1971 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 29th

Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is

for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1971

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page 433 ]

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

On the motion of the Honourable L.R. Peterson, Bill (No. 33)

intituled

An Act to Amend the

Consumer Protection Act

was introduced, read a first time, and Ordered to be placed on the

Orders of the Day for second reading at the next sitting after today.

BUDGET DEBATE

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the Minister of Public Works.

HON. W.N. CHANT (Victoria): Mr. Speaker, at the outset, I

would like to say welcome to a large number of young people in the

gallery today. It is not often that we have the opportunity of seeing

such a large number present in the galleries and I trust that, this

afternoon, they will not only enjoy their visit to the House but they

will also profit thereby.

Mr. Speaker, in rising to participate in this Budget Debate, I want,

first of all, to express my appreciation to the electors in our capital

city for having permitted me the honour of being one of their M.L.A.s

for the past 18 years. They re-expressed their confidence in our

Government and their Members, during the last election, by casting

their ballots for us in a number that exceeded those received by

candidates in any other constituency in the Province. This speaks very

well indeed for the capital city of Victoria (interruption) .

Your memory is very short, my good friend. I did not say that, I'm

sure. Furthermore, today is exactly one year since I last spoke in the

House. It was on February 16, a year ago (interruption) . You are thinking of

yourself, my good friend, no other one.

Greater Victoria enjoys a continuous sound, natural growth. The good

citizens from other parts of Canada and the United States are attracted

to this area of British Columbia because of its pleasant surroundings

and salubrious climate. Our natural amenities are second to none. The

question being faced is not whether continuous growth will be

experienced; the paramount problem is how to provide adequate, modern

services for an ever-expanding population growth. I am sure that the

municipal councils are doing their utmost to provide these essential

services.

In speaking of the Department of Public Works, I know that there is

a question uppermost in the minds of many of the honourable Members in

the House and, no doubt, it is, what about the B.C. Building? I want to

report that we are making rapid progress on the planning and

programming … (interruption) .

Yes, sometimes, Mr. Speaker, ignorance can laugh very loudly. For the

simple reason that, in a building of this dimension, it's practically

the difference between that of building an ordinary building such as a

pleasure cruiser, comparing it to boats, or building a Queen Mary .

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, one of the main things to do in programming or

planning a building is, first of all, to do good, sound, essential

programming for, without that, you run the risk of a very poor result.

This is being done and we have some very capable consultants and

architects who are working with our department. I am sure, indeed, the

building will be a credit to the people of British Columbia and also to

the Government.

I'm also pleased, Mr. Speaker, to report that a good number of

projects have recently been approved and the Department of Public Works

is in the process of calling tender to some thirty or more projects

throughout our Province. These projects are estimated to cost in excess

of $5 million and possibly up to $6 million. This is an estimate, of

course. A large percentage of the projects are renovations and repairs;

consequently, they have a high labour content and will help ease the

labour problem, particularly in the construction industry. In the past

year, our department staff proceeded with programmes and plans for

various new buildings and also the renovation and repair of existing

structures. Consequently, we are in a position to proceed on projects

with a minimum amount of delay.

As the Minister of this Department of Public Works, I have followed

a policy of having programmes and plans studied and carefully prepared

before going out to tender and the trade recognizes the plans coming

from the Department of Public Works of British Columbia as being some

of, if not the best, plans they have to work with in the Province.

This, in a large measure, helps to avoid an undue amount of extra costs

during construction.

I'm also pleased, Mr. Speaker, to note that railroad and power

development is proceeding apace within our Province. I can well

remember various occasions when the Opposition quite loudly opposed

some of these developments, but nevertheless, it is very interesting,

at the present time, to notice how they clamour, loud and long, to

claim it was their original idea (interruption) .

That little thought sticks in your mind, my honourable friend. It's

about time you got rid of it, I think.

The Member from Kootenay, as usual, expressed some of his economic

thinking and also the associate honourable Members' in his party. They

have the misconceived idea that interest on a net debt, or that on a

contingent liability, is all one and the same thing. As soon as this is

mentioned, they start to raise a cackle and make a big noise about it,

but it only indicates to me one thing. They don't understand the

difference between paying for a dead horse, or for a live horse that

works and produces far in excess of its keep. Apparently, they can't

differentiate between this. In fact, Mr. Speaker, their lack of

discernment reminds me very much of the story of a certain clergyman

who liked to go to the horse races and put little bets on the horses.

Now, he had to be quite careful about this, because some of his

parishioners didn't approve of it. So he attended and, on this

particular occasion, there had been four races and he had lost in each

race. He was watching the goings on down in the paddock, where they

bring the horses out and parade them around a little, and he noticed,

down in the paddock, a Catholic Father down there looking at the horses

and he, apparently, blessed the horse before each race. In each of the

four previous races, the horse that had had the attention of the Father

won. So he thought, "This is a dead cinch. Now, I'm going to make

something on this." So, he watched very carefully at the fifth race

and, eventually, he noticed the horse who had the attention paid to it.

Up he goes and lays a good, healthy sum right on his nose, more than

usual. Then, he waits for the race. Away the horses go and this horse

is out front, leading, but, all of a sudden, he stumbles, falls,

collapses and dies. Well, he couldn't make out what had happened. So,

after the race, he approached the Catholic Father and explained the

situation — how he attended the races and didn't want it publicized and

so forth. He said, "You know, I watched the four races before and I

noticed the horse that you blessed won in each case. What happened in

the fifth race?" he said. "I can't understand it." The

[ Page 434 ]

Catholic Father says, "You haven't very good

discernment and you don't understand. You see, you don't know the

difference between a blessing and the Last Rites."

Mr. Speaker, the discernment in regard of interest is of about the

same category as that expressed by the honourable Opposition Members (interruption) .

Well, my dear friend, possibly you have heard of the doctor, who had

reached a very ripe old age and was still practising. They asked him

how it was that he had lived to such an old age. He said it was likely

because he hadn't died. So, possibly, that is the reason why some of

the Opposition Members are still in this House.

However, let me go on to something of more merit than just

these…Speaking more seriously, the Honourable Member from North

Vancouver–Seymour, I noticed in his discourse, particularly … I

think it was in the Throne Debate, talking of unemployment and causes,

he said that war was the cause of unemployment. This is contrary to all

fact and experience. Again, it indicates a lack of understanding in

certain economics. War has an insatiable appetite for products. It is

destruction and, if there is anything in this world that increases

employment, it is war. Nevertheless, war is, certainly, the last resort

that humanity should resort to and shouldn't resort to at all, to try

to provide employment. It is basically wrong. In fact, war is the most

foolish thing that humanity can indulge in.

Another matter, Mr. Speaker, that has been drawn quite forceably to

my attention, in recent times, is the action of Prime Minister Trudeau

and his Government in commuting the death sentences on individuals who

have shot policemen in cold blood, when the Courts have declared the

death penalty. I want to say that the police are our thin line of

defense against lawlessness. Police have many onerous and dangerous

duties to perform in their line of duty and a policeman is continuously

exposed to the criminal and lawless element in our society. Police

officers are also human beings and I find them of very high standard.

Commuting the death sentence on those who murder policemen in cold

blood, when a policeman is carrying out his duty, will demoralize the

effective work of our police officers. In fact, my opinion, Mr.

Speaker, is that the Prime Minister and his Government, in commuting

the death sentences of police killers, is repugnant to the concept of

justice, law and order.

Mr. Speaker, many of the young people today are highly disturbed and

I don't blame them. I think they have good reason to be because there

are many conditions prevailing which cause them to have doubt of what

is in store for them. It was, until quite recently, oftentimes

proclaimed that a cure-all for unemployment could be found in the field

of education. Education is a very valuable asset to every and any

individual, and each and every one should obtain the greatest amount

possible for them to obtain. But, after spending 15 to 20 years getting

an education, you, all too often, find that jobs are not available, not

only in the professional or technical field or other fields in which

they are trained, but a job at almost anything is not available. We all

know that thousands of things need to be done, endless services are

required. But young people are enforced to be uselessly idle because of

a worshipful, financial idolatry that dictates to them in our economy

that it cannot be financed and paid for. Let us intelligently adapt and

redirect our monetary and finance mechanism to serve human needs so

that the multitude of good things which knowledge and science have made

physically possible will become financially possible to the betterment

of mankind.

I would like to say, at this point, that destruction will not enrich

you and this applies to any and everyone in life. That's one of the

reasons why war is folly, outside of the fact that it destroys human

life. Destruction will not enrich you but millions would rather die

than think; therefore, millions die. When we do the right thing at the

right time, we will obtain the right results.

There is another matter, Mr. Speaker, that has been of particular

interest to me recently and that is in the field of economics and

international affairs and what has been devised and known as "special

drawing rights" or paper gold. This, Mr. Speaker, is a fuzzy monetary

concept. It is a very poor substitute for real gold — paper gold is

based on the vagaries of international agreements and integrity. Mr.

Speaker, I think a much wiser move and a more practical move, would be

to revalue real gold at whatever figure is necessary. Whether it's a

dollar an ounce or more is not the question. For, irrespective of the

evaluation figure, it is but an imputed value to a special mineral

substance which has worldwide recognition and ready acceptance as a

means of settling international imbalances of trade and commerce. It's

not necessary to have a gold-base content in a National economy. But,

for international trade, I think, it is by far and away still the best

method of settling our international imbalances of trade and commerce

which cannot be settled otherwise. This can be accomplished by putting

a correct evaluation on it. Furthermore, it would also provide a high

degree of confidence in export and import transactions. Many

Governments and countries would prosper and, simultaneously, gainful

employment would become available for many presently unemployed.

Imagine the great boost there would be in the mining industry. Now,

insofar as the value of gold is concerned, over and above what was a

good return on the mining effort, depending upon the quality of ore and

the cost of extracting, over and above that a Government could collect

the royalty or whatever was required to bring it up to the price that

was placed on it in the world market.

Also, I know that the honourable Members will be waiting for a

little more economic thought. The present practice of chartered banks

being permitted to do the major share of our monetizing, or having the

Bank of Canada perform 100 per cent of the monetizing function, would

not outwardly change the customary accounting mechanism for sound money

— we have sound money, today, and we want to keep it as such — but

would produce dynamically improved economic results for labour and

industry by effectually removing an artificial financial bottleneck.

And, again, a word of admonition — administrative bottlenecks,

financial or otherwise, are usually found at the top.

To illustrate my story, possibly — because so many look at the

financial system and don't grasp what is involved … to illustrate my

story, I will mention … This is a true story of a certain individual

in Calgary who decided to install his own hot water tank. He did so. He

connected up the gas and he connected up the thermostat controls and

water and so forth and then he turned it on. But what a racket! It

wouldn't function properly, it was always giving trouble. What was

found out to be the case — everything seemed to be there, all the parts

were there — but he had connected the cold water to the hot water and

the hot water to the cold. Otherwise, it was a very good installation.

This, somewhat, illustrates the situation we are in today, in regard to

the field of monetization — the birth and generation of money.

We hear a great deal about inflation and deflation. It's a worldwide

problem and, therefore, so as not to be mis-

[ Page 435 ]

quoted, I'm going to read what I have to say about

it.

Recently there have been more words written and said about inflation

— its causes and cures — than at any time in contemporary history.

There is a sense of desperation in the air. The question is whether a

free market economy can really cope with the problem. I believe it can

— but not by a continuation of outmoded, illconsidered, unintelligent,

economic nostrums which, past and present, have been foisted on an

unsuspecting public as expert advice and which, so far, has

intensified, rather than providing an acceptable remedy (interruption) .

