask them if they would

like to purchase, if they can, in several months. What they

have is a built-in rent control. In other words, they are

suggesting that the rents will be somewhere between $45 and $65

per month, and that is a fixed price. This is beginning to have

an effect on the spiralling cost of living, especially for

rental purposes.

So I am pleased to see that approach in this complex problem

of providing housing for our citizens.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair]

Here is one other little feature that perhaps the Minister

of Highways (Hon. Mr. Lea) and maybe the Minister of Recreation

and Conservation (Hon. Mr. Radford) might be interested in. It

is more on the health and welfare side, or the sports and

recreational side. I would like to see us pay more attention to

other modes of transportation. It is incongruous, for us on the

one hand to talk about the need for better transportation, for

more massive movement of people, and trying to eliminate the

private automobile and this kind of thing — rapid transit and

so forth — and not recognize the role that the bicycle has to

play in this whole matter.

As a matter of fact, we could sponsor the use of the

bicycle, go so far as to build in a strip along the highway,

say 18 inches or 2 feet, on all future highways. You'd cut

down the hazard of people getting run over or being threatened

or intimidated by reckless drivers.

I would like to see that. I ride my bike quite a bit, and I

don't like to dodge the cars that much; I like to relax and

feel that there is a place for me on the highway. I think that

this would go a long way to encourage people to keep in good

shape, to keep healthy. I think maybe the Minister of Health

and Welfare (Hon. Mr. Cocke) would agree with that. But we'll

have to include that in the budget — do something about it.

MR. GARDOM: Highways are too old-fashioned.

MR. BARNES: In connection with transportation — as I say,

I've got all these shorts that I'm throwing in — but in

connection with the transportation problem we'd better start

taking a look at this, especially in my riding. I realize that

you can't go holus bolus and do it all over the province — perhaps you

can — but I would like to see us start out with a

free transportation system or a free bus ride system

downtown.

We've done a bit of work in this area with the

park-and-ride, which is a similar kind of idea, and I think it's

very good. We should have more park-and-rides. I think people

are realizing that by the time they go through this carbon

monoxide threat downtown, getting to buildings in this

high-congested area, they would be more than willing to get on

a bus and ride for 20 minutes or so to some area where

park-and-ride is out of the city centre. They can get in their

cars, after having had a chance to relax and not having to

fight that traffic. People need a little time to unwind when

they leave downtown, so I would like to see more of that.

Also I think it would be economically advantageous to make

it easy for people to get downtown without having to take their

car and then find a place to park; in fact it is impossible to

find a place to park. Some of those places charge you a buck an

hour to park. It's ridiculous.

So there is a real point to consider: free transportation,

at least in certain areas. Experiment for a while. Try for six

months in downtown Vancouver and see what happens. Include West

Vancouver, especially coming across the First Narrows bridge.

But we've got to start experimenting and stop talking. We're

doing too much theorizing and not taking enough action in these

areas. Sure, we're into virgin territory, we're doing things

for the first time; but I would like to see us try a few.

Now again this is to the Attorney General (Hon. Mr.

Macdonald). The Liquor Control Board, I think, is going to have

to buckle down on certain of the operators who have licences.

In the Gastown area particularly there are hotels that no

longer bother to throw people out who come in with hard

alcohol, hard liquor. They have a licence to serve beer, but

everything is coming in now. Bottle clubs is what they are.

They've turned them into cabarets. This is happening right

downtown everyday.

There are fights galore, people are carrying knives, they're

smoking opium pipes and having a real good time and this is

happening on the licensed premises in Vancouver centre, right

downtown today. I could take you and show you this is

happening.

The thing is, we're in a position to stop this from

happening. I don't think it's giving us a very good chance to

demonstrate some of the other things that

[ Page 229 ]

we would like to do, in terms of neighbourhood pubs

and

other concepts, if we can't control these places where people

have licences and are abusing them in this way. In my opinion

they're enemies of the people and to me this is a deliberate

attempt to show that we can't do anything but get more rigid.

Instead I think we're going to have to do it in the right areas

because these are not friends of the people, those who are

permitting all kinds of things that go on in these pubs. It is

really deplorable. It's a sickening situation. I wish I had

some film to show, the same as the Member for Omineca (Mr.

Kelly) did with the leg-hold trap.

If you could just see the kinds of things that happen. If

you could see the vanilla extract bottles for instance, in that

riding, where those people are getting high on it. This is

another area I think that the Liquor Control Board should look

into, the handling of substances that contain a portion of

alcohol, because apparently on the vanilla extract certain of

the labels carry with them an alcoholic content that is quite

popular among certain people. You can see boxes of these things

in the alleys and lanes and, when we find that operators are

carrying large stocks of these commodities in their stores, I

think we should be concerned. I understand that the Vancouver

City Police have, at the request of a special welfare committee

in the City of Vancouver, been investigating in this area, but I

couldn't get them to give me any details on their

investigations, for obvious reasons. I'm pleased that they are

concerned, but this isn't a new problem. This is a problem that

has been going on, and it should be taken out of the hands of

political bandying-about and something should be done.

[Mr. Dent in the chair.]

One other area, the field of public housing. For instance

Nicolson Towers or MacLean Park and some of these public

housing projects that we have in the past gleefully announced

that we were participating in, these are some of the concrete

monsters, the bastions or jails, or gaols or whatever you want

to call them, that people are living in. In fact they're worse

than jails because in jails, in their concrete enclosures, you

have guards who look after your best interests and you can tell

on somebody and get some help, but I understand that in

Nicolson Towers some of our senior citizens are being robbed

right at the door. Purse-snatching and all kinds of activities

are going on.

In some of the family housing projects the same kinds of things are

happening. It is not a happy, neighbourly atmosphere that we have in

some of these housing projects. In fact we can find testimony to the

error of our ways, particularly the past administration — because we

haven't had a chance to really build any. But I'm very worried about

our slipping into a role of expediency and allowing any further

development in this way. These concepts have got to stop.

We're going to have to face it sooner or later because our

social problems are manifold, compounded by the time we finish

one of these housing projects. They call on the police to come

and help, but how can the city police come into a housing

project and supervise families and social problems? It's just a

very awkward situation.

I receive calls, and I listen. I don't know what I can do,

but it's bad. Probably what we should do, if we were bold

enough to forget about the dollar for a moment, is move all

these people out and put them in private environments where

they can live and they can choose their neighbours and not be

thrown together. We can't confuse the private type of

accommodation, that is, the private rental accommodation where

a person goes to a hotel or to an apartment block and applies

for an apartment and gets it, because this is a built-in kind

of system where you can choose the amount that you want to pay

and that's fine if you can afford to pay.

But where we're trying to subsidize or assist people who are

not able to compete successfully, then we're going to find

another formula. That formula has its own build-in protection,

by the very nature of the competitiveness of it. People can

choose to stay at the Bayshore Inn if they want to, or they can

go to the Central. If you're paying, you go where you want to.

But people who have a fixed income, who are limite