I'm not talking about anyone in particular. I'm talking about the

conditions as a whole. Again, your lack of understanding surfaces. It

just indicates that you don't know what you're talking about,

honourable Member. May I interject here, that we can have real

prosperity only when healthy profits can be realized in our economy. On

the contrary, our Socialist friends say, "A curse on profits." Their

objective, apparently, is a regimented, planned, profitless society,

which would demean the individual and glorify a State autocracy. You

know, who needs a Socialist Party, when we have Benson's White Paper , and the Prime Minister

of Canada and Mr. Benson on the loose in this country? Who needs

another Socialist Party?

Here are some examples of some rather useless experiments that run

us around in dizzy circles. Experiments they are and they have been

tried over and over again. I'll just mention a few of them and let you

take a deeper look at them.

First of all, we hear of higher wages, lower wages and freezing

wages. Now, if you have higher wages you get inflation and resultant

unemployment. If you have lower wages, you get depression — and we had

it in the 1930's — you couldn't get it any lower — and you had

unemployment. If you freeze wages, you'll have stagnation and also

unemployment. Now, let's take a look at high interest rates and low

interest rates. If you have high interest rates, the inflationary

process takes over and you also get unemployment, because the goods are

priced out of reach. Merchants try to push them on you, on credit and

everything else, and they pile up and you can't pay the price, or you

wonder how you're going to meet your bills at the end of the month or

year. Low interest rates — well, we had them in the 1930's. They were

down to one and two per cent. Alberta refinanced its whole debt in 1944

at a rate of 2% per cent and that was even after the low pressure of

the 1930's. Low interest rates — depression and unemployment. It

doesn't solve it. More money in circulation doesn't solve it. You get

inflation and unemployment and then they shout less money. Then you get

depression and unemployment. What I am trying to point out, Mr.

Speaker, is that these attempts to deal with symptoms can be of help of

a palliative nature, but they are not a sound solution to the problem

which we face in our economy today.

What the Western world and the rest of the world are facing, today,

to a great extent, is a choice between financial bondage or Socialist

bondage. You don't need to accept either one. There is freedom under

free enterprise and democracy as soon as the financial system is

synchronized and co-ordinated with the needs of production and

distribution. It can be done, because money is a man-made system from

beginning to end. Now, variations of the foregoing, plus other related

ideas, have been tried and found wanting over and over again.

A manipulation of them may temporarily make you more comfortable,

but have failed to treat successfully the root cause of our present

economic and monetary malady of being frustrated and hindered in a

normal utilization of our great human and material resources to produce

and distribute the potential abundance which is physically possible

within our domain and our power. For a free enterprise, democratic

economy and social order to survive and thrive, it is imperative that

realistic new policies, governing the generation and injection of

currency and bank credit money into our economy, must be redirected in

a manner that will co-ordinate and synchronize the operation, so that

production and distribution of real wealth will not be hindered and

stultified by arguments of financial necessity that cannot be financed.

And this is within the bounds of reason, Mr. Speaker. Human frustration

and suffering demand that humanity be freed from this unnecessary

financial bondage imposed, in large measure, by certain banking and

monetary practices. All money is man made and can be directed to

properly serviced human needs.

Now, without going into the detail of explaining, I want to point

out some primary steps which I deem to be fundamentally necessary.

First, the Bank of Canada should generate all bank deposit funds

originating in Canada. Chartered banks should cease their privilege of

monetizing real wealth credit. It gives them an ownership of an undue

amount of real wealth without producing a like value. A foreign

exchange control board should be activated to control the buying and

selling of all Canadian funds. We had a great example of that, a little

while back, when the Canadian dollar had to be freed. There was a

tremendous buying of Canadian funds because, it was presumed, they

could be forced up in price; therefore, they were bought at a low

figure, forced on the free market, went up in price and the buyers

profitted thereby. The Bank of Canada tried to keep up with this for a

while, but after two or three billions of it, they had to let her go.

This is where a foreign exchange control board would prevent this

gambling, international gambling, with the National currency, not for

the purpose of investment, but for the purpose of gambling in

international or National monetary unit or units. The Bank of Canada

should buy Federal Government net debt maturities as they become due,

thereby easing the millstone from the taxpayers' necks. Funds so

released could be invested in productive and service enterprises. The

Federal Government, through the Bank of Canada, should monetize our

National Credit and thereby pay for many social services. This would

reduce taxation and, simultaneously, increase buying power without a

cost plus price inflation.

I might just point out, Mr. Speaker, that bank monetization is money

birth; bank demonetization is money demise, which so few economists,

when you read the articles or the treaties or the books in the

universities, utterly fail to explain or to inform the students of what

the facts are. You can search them from beginning to end and not find a

sensible

interpretation of this function that would do credit to an

Aesop's fable. Do not confuse these functions with velocity of

circulation, the cycling and recycling of money in our economy, during

its life, and I mention its life because it comes into existence and

goes out of existence every day, through the function of monetization

and demonetization as practiced in banking, or the resultant money

pools of business reserves and various ways of saving. These are also a

tremendous factor in our economy. This is a velocity of circulation,

the reserves and savings that take place in the economy. This also is a

great function in the economy which

[ Page 436 ]

I will not take time to touch on.

Until the full control and issue of money and bank deposit credit is

restored to the Government, that is, Bank of Canada, all talk of the

sovereignty of parliament and democracy is idle and futile. Sound

economics and sound government are inseparable. Within the orbit of our

Provincial jurisdiction, the record stands, and our Minister of

Finance, Premier Bennett, to his great credit, has for 18 years,

through thick and thin, stood firm in his resolve to balance our

Provincial Budget each and every year. There may be some difference of

opinion regarding the allocation of funds, this is normal. But,

nevertheless, it is done very wisely and has proven to be so, both in

the past and the present. Our Budget is a far more commendable and

outstanding Government Budget, in fact, it is the outstanding Budget to

be found anywhere in North America. I'm sure all fair-minded honourable

Members in the Legislature will give it their unstinted support.

British Columbia's Budget leads the way — others may follow. Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Atlin.

MR. F.A. CALDER (Atlin): Mr. Speaker, again, it is an honour

to take my place in this Debate, representing the large constituency of

Atlin. I am going to get right down to the business of the problems in

my riding, Mr. Speaker, because I think of late … I really don't mind

the introductory remarks. I agree that introductory remarks have their

place in the House. But I think there has been a lot of Members, on

both sides, who have prolonged these introductory remarks and, to me,

being one of the older Members in the House, it is sort of a waste of

time. But I cannot help but reply briefly to the previous speaker, in a

form of a brief criticism, as I am just as long in the House as he is.

He has, on several occasions, taken two or three years in a row, to

expound on the monetary theory and there are times when he has not

spoken of it. Today, he dealt very lightly with it, and it seems to be

the sort of subject that is decaying, Mr. Speaker. He did use the words

"dead horse" on some other matter and I would like to refer to that

phrase of his by saying that perhaps because he did not dwell, for any

length of time, on the monetary theory, that, on this side of the

House, we consider the monetary theory is a "dead horse."

I don't think the Premier of British Columbia has ever thought that

the monetary theory ever lived at all. He was a good Conservative, he

still is a good Conservative and he always will be a good Conservative.

There is a lot of colleagues of his on his side of the fence and

perhaps a lot of Liberals and a sort of coalition in disguise. Anyway,

there are several Members on his side of the fence, particularly the

previous speaker who has dwelt, almost on every opportunity he has had

to speak in the House, to dwell on the monetary theory. But, like I

said, today, it was very weak. To me, it's a dying or it is becoming a

dead horse.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to get right down to business and deal with

three points that are problems in my riding. I'd like first of all to

deal with rural electrification. I am quite happy to see, on this

particular day, there is an exceptionally large number of students in

the galleries and they may be interested in what I have to say on rural

electrification, because it is a problem in my constituency. We realize

that the Government has a programme on rural electrification and we

realize that they are progressing. Perhaps, in some areas, it may be

rapid; in other areas, it may be not so rapid, particularly in my

riding, It is a definite need, Mr. Speaker, in the northwest of British

Columbia.

I am quite gratified that the Government has seen fit to recognize

some of the communities, that they realize there may be communities

that are going up instead of down. Because of certain industrial

circumstances, people are going into these communities and there is the

prospect that one day they will be definite, established communities

with increased population year after year. In this respect, I would

like to say something about subsidized rural electrification. The

Government has, in its programme, selected six areas in the Province,

which I think is no longer on an experimental basis. It is working. I

have one in my riding, the town of Atlin, where we have three units of

550 kilowatts. Ever since it was established, it has been quite an

expensive operation. I don't think this subsidized rural

electrification ought to be removed from there, because Atlin is a

growing town. We have the tourist trade there, and we have mineral

explorations, and the people who are engaged in these enterprises are

definitely satisfied with the programme. I believe that, last year,

improvements, involving power lines, generation, etc. amounted to about

$13,000, in the town of Atlin, and the operating deficiencies amounted

to about $37,000. So you have a total there of about $50,000. For a

small town, I would say that is quite an amount but, then, we are

satisfied that that amount of money has been spent to improve the

situation there.

Then we have a place…the Member for Mackenzie, she, too, has a

place in her constituency — the town of Anahim Lake, in which there is

a smaller unit. I think this past year an amount of $13,000 was spent

there on a subsidized basis. Then we have other towns, such as Bella

Bella, Massett, Port Clements, these last two towns, Mr. Speaker, in

your area, and, then, of course, there is the town of Wells. I am

talking about remote areas. I am talking about an area in which there

is a tremendous amount of development and exploration mainly, and that

is my own riding. I have two towns, the town of Telegraph Creek and the

town of Eddontenajon, towns of 200 persons or over, respectively, in

which there is a crying need for electrification.

Correspondence has been going on for several months, particularly

with respect to B.C. Hydro for the town of Telegraph Creek. Telegraph

Creek has a historical position — we are now debating and have just

concluded one, the Throne Debate, and now on the Budget, and these

debates are taking place in our Centennial year — and we talk about

historical sites, one of which, of course, is Telegraph Creek.

Telegraph Creek will never die as a township. It is the centre of

mineral exploration, big game and road construction areas. B.C. Hydro

has not seen fit to move into Telegraph Creek because they claim that

the population is dwindling away. I would like to say, here and now,

Mr. Speaker, that such is not the case. People may be transient there,

those who work in the nearby industrial areas, but they do go back in

the winter months when they have completed their seasonal employment.

Surveys have been completed in Telegraph Creek with respect to B.C.

Hydro being established there. I believe that the reason why nothing

has been done is because of the very few non-Indians there; the town is

comprised mostly of native Indians. I would like to say, through

correspondence, the Indian Affairs Branch is willing to participate in

this respect. This concerns many people. It concerns doctors, it

concerns nurses, educational people, school teachers, because there is

a large number of school children in this particular

[ Page 437 ]

town who still have to study and read under the

obsolete and dim oil

lamps. Mr. Speaker, I think, in this day and age, we should think about

improving this situation so that these children could benefit by a

modern improvement other than to live the way their forefathers used to

live many years ago.

I and several Members, who are M.L.A.s from the north, continually

bring up this particular point and, I think, you, Mr. Speaker, if not

many other Members of the House, are getting a little tired of hearing

it. We have natural resources that are now being developed up north

from which this Government and the south have benefited. Yet, there are

not enough returns to the north and, I think, this is a point that has

to be taken. I think one of the returns is the improvements in rural

electrification. We have complaints from doctors of people, of

students, with sore eyes, and they blame the condition whereof I speak.

I plead with this Government that they consider — and I know that they

will have to subsidize — this situation. There are only two towns in my

area and one of them is Eddontenajon, which, no doubt, in the very near

future is going to be the next highway division on the Stewart-Cassiar

road. We have Good Hope Lake and we have Dease Lake, and, for the

south, we have Eddontenajon. I'm going to speak a little later about

the mileage and the reason why I think consideration should be given to

Eddontenajon. There hasn't been too much correspondence in this

respect. But I think that, with the people who are considering moving

into this particular territory, certainly, consideration should be

given to B.C. Hydro going into Eddontenajon.

The village of New Aiyansh, Mr. Speaker, and another one of Kispiox

and several others in the Province already have experienced Indian

Affairs Branch participation. I think this is a point that should be

considered. There are quite a number of other villages in the Province

that are now being considered by B.C. Hydro but, again, I must speak on

the very remote areas where this rural electrification is required.

This, I think, is a real problem. I could have brought this up under

estimates. I could have talked about this with the Minister in his own

office. I could have talked to his deputy. But I think this is quite a

serious situation and, with the complaints by different departments of

Government, both Federal and Provincial, I thought that it might be

advisable at this time to bring it to your attention.

The second point that I would like to speak about, as far as local

problems are concerned, has to do with flying game wardens. I think the

northern Members would be interested in this because they brought it

up. I have brought it up, if not all Members, who are M.L.A.s from the

north, have brought this situation to the attention of this Government.

As far as I am concerned, this is about the fourth time that I am going

to bring it to your attention. There is a great need for game wardens

in northwest British Columbia. The game warden who we have, and may I

say at the very beginning, Mr. Speaker, that this involves an

international situation, otherwise, again, I would have brought it to

the attention of the officers in their own offices right here in

Victoria. But this has an international aspect to it and I think it is

only fair to bring it to the attention of the Members of the House.

I have stated that there is only one game warden in Fort Nelson and,

not too long ago, they set one up at Watson Lake in the Yukon. We don't

believe that, in the large northwest territory, this is good enough.

May I say, too, that I have brought the attention of my friend, the

Honourable Minister of Recreation and Conservation — we had

correspondence going all summer on this, and also the Federal House — to the abuse of game. We don't have absolute evidence but we do have

enough evidence, I think, we can go on, with respect to abuse of big

game from southeast Alaska. Locally, we have abuses by users of the

snowmobile, by users of aircraft. Lately, the complaint has been about

the users of aircraft from southeast Alaska. Just a little over a year

ago, the Federal Government removed the customs officer from the town

of Wrangell in southeast Alaska and this has left the whole border of

southeast Alaska and the B.C. boundary unprotected. We have complaints

by very responsible game guides that there is a definite abuse by

people flying in from southeast Alaska, not so much from the State of

Alaska, but from southeast Alaska. As I said, Mr. Speaker, this is an

international question. From the correspondence I had with the Federal

House, I must say that I had poor response from the Federal House…I

had a very good response from the Provincial Government. I will not

take the time to read the letters. I will be discussing this further

under the estimates or, maybe, in the Minister's office.

The only satisfaction that I got from the Federal House is that

their periodic flights, Mr. Speaker, from your city, Mr. Speaker, the

city of Prince Rupert, their periodic flights from there, along the

border, perhaps, up to Whitehorse and back, are only scheduled flights

and, certainly, they don't involve surveillance at all. I'm not too

satisfied with the answer that I got from Mr. Cote, the Minister from

Ottawa. As a matter of fact, I think I can go as far as to say that I

think there has been poor cooperation from the Canadian Customs

Division in this respect. I also received letters from the offices in

your city, Mr. Speaker, with very vague replies. I think this is not

good enough.

We go back to big game. The only reason why people, perhaps, fly

over, without going to Customs at Wrangell — and now we have no customs

at Wrangell — where would they go? They just fly in across the

border … (interruption) . I

don't think that I should be challenged on

the floor of the House to prove my statements. What I am trying to

drive at, in this respect, is that I think there should be real

cooperation between the Federal Government and the Provincial

Government to see that there is a real protection, because, as far as

the Province is concerned, it's the big game we have to protect.

There is hardly any protection for conservation of game west of Fort

Nelson and west of Watson Lake in the Yukon. Now, I was informed, not

too long ago, that this Government had set up a flying game warden

centred at Prince George. I am subject to correction by the Minister,

but there has been a resolution forwarded to this Government indicating

that there is an establishment of a flying game warden in the city of

Prince George. Now, there is nothing wrong with that, I think that is

good. For one reason, Prince George is the centre of the Province of

British Columbia. But this is quite a way from the main boundary of big

game in the northwest of this Province, northwest B.C. I am standing in

my place here to state my gratification about the establishment of the

big game, or the flying game warden, but, also, to plead, not to say

that he is removed from Prince George and re-established, say, in the

town of Atlin, but to have an additional one established in the town of

Atlin. Because here, it is not only setting up a game warden where a

game warden is required but also to provide surveillance on the

boundaries between southeast Alaska and the Province of British

Columbia.

Atlin is a suitable location and so is Prince George. All I'm asking

is that there be an additional one.

The third problem I would like to bring to your attention,

[ Page 438 ]

Mr. Speaker, is the question of a new contract for

the

Stewart-Watson Lake Highway. The Ben Ginter, which is constructing the

road southward, contract has been completed and the Peter Kewiet

contract going north is also completed. I see, by the estimates, that

the Government has again allocated the amount of $2,700,000 towards the

construction of the Stewart-Watson Lake Highway. This indicates to me

there will be no stoppage towards the completion of this major highway.

All I'm asking is that the contracts be let as soon as possible because

of our wish to see this road completed.

I am told that there are only 25 miles to go and it's just too bad

that we could not complete it in this Centennial Year. I think this

would be one of the major news items in the Province of British

Columbia and also in the State of Alaska and also the State of

Washington, if we could open this road. It has been going on for so

long, now, that most people have forgotten that there is such a road

under construction.

I think the completion is marked urgent, Mr. Speaker, because, here,

in the last few days and in the previous debate, we have been talking

about employment. Do you know that there is a lot of companies, a lot

of people, who are going north, to establish themselves in business,

who are looking forward to completion of this road? It means

development, once it is completed. It means logging in the area, it

once before, that once this road is complete it will take 40 per cent

of the business away from the Alaska Highway. I think it's about time

that this sinks in to all the Members, and they start pleading for this

road to be completed. It means services, it means communities, Mr.

Speaker, and again it means employment. I think it's most important

that this road be considered as urgent in this Centennial Year.

In the previous debate, the Member for Skeena informed the House of

the building of a bridge to span the Nass River. Mr. Speaker, you and

the Member for Skeena and myself know the meaning of this link. It

means that you will link the Stewart-Watson Lake highway to the outside

world, outlet to Terrace, down to Prince George, and down through the

State of Washington. I think this is one of the greatest developments

this year and we are hopeful that this bridge may be completed this

year because everyone is looking forward to its completion and, also,

to close the 25-mile gap of the Stewart-Cassiar Road. Let's make this a

crash programme, Mr. Speaker, let's make it a Centennial project. As

I've said before, I've brought this many times to the floor of the

House, and I'm still pleading until that road is completed.

Other problems that I have in my constituency I will raise during

the consideration of estimates and also on the Order Paper and

interviews with the Minister. This is the job of the M.L.A.s and I will

be using those avenues to try and solve problems in my riding.

I would like to say something about Federal-Provincial problems of

public interest and the first one is the protection of the British

Columbia salmon. Don't think for a moment that this is Federal

business. I think the Province has almost a 50 per cent part to play in

this, if not more, when I say the protection of the B.C. salmon. This

is a concern of everyone. It may not be the concern of all Canadians,

but I will say it is a definite concern of all British Columbians. In

past years we have been talking about pollution, we have been talking

about effluent from communities, nearby rivers, takes, we talk about

pulp mill effluent, logging debris, mining effluent, and we talk about

them when we consider the safety of our rivers, particularly the

spawning rivers and lakes. We even talk about the safety of our coast,

because the whole coast, one day, may be polluted if this madness

doesn't stop. We talk about oil drilling. We talk about river

diversions. I think most British Columbians are quite concerned, now,

that there are just a minority of people talking about the safety of

salmon. I think, in this respect, the Province is very much involved in

this question of the protection of the British Columbia salmon. The

result of all this, Mr. Speaker, has not only been a public concern but

you have several organizations springing up all over the place, now,

with ecology and environmental situations and they will always be

heard. They will always be heard. The Members here are being heard, in

this respect. I think, mainly, this concerns every commercial

fisherman, sports fisherman and, especially, a concern of those who

rely on salmon, from time immemorial, for their home consumption.

Let me just point out a few of the contributing factors that have

sort of dwindled away this whole fishing situation. Let's look at the

Federal, first. Their concern is coming rather late, Mr. Speaker — the

concern of the commercial fish companies and the Federal Fisheries

Department — it is definitely late. They are just now finding that

something is up and they are trying to do something about it. Let's

look at what they have been neglecting to do in past years, even just

before the World War It and immediately afterwards, and during that

period. There is no question about it that the Federal Government has

had very loose regulations to the extent it even had to loosen up

administration. It allowed an overcatch, it allowed freedom to the

companies, too much freedom, it allowed overcrowdedness and there was,

really, no strictness to the catch quotas. There wasn't too much

concern about Pacific fisheries. There wasn't too much concern of the

foreign fisheries off our previous three-mile limit.

When they do get together with the other nations, Canada has shown a

complete weakness in these negotiation rooms. Now, today they are

jumping all over each other to try to solve this whole situation and it

has developed into something quite serious. The immediate concern, now,

of the commercial fish companies and the Federal Government, is, today,

to create new laws and regulations that are now interfering with the

very livelihood of people engaged in this industry. We find that there

is a decrease of the fishing boundaries all over the coast. We hear now

of limitations — and you, yourself, have experienced this, Mr. Speaker,

because you have a large amount of fishermen in your riding. I have

spent 26 years in this industry myself. We hear of limitations of the

number of days that one can fish each week. There are weeks when we

only have one day a week. If we're lucky, we get two days in one week

to fish commercially. If we're really lucky, we get three days, but,

mostly, one day. There are seasonal operations on this coast that only

amount to about 18 days and the fishermen are expected to live, and

this is their only means of livelihood. All through the summer, when

you total the number of days fished, they average about 18 days. This

is a terrible situation. We are now faced with strict salmon escapement

quotas. We now have limitation of boat licenses. We have company

mergers. We have cannery closures. We have lay-off of borderline

fishermen. In this respect, Mr. Speaker, I would like to read what

happened at the convention from which I just came. You will see what is

happening. This may just enlighten you of what's happening with the

lay-off of people through the new Davis plan. Let me read you the

report of a

[ Page 439 ]

paper from your city, Mr. Speaker, and mine, Prince

Rupert. This was

dated just a few days ago, February 8. "Canadian Fishing Company has

joined B.C. Packers in cutting boats from the salmon fleet. Canfisco

manager, Norman Christensen, announced at a meeting of the Nishga

Tribal Council in New Aiyansh that 18 gillnetters had been dropped

permanently. Twelve of the fishermen affected are Indians. S.K. (Sonny)

Nelson, Manager of B.C. Packers, said that his company had dropped 125

gillnet vessels from a fleet of 2,000 operating along the coast. Of the

125 men cut, 64 are Indians, and 21 are in the Nelson Bros. Ltd.

operations at Port Edward or at Surmyside Cannery." These were definite

statements made by the operators at the convention. I continue, "B.C.

Packers is also reducing the fleet of seine boats by 26 with 17 Indian

fishermen being affected. Nelson denied that the decision not to fish

these boats was made in order to sell the boats to the Government under

the terms of fisheries minister Jack Davis "buy–back" plan. 'This move

is necessary because of the hard fact of economics. There are too many

fishermen after too few fish.' he said. 'Most of these boats are not

very good boats and it would cost a lot of money to bring them up to

standard. Those operators involved are marginal fishermen, men who have

not proved to be responsible in the past and who have worked up large

debts with the company. What is the use of sending a man out to fish

when you know before he goes that he is not going to make any money.

He's just wasting his time.' Nelson pointed out that this year all

predictions are for a poor season. 'Last year we packed 1,400,000

cases,' he said. 'Projections for the coming season are for a pack of

only 620,000 cases. If we do not operate with maximum efficiency we'll

all be in trouble. Only two B.C. Packers operated canneries, will be

working this year."' As you know, Mr. Speaker, the Shearwater is closed

this year, Namu is closed this year and, last year, they closed

Miallard's in North Vancouver. They closed North Pacific Cannery, this

is in our area, Sunnyside, Klemtu. This has been a hard hit situation

in your particular constituency. "'We have made foolish investments in

the past,' he said, referring to the company's policy of loaning money

to the fishermen to be paid out of the catch, 'and we're not going to

do this anymore.' Cutback of credit to fishermen was a sore point with

members of the council, but their main concern was repayment of already

outstanding debts to fishing companies owed by those dropped from the

fleet. 'It's a difficult problem,' said Nelson, 'when a man hasn't a

job we can't collect, but the fisherman, like anyone else, still has an

obligation to pay the loan back sometime. We can't just write off large

amounts of money because the fisherman hasn't worked out, although we

do realize we're not going to get all loaned money back."'

So, here is a picture that now involves a very serious situation all

along the coast. We did bring to the attention of the canners that, if

there is no way of continuing the operation of a fisherman — and don't

forget a great many of these people who are now being put out of the

fishing industry are the very ones who participated, or their fathers

or their grandfathers participated, in establishing the fishing

industry in this Province. They haven't been engaged in any other

industry … This is a serious situation but, because of the laxity

from

away back and then the restrictions of today, they are now caught with

many things. High costs, high boat costs, and now a great many of them,

and I will say this, Mr. Speaker, and you know a great many of them

yourself, a lot of these people who are caught with these high debts

and extremely high debts from $5, 10 and 15 thousand, are some of the

real bona fide good fishermen. I wouldn't buy what the gentleman said

here, that they were all risk fishermen. Sure, there is a good majority

of them, but there is also a lot of good fishermen in there. If they

are just going to be told, and already letters have been going out and

they are told, "Well, just take off," then, why should that same

company which said that, or directed that, turn to another industry

where this poor guy now has to work and garnishee his wages? I say that

if he is put out of the industry, then, I think the company should

write off that debt.

Then we have this quality control that we hear about, and I'm still

talking about restrictions they are taking off all rental boats. Who is

going to be hard hit, Mr. Speaker, when they knock off this summer the

rental boats and create unemployment? We are still relating this to

unemployment, and the laxity from way back. Now we are caught with this

laxity.

The Skeena fishermen, the Nass River fishermen, your fishermen, Mr.

Speaker, because the majority of them are the ones that rent boats but

now they are going to be cut off from that, they are going to be cut

off from all operating credit and so forth. So what is left of the

fishing industry? It appears to me that they are, now, with the very

few that they are going to retain … this whole policy, I think, only

means the survival of the fittest. Those who, like I have stated,

pioneered the fishing industry are now out and are part of the

unemployed. Only the professional fishermen will remain. This whole

question, that relates to unemployment, is a serious question and I

think we should be doing something about it. This, I think, is where

the Minister of Rehabilitation comes in, because I was quite happy the

other day when he did talk about the retraining programmes. If there is

anyone that requires that retraining now, it's fishermen. Because they

are now finding themselves out in the cold, they have to get into some

other industry. I'm only hopeful that, once they are retrained, they

will go to work and that there is nothing in the way of barring them

from entering any other industry.

This whole situation, Mr. Speaker, only means to me the relegation

of the fishing industry to the very bottom of our Provincial industry.

At the rate things are going now, I don't think the industry is going

to last too long. So there is my hit towards the Federal Government.

But I am not going to leave the Provincial Government alone. There is a

certain amount of lack of concern of the B.C. Government towards the

conservation of salmon. The Government doesn't appear to me,, or to

anybody else … we know it is a fact that this Government is more

concerned with the development of other industries, and many people

claim this is playing havoc with the very survival of salmon on this

very coast.

We all support development in this Province, Mr. Speaker. We are

supposed to be responsible people, particularly if we are

representatives of the people, and we all are, here. I don't think

anyone here is going to come out and condemn the actual development. We

like to see development but I think this Government should set

guidelines by which these havocs that may create the loss of fish have

to be prevented. Mr. Speaker, take a look at this little fish. I wonder

if the Members here ever consider the struggle of the poor fish for

survival. Take, for instance, the Trudeau fish going up the river and

the Bennett logging slash coming down the river. Have you ever

considered the Trudeau fish going up the river and — the Bennett

logging debris coming down the river? The Trudeau fish going up the

river and the Bennett and everyone else's effluent coming down the

river. Have you ever

[ Page 440 ]

considered the Trudeau fingerlings coming down the

river and then

hitting against the proposed Moran Dam on the Fraser? This question of

the Moran Dam is not over yet. What I am trying to point out is that

the poor fish haven't got a monkey's chance in this lopsided two-way

traffic.

I picked up the Province

before Christmas. It is dated

December 18, and I am very happy to welcome the statement of the

Premier. Let me read a few excerpts from this. "Premier Bennett says

the cheapest cleanest power in B.C. could be produced by the

construction of the proposed Moran Dam on the Fraser River — but he

insists, it won't be built if it will destroy the river's salmon

fishery." That's a good statement. "His comments," and I am only

picking out excerpts, Mr. Speaker. "His comments Thursday about the

cheapness of the power and its pollution-free value, however, appeared

to be an indication that he is shifting his approach as B.C.'s

electricity needs rapidly rise. He confirmed the statement two months

ago by B.C. Hydro Chairman Dr. Gordon Shrum that the Moran proposal

will be included in a B.C. Energy Board study of B.C. power needs for

the next 15 years. The Board said Bennett has been told to get "advice

from experts any place in the world" about the Moran fish problem and

the entire power-need study. 'Before we can do anything on the Moran

Dam,' he said, 'the number one problem must be solved, the problem of

the fish. We don't want to lose a great resource of food. It is a very

important industry to us.' The Moran proposal was renewed, after being

dormant for some 15 years, during the 1970 Session of the Legislature

last March by Evan Wolfe (SC — Vancouver Centre). He urged construction

of the dam for the cheap power it would provide. It could be built at a

cost of $1.2 billion and would produce 7.5 million kilowatts of

electricity — the cheapest power in Canada at 1.6 mills per kilowatt

hour, he said. His proposal was bitterly opposed by George Mussallem

(SC — Dewdney). 'Hands off the Fraser,' said Mussallem. 'You might get

the fish up the ladders, but there's no way you can get them down

through those turbines, because then they're dead fish."' A very good

statement, Mr. Member. "Bennett said Thursday the Energy Board has been

commissioned to investigate all methods of developing hydro electricity

'because it's the most pollution-free.' 'It is very important that this

river become pollution-free' Bennett said. 'Our great job is to open up

the province and create jobs and still control pollution and keep it at

an absolute. minimum. Yes, great efforts will be taken to see that that

comes about. It will be done by the Pollution Control Branch and Board"

he said. 'Technical questions raised by the report, such as the

proposal that all sewage disposal into the Fraser be given secondary

treatment by 1975, will be examined by the Pollution Control Experts,'

he said."

Well, those are all good statements. Another statement here:

"Chamber of Commerce Favours Fraser-Moran Project, Bennett favours

Fraser River Dam." But they are not giving statements that I welcome.

Let's look at the Bennett Dam. We are told that surveys were right

up to date. They had every type of study to prove there would be no

results or damaging effects after the completion of that dam. But then

we hear criticism from Alberta. We are hearing criticisms from the

Indian Affairs Branch and elsewhere over the results of the Bennett

Dam. There was no second look, at all. There was no second look. We may

still be faced with a Court action. This is not over yet. So even

though I welcome these beautiful statements, I'm still afraid of the

Bennett second look.

I am going to say this, Mr. Speaker, that if this B.C. Energy Board

were to come across with a very favourable report,

there is nothing to stop the Premier and this Government from taking a

second look and perhaps going ahead with the Moran Dam. This is what

has given me a lot of fear. It could easily happen. I am quite sincere

about this. I fear if this Energy Board comes out with any favourable

reports … I don't think, if there is a real need of power and how we

need it in this Province … if they show that need, the Province goes

ahead with the Moran Dam and I'm quite sure this will be write-off of

the fishing industry in this Province. The Fraser River is the heart of

the whole fishing situation in this Province and you will have taken

out the heart of the fishing here in British Columbia.

I think the only way to solve this whole problem, Mr. Speaker, is a

very close consultation between the Federal and the Provincial

Governments. The Province, no doubt, under the new Constitution which

we are going to be studying perhaps in our day — it won't be too long

before we see the final writing of the new constitution — I'm quite

sure there will be a close relationship between the Province and the

Federal Government, all along, from coast to coast. I am hopeful for

that because of the consultations will just have to deal with the

safety of salmon and industries which are lacking, in this Province. I

am hopeful that under the new Constitution we may have more Provincial

jurisdiction over fisheries but this remains to be seen.

I stand here, today, to plead that the Government consider the

protection of our B.C. salmon, because the Province is definitely

involved on the account of other industries at which we now point our

finger as being the destroyer of the salmon in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to end up by talking about Mr. Alan

Fry. We have heard quite a bit about his book, Mr. Speaker. I happen to

know this gentleman. He is one of the hardworking superintendents of

the Province … of Indian Affairs. His book, called How A People

Die , has created quite a lot of criticism in the Province and

throughout the country. I have read the book and I have read the

criticisms in the newspapers. I have heard a few comments from radio

and television. I am just about in between. I haven't offered any

criticism of this book. Let me read what an Indian pamphlet says about

this. It says, "Alan Fry is the superintendent of the North Island

Agency. He has been employed by the Department of Indian Affairs for 15

years. Areas he has worked in include Hazelton, Yukon and Alert Bay."

My own comment, I first met Mr. Fry in Whitehorse. "He has recently put

out a book entitled How A People Die .

Now, this book is listed as being

fiction. There are too many parallels between the fictitious Indian

village in it and a village on the Island where a band was relocated

within the last ten years. Some of the points that Fry seems to point

out in the book are: Indian people cannot help themselves, possibly,

because of genetic and cultural factors. Indian homes are filled with

stench and filth. Indian women are stupid and ignorant of the sex act,

hence, because of their ignorance, they tend to be morally loose.

Indian women neglect their children. Indian people are irresponsible.

Indian people have no pride. Indian Affairs officials are so sensitive

to Indians' needs that they face an agonizing dilemma in helping the

Indians. The general condition of the Indian people is that of a

drunken stupor." Here are some quotations, Mr. Speaker. "How can a

police officer enforce a law among people who cannot appreciate its

values or understand its complexities'? How can an Indian agent help a

people build a better life if they refuse to take on the most

elementary steps to help themselves"" He ends

[ Page 441 ]

the book with this quote, referring to an

able-bodied young man

asking for assistance. "You, you poor bastard, never had any to start

with. You are 19 and you are dead already, in reference to pride." Now,

these quotations have been quoted many times by columnists and other

reporters in papers and I don't think the criticisms are going to die

yet. I am rather amazed that the Indians, themselves, have come out and

condemned this.

Many a time I stand on my feet here, Mr. Speaker, and I talk about

the whole reserve system. It's a little over 100 years now that the

Indian people have been living under the reserve system. Many a time,

since I have been a Member of this House, I have brought to your

attention the damning results of this whole reserve system. I have

mentioned, many a time on the floor of this House here, one of the

conditions created by the reserve system is the taking away of the

Indians' initiative, making him dependent. This is what the reserve

system breeds, making an Indian a member of the tribe of the

inferiority complex people. You know, all that this chap is trying to

tell us is the end results of these things of the whole system. We

don't have too many of these people coming out and stating things like

this, especially when he still is in office. I hear quite a lot of

comments from Indian Affairs offices throughout the country, pleading

that something be done for the Indians, only after they retire from

office. But, here, along comes this chap and he blasts … I'm not

going

to commend him on his statements but I'll commend his whole … that,

while he is in office, he dares to come out with something that could

have slapped him down immediately after he made these statements. I'm

not going to enlarge too much on this, Mr. Speaker. All I wanted to

point out is that these are some of the things, now, that are coming

out and they will continue to come out because of this whole system.

Why in the devil do you think that, when I first came into this House,

I asked that the reserve system be abolished from the whole of Canada?

Do you know my only defense might condemn me. If I ever write a book,

I'm not just going to hit the natives but I am going to hit the people

responsible. It works both ways and it will make this guy's book look

like peanuts. But, you know me. I'm just a nice little fellow! I don't

go around making statements that would hurt anyone's feelings.

These are very serious charges, to me, and to many of the native

leaders. We know a lot of this that he has brought out, but we don't

dare say anything about it. We are going the other way. We are fighting

to do something so that Indians can be taken out from where they are so

that they can walk with you. We know a lot of this exists. I'm not

saying that I'm supporting every statement the man makes, but there is

a lot there that he dares to come out with. These, now, are surprising

society. They are stunned over this. Boy, you live one year on the

reserves and you are liable to support this man on many aspects on

which he speaks. Like I say, there is many an Indian leader who would

take a good look at this. All I can urge at this time … and it still

a reserve business but, then, we are trying to do something under the

Provincial basis to try and help the Indian development, the community

… economic development to help him take his place. So, I feel it is

quite safe for me to bring up this matter. But there are such serious

charges that I think at this time I am going to use this forum to urge

the Federal Government to set up a Royal Commission and that Mr. Fry

and any other member of the Indian Affairs Branch, or even Indian

organizations, come forward to that Commission for a whole study of

this whole question. I am going to tell you — this is going to involve

the whole reserve situation. It's a gigantic thing. If they ever open

up that Royal Commission, I am just afraid that you are going to see

something that's even bigger than anybody ever thought of. The only

thing that really scares me is that, if that Royal Commission makes its

report, they will find that many things that this man says are true.

This is all that I have to contribute at this time, Mr. Speaker. Other

matters I have, I will bring up before the estimates. Thank you.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable First Member for

Vancouver-Burrard.

MR. H. J. MERILEES (Vancouver-Burrard): Mr. Speaker, it is an

honour to once again rise in this House, today, representing the great

constituency of Vancouver-Burrard, to speak on the Budget Debate. The

Budget, as presented by the Honourable Minister of Finance, Mr.

Speaker, is a good Budget. It is a sound Budget and, as one has come to

expect from British Columbia's Premier and Minister of Finance, it's a

balanced Budget. Even in this day of Women's Lib I think even the most

ardent proponent would acknowledge that British Columbia's Minister of

Finance is, by all odds, the best housekeeper in Canada, which is more

than I can say for the Leader of the Liberal Party. Talking of

housekeepers and listening to that. Member's budget, reminds me of a

television programme of another male housewife called the "Galloping

Gourmet." He galloped from hither to yon — bankruptcy.

Undoubtedly, this $1,300,692,600 Budget will create many new jobs

but, equally important, Mr. Speaker, and something that I think many of

us forget when we talk about new jobs and such a Budget, in addition,

this Budget will guarantee the continuity of thousands of jobs that

would have gone down the drain.

Rational, well-informed people, Mr. Speaker, know full well that no

Provincial Government can exercise absolute control over employment or

unemployment. A Provincial Government can play its part, and this

Budget guarantees that British Columbia is, certainly, playing its

part

in the total effort to create new jobs. Further, Mr. Speaker, I venture

to predict that, by the time this House rises, there will be a very

drastic drop in the number of employable British Columbians who lack

work and wages.

Mr. Speaker, in this debate, I will not discuss tourism and the

travel industry at any length. Suffice to say, that, after a

considerable career as a professional in the tourist industry, I report

with the deepest regret that tourism, a $450 million British Columbia

bonanza, has yet to be treated with the adult, businesslike approach

warranted by a truly great, major industry.

The tax that has been placed on the hotel rooms, now, should provide

a greater opportunity to assist us in devoting the time and effort

needed for research in that direction.

Similarly, Mr. Speaker, during the Budget Debate, I will not discuss

youth hostels or needed summer employment for students which was so

ably dealt with by the honourable Member across the way, but I will

have some constructive suggestions to make about this during the

estimates.

The Honourable Member from Atlin who just spoke prompts me to

digress for just a moment, in that regard, when he was discussing the

threat to the fishing in some of our major rivers.

It has long been a private theory of mine that our major rivers,

from a standpoint of production of fish, are overrated, or, maybe, in

reverse … can we put it this way, that many of

[ Page 442 ]

our secondary streams are underrated? There are

hundreds and

hundreds of very valuable fish-producing streams along some 14,000

miles of British Columbia coastline, both on the mainland and on the

Island. I happen to be familiar with one stream, the Salmon River,

which empties into Salmon Bay, in the Sayward area. Many years ago,

that river supported a fantastic salmon population. It's a secondary

river, not a great river but, nevertheless, an important one. It

supported two distinct tribes, or runs, of Spring, now called Chinook

or King salmon, or Tyees, two distinct tribes or runs. There was a very

heavy run of Cohoe. There was a fantastic run of Humpbacks or Pinks.

There were even Dog salmon in the fall. There was a heavy run of

Steelheads, which is one of the only things that survives in the Salmon

River, today, and sea run, Dolly Varden run and excellent Cutthroat

trout fishing. Today, that river has been practically decimated and, if

you count what used to be a school of salmon going up that river,

today, you'd count them on the fingers of your hands. In those days,

you'd count them by the minutes it took them to pass under the bridge

like a fleet. It is a disgrace and these rivers, such — as the Salmon,

require much greater protection. The Campbell River complex … and

when

they dammed to provide extra waters for the John Hart development, they

dammed the headwaters of the Salmon River and they were not too careful

as to when they would spill and when they would hold and, naturally,

they are holding in the hot, dry period and the hot, dry periods are

when the fish are trying to get up to spawn. As one of the oldtimers

said, up there, Mr. Speaker, at this particular stage, in late August

and early September, when the Cohoe were trying to get up the river, he

said, they left nothing behind them but a trail of dust.

I think there is great room for employment here, not a vast number,

but a chance to interest our young. people in the ecology of our coast

and our rivers and our fishing industry. I think there is a great

opportunity for patrolling these rivers, because in that particular

river, and I think many others, patrols to prevent depredation by

lawbreakers is practically nonexistent. I ran across a fish warden a

few years ago and he was circling a reef at the south end of Helmcken

Island, five miles across from the mouth of the river, he had a 16 ft.

aluminum boat with an outboard! This man was supposed to be patrolling

the whole of Salmon Bay and the tidal waters of the Salmon River, which

is patently ridiculous (interruption) .

What killed the run, the honourable Member wants to know? Yes.

Humanity is the answer. But what phase of humanity I cannot tell you,

because there are so many facets to it. Obviously, overfishing in the

early days, with heavy seining, the destruction by dynamite by

unemployed loggers in pools, too lazy to fish, pesticides, obviously,

some used by various branches of forest industry and Government without

regard, in those days … I am glad to say that aspect of it is being

co-ordinated and ended. Nobody can put their finger on it. You cannot

prove any one of these things because the thing that has been lacking

has been the supervision of that river by knowledgeable biologists to

tell us what has happened and what should be done to bring them back.

The Honourable Jack Davis has appealed to them and he has been promised

cooperation, in cooperation with our own Department of Fisheries, to

examine that particular river, but that is only one river. There are

hundreds of secondary rivers that, in the aggregate, become, maybe,

almost as important as the Fraser or the Skeena or whatever it is.

But I make a case here for the employment and interest of our

younger unemployed, during the summer season, when the fishing season

is on and, possibly, a programme could be worked out on a cooperative

basis between Ottawa and Victoria in that area. Not a spectacular

answer to unemployment, Mr. Speaker, but certainly a constructive step

forward on both fronts, the ecological front and the employment

front

(interruption) . I'll leave the

Skagit Valley to you, Mr.

I will not

discuss further at this time dialogue that has been set up with the

Majority Leader of our neighbouring Legislature in the State of

Washington with regard to action on the subject of pollution. You may

have read in Friday's Sun of

the Honourable Stewart Bledsoe's interview

and his willingness to cooperate with this Province and join forces

with us to put up the best possible fight we can against those things

that threaten the coastline of Vancouver Island and the Strait of Juan

de Fuca and the Gulf of Georgia. This dialogue, Mr. Speaker, now

promises to extend over the full length of the Pacific Coast of North

America, because the Mexicans are now in and expressing an interest in

joining with us. Representatives from the State of Alaska Legislature,

Oregon State, California, and as I said, Mexico, they are ready and

willing to enter into dialogue. I'm delighted to know that the

Honourable Minister of Recreation and Conservation and the Honourable

Minister of Lands, Forests, and Water Resources have both indicated

their willingness to join in this dialogue, which, I hope, will take

place after the House rises. Meetings will be held very shortly and I

think British Columbia should be in attendance.

The question of the vital need for a Lower Mainland Transit

Authority and a new bridge across Burrard Inlet, I will discuss during

the estimates. Finally, during the estimates, Mr. Speaker, I will bring

forward further information and suggestions with regard to a continuing

programme of highway landscaping and beautification.

The subject that I do wish to

discuss during this debate, Mr.

Speaker, is the future of Canada's third city — Vancouver — of which I

have the honour to be a native son and one of two representatives from

Vancouver-Burrard. Vancouver-Burrard, as I said in my reply to the

Throne Speech, forms a belt line across the dynamic core of the fastest

growing metropolitan area in this nation.

Greater Vancouver, Mr. Speaker, is a city of destiny in the truest

sense of the word. As Van Horne said, when he stood in the forests,

near Victory Square, now Cambie and Cordova Streets, when Vancouver's

surveys first commenced, said to Hamilton of the CPR, "Hamilton, some

day here will be one of the nation's greatest cities, probably, its

greatest." Van Horne's predictions have long since come true, but we

have progressed much farther. The lower mainland area of which the city

of Vancouver is the core, has become not only a National and Provincial

metropolis, it has also, in the process, become a problem. Our Premier

is quite right when he states that British Columbia has become a Mecca

for easterners and people anxious only for the better way of life that

offers itself west of the Rockies. It is also true to state, Mr.

Speaker, that a corollary of this phenomenon is the fact that Greater

Vancouver bears the brunt of the overload of this country's migration.

As a Province, we welcome industrious newcomers and, as a city,

Vancouver welcomes them, but, Mr. Speaker, if British Columbia deserves

Federal assistance to cope with its overload, then it is obvious that

Vancouver needs both Federal and Provincial assistance. Vancouver needs

leadership, not cheap advice. Our senior Governments, Mr. Speaker,

should act like senior Governments. It does no good to have a request

by the mayor of the city of Vancouver ridiculed, either by Ottawa or

Victoria. It does no good to have a

[ Page 443 ]

positive statement offered by a British Columbia

Cabinet Minister in

good faith, supporting a great need by Vancouver, to be contradicted

and discredited by a Cabinet Minister in Ottawa or vice versa.

Mr. Speaker, we had a classic example of this very recently. I am

sorry, Mr. Member, the example has to be quoted in this context. When

the Lower Mainland Rapid Transit Report was released, the Honourable

Minister of Municipal Affairs stated very quickly that the Province of

British Columbia would put up its required 37 ½ per cent share, well

in excess of $100 million. Immediately, almost as though you had

pressed a button, from the wrong Minister in Ottawa, a Cabinet

Minister, supposedly representing the citizens of Vancouver, came a

gratuitous announcement that Ottawa would have no part of such a

scheme, nothing to do with it, no responsibility for anything to do

with rapid transit or mass transit for the good of the city of

Vancouver which he represents. One wonders, Mr. Speaker, what happens

to some of these people when they cross the Rocky Mountains and pass

through the portals of the Peace Tower on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. I

really don't know, Mr. Speaker. I've been there, many of you have been

there, and the air is not that rare. But something seems to happen.

Greater Vancouver can do without being the feather plug in this

continuing game of shuttlecock and battledore. For the information of

the uninformed, Mr. Speaker, shuttlecock and battledore was a game

dreamed up by British calvary officers in India to relieve boredom

between riots in the Khyber Pass. Today, it goes under the polite name

of badminton, and the two great exponents in this House are the

Honourable Members from Vancouver–Point Grey and Vancouver East. They

well know the game of badminton and how it is played. In politics, they

call it "passing the buck!" (Interruption.)

They haven't got a bat in

hand, though. Tiddlywinks is your game, Mr. Member.

Canada and British Columbia — now listen carefully — need a new

bridge across Burrard Inlet, Mr. Speaker. Canada and British Columbia

need this new bridge more than the citizens of Vancouver need it.

People generally think of Vancouver in terms of a million people. This

is just not so. Vancouver city proper is the core of a metropolitan

population, well in excess of a million, but the city core population

is just under half a million. The Greater Vancouver-lower mainland area

is of inestimable strategic value to the whole of the Dominion of

Canada and to British Columbia, Mr. Speaker. The usable land area is so

limited, so strategic and so valuable that I repeat, Mr. Speaker, a new

bridge across Burrard Inlet is most certainly more of a Federal and

Provincial necessity than it is a necessity to the citizens of

Vancouver.

AN HON. MEMBER: Tunnel be all right? Tunnel or bridge?

MR. MERILEES: I'm coming to that and you can crawl in the

tunnel.

You will notice, Mr. Speaker and honourable Members, that I refer to

the construction of a new bridge, not a tunnel. For two reasons: one,

which is important, the bridge will be cheaper. It will be a soaring,

excitingly beautiful attraction that will rival anything spanning any

harbour in the world. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, whoever took a picture of

a tunnel? Answer me.

Rapid transit, which is part of a total mass transit problem — we

will discuss that later. The Honourable Member from Vancouver Centre

will be bringing that up. Half a million people just cannot possibly

swing a multimillion dollar bridge, a multimillion dollar rapid transit

system, a multimillion dollar waterfront development, on top of

extraordinary expansion of other developments and service costs in

Canada's fastest growing urban complex. It's just not possible and just

not fair. Mr. Speaker, there should be, there must be, a Federal

Provincial and municipal master plan for the efficient development of

the whole Greater Vancouver-lower mainland area. If we don't do this

soon, almost now, a hundred years from now when we are celebrating

another Centennial, people are going to look back and wonder what was

wrong with us. Such a plan is vital to the National interest, not just

Vancouver. Don't talk just Vancouver or British Columbia, it is

National as well as Provincial as well as municipal. There just has to

be an end to buck-passing, telegrams, insults, refusals and ridicule.

I am very happy to make this announcement, Mr. Speaker and the

Members, that, today, the Honourable the Minister of Municipal Affairs

has given his undertaking that, as soon as is mutually convenient,

following the conclusion of this Legislature, he will issue invitations

and convene a meeting in Vancouver. These invitations will be issued to

the Honourable Robert Andras and other interested Ministers and their

advisors, in Ottawa, as well as members from the Greater Vancouver

Regional District and the mayors of the cities and municipalities

within the Regional District, to discuss on the broadest possible basis

cooperative plans, instead of shuttlecock and battledore, for the

development of Vancouver.

This meeting, which the Honourable Minister had pledged to convene,

will take place some time during the month of May. In this matter, Mr.

Speaker and Members of the Legislature, I should like to convey my

sincere appreciation to the Honourable the Minister.

Now, to an immediate problem, Mr. Speaker. As you will remember, our

Premier suggested to the city of Vancouver that it install higher

street lighting intensities to discourage crime of all types and to

make heavily travelled metropolitan streets safer for both vehicular

and pedestrian traffic. There is no question, Mr. Speaker, that this is

a most constructive and valuable suggestion. The Chief Constable of

Vancouver, John Fisk, strongly supports higher lighting intensities.

Chief Fisk and his staff have studied the effect of lighting

intensities as they assist in cutting crime. I quote from a letter

written by the Chief Constable. "In this regard, you might be

interested in the following

article appearing in the Seattle Municipal

News with respect to the effect of improved lighting on the

crime

pattern:

Documentation of crime rates before and after the installation of

lights leaves much to be desired; however, where data are recorded, the

results following lighting campaigns often have been dramatic. Here is

a sampling from the files of the Street and Highway Safety Lighting

Bureau in Cleveland. In some areas of Indianapolis, crime dropped 85

per cent after adequate lighting was installed. A former Detroit Police

Commissioner reported that street crimes have been reduced as much as

55 per cent in improved areas. Gary, Indiana, installed 5,000 new

street lights. Criminal assaults dropped 70 per cent and robberies 60

per cent. When relighting was one-third completed in Cleveland, the

assaults dropped by one-third, in equal proportion. In the first four

months after 144 blocks in St. Louis received new lights, street crimes

dropped 15.9 per cent. In New York City, an area of 111 blocks was

relighted. In the subsequent two

[ Page 444 ]

years, the incidence of murder, assault, and rape

dropped 49 per

cent. Chicago installed 51,000 luminaires in 2,200 miles of alleys in

the winter of 1965-66. Carefully documented police records show that

the number of serious crimes reported in alleys during the hours of

darkness was 30.4 per cent less. In a survey of 1,300 police officers

throughout the nation, 85 per cent reported a drop in crime rates when

lighting was improved. After good lighting, 42 per cent of the

officials reported a 50 per cent drop; 30 per cent of the officers

reported a 25 per cent crime rate cut; 19 per cent said crime had

dropped 10 per cent." Now, these are rather interesting figures, Mr.

Speaker. And the final statistic, in case you are not too bored,

"Milwaukee may be known as the beer capital of the world, but its alley

lighting programme justifies another claim to fame. Once the city got

its first taste of these lights, it thirsted for more. And, in six

months time, 5,000 new lights had been installed. The first alley

lights to be installed were 2,500 lumen incandescents; however, this

one-by-one installation was never contemplated to completely cover the

city. As aldermen started to receive phone calls praising the new

lights, more were installed. Public demand grew and grew and grew."

In addition to this telling evidence, Mr. Speaker, our Premier

discovered in Los Angeles, that, in the troubled Watts area and other

difficult areas in Los Angeles, higher street lighting intensities

brought startling results. The aim — the rapid drop in crime rate — was

most rewarding. This programme was brought about by cooperative action

between citizens, the municipality and the State, in which business

firms and citizens declared themselves prepared to share with the State

the increased costs on a local improvement basis. One of the important

factors in providing higher lighting intensities is, of course, the

cost of energy.

Historically, in British Columbia, electric rates have been

structured to encourage heavy industry. This goes back to the

beginnings of the electric utility business. They were structured to

encourage, first of all, heavy and, later, lighter industry. This made

nothing but sense in an economy that was based on hewers of wood and

drawers of water. This policy, Mr. Speaker, still makes sense. Lower

electric rates help industry to compete in world markets and this, in

turn, means steady, gainful employment for hundreds of thousands of

British Columbians. So, if you complain about lower industrial electric

rates, think twice before you complain too loudly, because it is

guaranteeing jobs.

But, now, Mr. Speaker, a new era is with us. Population growth and

technological changes, such as the automobile, have rushed upon us.

People's living habits and the growth of crime force us to examine

everything we do, including the lighting of our streets, in a

completely different manner and approach. This has to include, of

course, Mr. Speaker, the cost. The city of Vancouver has a street

lighting bill payable to B.C. Hydro in excess of $680,000 per year. The

average overhead street lighting unit draws 300 to 400 watts.

Vancouver's city electrician has done a survey and recommends that, to

make Vancouver a safer place and a more enjoyable place to walk, drive

and live, requires considerably increased lighting intensities on

presently lighted streets, which mean many more fixtures. In addition,

he strongly urges, with full police support, a special programme of

lighting with a minimum of 5,000 new lighting units to be placed in

lanes and alleys.

In Vancouver-Burrard alone, represented by my colleague, the

Honourable Second Member and myself, there are many trouble spots. On

West 7th Avenue, and in other areas between Broadway and the shores of

False Creek, there are definite danger areas. Many citizens are afraid

to leave their homes after dark. One business woman who lives on 7th

Avenue and owns a store on Broadway, three short blocks away, Mr.

Speaker, due to the darkness and close presence of known

potentially-dangerous individuals, is put in the position, and to the

daily expense, Mr. Speaker, of having to hire a taxicab to and from her

place of business and her home.

Mr. Speaker, let us correct these situations and let us light up our

streets so that we do not find in our larger centres that conditions

deteriorate to the point that exists now in many American cities where,

not only women and children, but also grown men dare not venture forth

after dark for fear of muggings, rapes or what have you.

There are many more in the areas represented by the Honourable

Members from Vancouver Centre and Vancouver East. The lighting

intensities recommended by the city electrician would increase payments

to the B.C. Hydro by over $150,000 per year. I'm working up to a point,

Mr. Minister — the two Ministers who represent B.C. Hydro — over

$150,000 a year. The capital costs to the city and the taxpayers of

Vancouver would exceed over $4 million. In addition to this, Mr.

Speaker, the 5,000 units proposed to light up lanes, which are a very

vulnerable part of our pattern for vandalism and muggings, as we all

know, and are stepping up, would require the city to pay an additional

nuisance charge to the B.C. Hydro of 35 cents a pole per month for the

privilege of hanging a fixture on a pole that is already standing there

doing nothing.

Mr. Speaker, here is information I have received from our city

engineering department. "The following is information on our present

plant: city owned lights at present, $30,926; estimated replacement

value, $16 million; cost of maintenance, $470,000; electricity,

$646,000; leasing of lights from Hydro, another $12,000.

Although the city has lighted over 90 per cent of its streets to the

minimum levels," which are too low, really, "recommended by the

Canadian Standards Association, or better, the following upgrading is

considered a vital necessity and forms the basis for the city's

continuing Capital Street Lighting Programme. To install lighting on

streets, not lighted, 1,000, 40 miles, capital cost, $520,000, and the

cost of electricity, $13,000." It goes on "… to replace obsolete,

incandescent, 1,000; replace incandescents in residential areas, 5,000;

replace incandescents in thoroughfares, 3,000; up-grade mercury vapour

lighting, 3,500;" and there are more statistics to install the lane

lighting, I told you about, 5,000. The total increase in the electric

bill to handle this, $135,400 and these figures are rough estimates

based on the dollar value as it stood in 1970.

In 1963, which is the last year for which I was able to get figures,

anyway, the street lighting rate for the city of Vancouver and other

comparable cities in Canada was as follows: in Vancouver, per kilowatt

hour 1.364; Edmonton, 1.194; London, Ontario, 1.025; Regina, 1.015. The

present rate for street light electricity in Vancouver is 1.5 cents per

kwh. The Winnipeg rate, data obtained in the 1969 report, was

calculated to be 0.686 cents per kwh.

So, I respectfully request, through the Honourable Ministers

represented on the board of B.C. Hydro, that they examine the street

lighting rate in the interests of the certain saving of human lives, to

say nothing of the removal of the fear of pedestrians on our streets,

and to cut down on property losses and expensive traffic accidents. A

reduction in street lighting rates would encourage our city to step up

its

[ Page 445 ]

lighting and do a better job. It would mean much to

bus citizens and

to our city and, in the end, could make Greater Vancouver an even

brighter jewel, Mr. Speaker, in the crown that is British Columbia.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Skeena.

MR. D.G. LITTLE (Skeena): Mr. Speaker, many remarks have been

made in the House, both responsible, and otherwise, during this

Session. I want to commend the NDP Member for Atlin for behaving like a

true northerner and taking his place in the House and telling the truth

regarding what goes on behind the scenes in the NDP Party. They

disassociated themselves from him. It was too hot in the kitchen.

We, at times, make reference to the different leaders that they have

in the NDP Party and we know, of course, we have several. But, Mr.

Speaker, it is very obvious who cracks the whip. As a matter of fact,

Mr. Speaker, you dare not cross this man. The man who actually leads

the Party, and I understand is now helping them write their speeches,

is none other than Ray Haynes, the secretary of the B.C. Federation of

Labour. You can well understand the reason, Mr. Speaker, when he tells

them right outright, and it has been practiced, "Either do as I say, or

we'll cut off your campaign funds."

Now, Mr. Speaker, I have a letter that I received from the north and

it is not from a political friend. It tells about things and how they

are in Terrace. He said, "The Chamber of Commerce had their annual

meeting on Friday night with the Honourable Arthur Laing as guest

speaker. His speech can only be described as dreadful. Forty minutes of

the history of British Columbia without a quip, anecdote or flash of

humour amongst them. If the Liberals cannot do better than that, then

your Government is safe in Victoria, but God help us in Ottawa, " he

said.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to have spoken directly on conservation

but the Minister isn't there, so, perhaps, I can come back to that, and

on Education but that Minister isn't here, either. Maybe, this could be

a real short speech … I'll speak to the listeners in, Mr. Speaker,

because you know there is always someone there listening.

What I'd like to say, now, is that I am very happy, this year, that

the Department of Recreation and Conservation has been provided with

money in order to be able to look after the many commitments that have

been neglected for years. I would like to point out that at Lakelse

Lake we have a beautiful beach. When we had the slide there, a few

years back — Alcan, the Aluminum Co. of Canada, had a beautiful beach

on Lakelse Lake they had bought when they first came north, for their

employees — and they decided, because of this disaster, to donate their

beach to the Government. This has finally been accepted and taken in as

a park by the Recreation and Conservation Department. But, that is all

that has been done, Mr. Speaker, in all these years. There is only half

a mile of road needed to get to this beach. We have an overnight

campsite at Terrace which accommodates, at the present time, some 60

vehicles, with barbecue grills and tables. They plan on developing

this. This will go up to a hundred. I think the plan is 90-some spots

there. This had to be located at another area from where the swimming

beach was for the bathers. Some of these beaches become crowded out

with people, Mr. Speaker, because Lakelse Lake just happens to be the

only lake in the area that has to serve the 10,500 people in Kitimat,

the 13,500 people in Prince Rupert and the 14,000 people in Terrace. I

would urge the Government this year to make a move and, for Heaven's

sakes, to put in this half a mile of road so that we can find

somewhere, at least, for the people where they can park their cars and

enjoy bathing on a Sunday. It is not possible at the present time,

because there isn't even room to park.

There is one point that I would like to bring to the attention of

the Minister of Recreation and Conservation and that is the debt of

gratitude that every citizen in B.C. owes to a family. I wonder if he,

by any chance, thinks that he has members in his department who are the

top conservationists in B.C. We have people, acting independently, who

have done more for B.C. than anyone within his department. Mr. Speaker,

I would like to speak, now, of the Edwards family who lives on Lonesome

Lake. The original settler, Mr. Edwards, fed and looked after the last

large flock of trumpeter swans on this continent. Then, later, his

daughter, who grew up beside the lake, married Jack Turner and she and

her husband have carried on this wonderful family tradition of caring

for these beautiful birds. The flock has steadily increased and now

stands at 380.

AN HON. MEMBER: Where is Lonesome Lake?

MR. LITTLE: Up the coast, inland, approximately at the north

end of Vancouver Island. Only accessible by air or you can get in from

the Chilcotin area. It's on the mainland. It seems unbelievable that

these people have had to pack in 18,000 lbs. of grain to feed these

birds during winter. It is hard to realize that we have a Department of

Conservation and Recreation and the Government have planes that are not

being used and still these people have to pack grain in to feed the

last flock of trumpeter swans in B.C. I would urge the Government to

take immediate action here to fly this feed in, because, right at this

present moment, they are out of grain there and need help to get grain

in. This should either be done from planes by the B.C. Government or,

probably, it would take, at the moment, Federal helicopters because, in

all likelihood, the ice wouldn't be safe to land on with skis. The

liquid would be frozen, so helicopters would have to be the answer.

Mr. Speaker, I have a proposal and I don't think it is unreasonable,

because this family is going to have to leave Lonesome Lake unless they

find a way to educate their daughter. They have a daughter who is now a

teenager and they feel that she should relocate in order that she could

receive a proper education. I am going to suggest to the Department of

Recreation and Conservation that this man, Jack Turner, be sworn in as

a conservation officer, at least, during the winter months when he is

doing this work in preserving the swans for posterity. This would

provide the means for Mr. and Mrs. Turner to send their daughter out to

school. It would also give them proper compensation for the dedication

and humane service they have rendered in helping save these birds from

extinction. I feel very strongly about this, Mr. Speaker, and hope that

the Minister will have a statement to make in this House before his

estimates come to the Floor.

Mr. Speaker, I have another matter which bothers me very much, I

have two children that need help in Kitimat. Because one was a normal

case, there was no problem in really placing this child. There was a

waiting period, which we all expect but; eventually, the child was

properly placed. The other child was a child born with multiple

physical damage, because she was a German measles child. She has braces

[ Page 446 ]

her legs, wears heavy glasses, she is deaf and, as

a result, is

mute. This child is intelligent and could be educated, but there is no

place in our educational system, or in an institution, that seems to be

able to help. After eight months I was advised by the Minister of

Education that they had been unable to find a place for this child, the

reason being, that because the child had suffered multiple damage, they

do not have a proper place for her.

Mr. Speaker, it makes you wonder when you see a headline like this,

in which it states, "B.C. Limits Lottery Prizes." Then it says that a

$5,000 limit is going to be placed by the Provincial Cabinet on the

total value of prizes in any Government licensed lottery. I could go on

and explain here, but this has seriously hurt the PNE in Vancouver. It

has also hurt a project, which would be the replica of the discovery

which did all the mapping on the first trip, to do extensive mapping on

our coast. This would have been such a wonderful, worthwhile Centennial

project that I don't see how anyone could argue against it. Also, it is

well known that what they call the illegal sweepstake, which is the

city of Montreal, netted that city $10 million. I think that if

Government isn't able and can't afford to place children like this,

then, what in the world would be wrong with letting one of our service

clubs, if they didn't want to do it themselves, or someone with a

properly supervised sweep, which could finance cases such as this? I

notice that, in reading the report from the Racing Commission, we issue

licenses and collect taxes, there, that go into the Government funds to

the extent of some $46,000. If we are willing to do this on a race

track, then, I don't see why we shouldn't be willing to participate in

a sweepstake. It's all gambling. I know, Mr. Speaker, if this were put

to a vote that the people in the Skeena riding, and there were a

worthwhile project behind it, that it would receive over 90 per cent

approval from the area which I represent in this House.

Regarding this girl, I could just read you a letter here. It comes

from a Minister. It tells that the case was turned over to one of the

specialists they have in their department, a Mr. Canty or something,

what they had done and the effort that was made. It is recognizing

that, in accordance with the Government policy, there are specialized

placement services in that department … the department offered the

best hope of finding facilities and so on. Then it winds up, "…

although I can offer no easy solution to the problem that concerns you

so much, I assure you that this department has done all in its power to

help and will continue to offer full support."

Full support, Mr. Speaker, in this particular case, is nothing. The

thing that concerns me is the poor mother and the brother and sister

that this child happens to have. The problem, as I see it, is that this

is not good for the other sister and brother and that this creates such

a burden that, unless the Government does something, they will be faced

with the problem of having a mother to look after, as well as the

child. How we can say, in this House, that we are looking after and

caring for the people that require special aid in the Province, and

then find yourself, because, it's a more serious than usual case, it's

one you can't handle. Multiple injuries means, in effect, that we can't

do anything about it, this is too serious a case for us to look after.

Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed that I had to bring this to the

floor of the House but there is no other way that I can see.

Then, speaking on sweepstakes, again. Here is an article,

"Sweepstakes Anyone?" This is Canadian

Press , January 6, 1971.

"Exhibition Association in Edmonton and Calgary announced that they

will each sponsor a $200,000 sweepstake." What is there about limiting

a $5,000 sweepstake in B.C., when they can go for $200,000 in Alberta?

This, of course, is Government-sponsored and the money is going to be

used for just such cases as that I brought before the House. Here's

another one. LuckyDog Lottery, this is Saskatchewan, and they are going

for $100,000. Why do we have to be so aggressive in the field of

helping by other means when we don't provide the means ourselves?

Mr. Speaker, we have mentioned on the floor of this House and we

have a bill on the floor of this House, regarding teachers' pensions.

So I am not going to speak about pensions. As a matter of fact, I feel

safer speaking about teachers on the floor of the House than I might at

home, because I happen to have married one.

However, Mr. Speaker, regarding these teachers, we, on the floor of

this House, have mentioned doctors as performing their duties with too

much laxity. This was brought out in an earlier debate. But what about

the teachers whose behaviour is worse than any labour union'! The

labour unions will honour a contract. Yet, the teachers expected to be

treated as professional people. The B.C. Teachers' Federation is one of

the largest and strongest wholly-B.C. unions in our Province. After a

teacher has put in two years' teaching, his position is comparable to

belonging to a union with a closed shop. They are now trying to dictate

to Government — policy. Some of their representatives are foreign born

and strongly favour communism. It is time Canadian teachers became

concerned with the cleaning up and policing of their own organization

and become truly professional like doctors and lawyers.

It is my opinion, Mr. Speaker, that this Government should allow a

competent board comprised of teachers from the B.C. Teachers'

Federation to have the authority to lift the certificate of an

incompetent teacher. We now have unemployed B.C. Canadian teachers.

There should be a stop order on bringing in teachers from the outside.

Then we have the municipal groups who are happy and then we have the

article that was in the Colonist

of this date. It says in this

article

— I'll only read a part, "If teachers struck for better pensions they

should be fired, according to Greater Victoria School Trustee, Peter

Bunn." But a Victoria labour official disagreed. "It is unprofessional

conduct for them to strike commented Bunn at a School Board meeting.

Bunn ran on an NDP ticket in the last Provincial election."

Mr. Speaker, only a few years ago, the main concern was the welfare

of the students. Do we ever hear this expression any more, Mr.

Speaker? The answer is, no. Now, all you hear is the welfare of the

teachers. Teachers sign to teach in a district at a stated salary scale

and benefits. They should not be allowed to strike or threaten to

withdraw their services. This is our tax money and teachers should be

demanded to play a responsible role in our society for the education of

our children.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak for a moment on fishing. I know

that the Member from Atlin will enjoy listening to this. He touched

lightly on this, before, today. I, myself, Mr. Speaker, have a fishing

village that is out on the coast and, then, also we have quite a large

number of fishermen who are headquartered at Kitimat village. Also, I

run out at the coast at Hartley Bay. I have become very concerned about

the plight of our Indian fishermen. How Jack Davis, the Federal

Minister of Fisheries could come up, with a proposal of reducing the

fishing fleet under his present plan is beyond my comprehension. It

will mean, in effect,

[ Page 447 ]

that boats making smaller catches will be the first

to lose their

licenses and be eliminated from the industry. In many and perhaps most

cases, those affected will be Indians. It would be my hope, Mr.

Speaker, that this House will not stand idly by and see our native

fishermen deprived of their main means of livelihood by a Federal

Department of Fisheries that doesn't understand their problem.

In many cases, their boats are small and their profits are very

marginal. We must remember that these are our first citizens and it is

my feeling that no Government whether Provincial or Federal has the

right to tell an Indian whether or not he can fish. For those who are

familiar with gillnet fishing they will know that the season starts

first in the north. Southern fishermen make a practice of coming north

with their gillnetters and then moving back towards home later on in

the season, taking full advantage of salmon runs along our coast. This

is an advantage to them, but what about the troubled industry that has

suffered from so many strikes whereby at the start of the season there

is no fishing? It has always meant that the northern B.C. natives have

had to bear the brunt of the suffering because, by the time the strike

is settled, the greater part of the salmon runs has passed in the

north. The Indians, in effect, have been the scapegoats for southern

fishermen, who still have time to take full advantage of the salmon

runs in the south. Mr. Speaker, what goes on, actually, is that the

companies now have the licenses on the boats — at the present time, 699

Class A licenses for gillnetting. Still, in spite of this, Mr. Speaker,

and in spite of the fact that they are cutting down, last year we

imported 28,000 cases of salmon. In 1969, of 773 salmon vessels, 416

were Indian and, in 1970, it was down from 773 to 699 and the Indian

vessels were down to 361 with licenses. I'd like to congratulate our

Minister, Dan Campbell, who wired to the Fisheries Minister, Jack

Davis, in the Federal House and showed how concerned we are in this

Government regarding the plight of our fishermen. The Federal

Government will allow large subsidies for tuna boats, many of which are

run by foreigners and still they won't subsidize the Indians to stay in

the fishing industry.

I think there should be a meeting between Jack Davis of Fisheries

and Jean Chretien of Indian Affairs to see if they couldn't come up

with a better deal, somehow, for our natives. Also, Mr. Speaker, I

don't think that we should allow the companies to control or withdraw

boats or wipe out licenses. I think the licenses should go instead to

the natives and not be put on the boats. Mr. Speaker, while I am on

this particular subject, they have, in Alaska, come up with a plan, and

it is my feeling that the coast should be separated into different

areas … I notice that this idea has been suggested by Chief

Councillor

Gosnell of Aiyansh. It has been endorsed by Sonny Nelson of B.C.

Packers, who is well known in the fishing industry of B.C. It is

already practiced in Alaska, where it is termed "fishing limitations"

which provides a fair return for the fishermen in the area and also

restricts fishermen from other areas going in and taking off the cream.

Mr. Speaker, it is a splendid plan and I think it should be followed.

Mr. Speaker, we have also a threat to our coast in the fact that

they could be putting on huge barges to bring oil down and land in

Washington State, just south of us. I think, Mr. Speaker, that we

should assert ourselves right here and say, for those of us who know

something about the coast, that you can go from Vancouver to Juneau

and, except for a couple of small exposed areas, you can travel the

inside passage. I think, Mr. Speaker, that we should assert ourselves,

right now, and say that those are our waters and that no tankers of any

other nation will ever be allowed to travel on our inside passage;

furthermore, that we keep them out beyond the 9-mile or the 12-mile

limit or whichever we may be able to control. In any event, if such a

thing did happen, that there were a leak, it wouldn't get right into

the inside passage and the mouths of our rivers, which run into the

inside passage all along the coast. Also, we might have a chance of

controlling it better if they were on the outside, along with the fact

that there wouldn't be the danger of the boats and ships getting into

trouble that there would be if we allowed them on our inside passage

which, in many places, is very narrow.

Mr. Speaker, I have one last subject that I would like to cover and

this … I'm not having too much luck here. Oh, yes, we have the

Minister

of Education with us. It has to do with mining. I would like to

congratulate, at this time, the Northern B.C. Chamber of Mines which is

endeavouring to sponsor a course at the Terrace Vocational School. This

would include a course in practical mining, exploration techniques,

geology, mineralogy and geophysics. Mr. Redmond, principal of the

Vocational School, has stated that dormitories, cafeteria and room for

a class is available at the Vocational School in Terrace. They have a

bus, if required, to take students out to mineralized zones for

practical study. It has been endorsed by Mr. Walker, Terrace's Canada

Manpower head, who also may be able to help some of the young people to

get this training.

Mr. Speaker, there was a release made and it was dated January 21.

This had to do with the support that the Northern Chamber of Mines

would be able to give to a school of mines to be established in Terrace

at the fast growing Terrace Vocational School. This will be Canada's

first School of Mines, west of the famous and highly successful

Haileybury School of Mines in Ontario. It pointed out that wider

membership is necessary for effective operation. The Northern Chamber

mining people, business leaders and others interested are asked to

participate in this project, with their participation and membership.

The fees and so on are set down.

Mr. Speaker, since this came out, there is a class already waiting

in Terrace, which is ready and prepared to take this course. That was

January 21. This is February I and this carries through with the

possibility of the class in Terrace and the plans that are being made.

Then it says, "In a phone conversation, Mr. Bates of the Northern

Chamber learned from the Honourable Donald Brothers, Minister of

Education, that although no definite decision has been made as to the

site, there is a possibility that the Kootenay area of southern B.C.

may be the final choice. It is interesting that the reason given for

this possible choice is that it has been declared a depressed area by

the Dominion Government."

Mr. Speaker, what I would like to point out is that northern B.C. Is

well known for its mineral wealth, which has yet to be developed. How

better can it be accomplished than by educating and training under

northern conditions. Labour turnover in northern mines is very high.

Why should we not, then, train local people who would be content to

stay and work in the north? Another fact that must not be overlooked is

the necessity for practical training which could be done under natural

field conditions. There is a great need in the north for skilled

miners. The Vocational School is on the ground where roads will be

built north to the mining area. I'm talking now about Stewart-Cassiar

and the northern area developing so fast. Terrace is in the Coast

Range, which, at

[ Page 448 ]

the present time,

is where most of the exploration is being done.

Besides that, it is well served by communications, such as two flights

a day to Vancouver via CPA, daily flights north via TPA, three times

weekly east by PWA, daily bus transportation east and west, Canadian

Coachways, daily train service, CNR, live television — Skeena

Broadcasters Limited, micro-phone wave communications, B.C. Tel., paved

roads, Mr. Speaker, east, west and south. They have all been completed,

now the secondary roads north soon to connect with Stewart-Cassiar Road.

The region has several open pit and underground mines in operation.

I'm talking of the Babine Lake area, now, affording firsthand study

and, possibly, some practical participation. It is not my intention to

deny that there may be a need for mining training in southern B.C., but

here we have a release on February 2, and this says " … The

Honourable Donald Brothers, Minister of Education today announced that

the Technical and Vocational Training Division of the Department of

Education, in cooperation with the Federal Manpower Department and the

Mining Association of British Columbia are considering the start of a

school for miners in British Columbia. The Mining Association has

advised the department that over the next several years many hundreds

of trained equipment operators are going to be required in the

Province. Training will be given on equipment used in open pit mining,

underground mining, mine rescue, the operation and running maintenance

of mine equipment and first aid. A site near Rossland has been

recommended and it is expected that the first class of 40 students will

start on April 1, if financial arrangements are made." This, Mr.

Speaker, is what I am taking exception to. I am not here to say that

they perhaps shouldn't have a class for miners in or near Rossland.

What I am saying here is that we have one of the finest vocational

schools in western Canada in Terrace. We have a school on which we have

spent now in the vicinity of $7 million and we have the new dormitories

and cafeteria and the accommodation for these people. Not only that, we

have the Terrace people there right now to fill this class. Let's not

get carried away because we have a depressed area somewhere, where, in

all probability, many of the people who took the training may not know

what to do with the job if they had one when they are finished. This is

an area where people are hardworking and where they wish to train

themselves in the art and skills of mining. Also, Mr. Speaker, it is an

area where these people, when they have finished their course, would be

able to go out and work in the mines in the immediate area and make a

real contribution to our economy. We, in B.C., consider ourselves

resource developers. If this is our belief, then, let's follow it

through by establishing this class in the B.C. Vocational School at

Terrace.

I can see where this Budget can be of great benefit to the people in

the Skeena riding. Mr. Speaker, I will support it. Thank you.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable the Minister of Municipal

Affairs.

HON. D.R.J. CAMPBELL (Comox): Mr. Speaker, this being the

Budget Debate, I intend to make one or two comments about the Budget.

Having sat here for some time, now, and listened very carefully to the

presentations, particularly by the Members opposite, in terms of their

nonconsequential contribution to the debate, and then listened to the

intelligent, well-thought through ideas that were presented by Members

on this side of the House, particularly over in the corner there this

afternoon, who said something that I think should be recognized about

the presentations that are made by this Government to the Federal

Government in terms of Budget. I don't think it was lost on the Member

for Vancouver-Burrard but, I think, in terms of this Budget, it

certainly was lost on some of the Federal Members of Parliament. For

some time, now, in this House, it is obvious that it's lost on the

Opposition Members opposite.

This is the only jurisdiction in Canada where we are dealing with a

Budget, where the proposition of spending $300 million, in terms of

meeting the problems of rapid transit, was put forward, not on the

basis of debt creation, but on the basis of cash flow to the project on

a flexible basis as you go. If you are mesmerized, as I understand some

Members of the Federal House were, with the prospect of a country, like

Canada, becoming involved with an expenditure over 20 years in the

amount of $300 million. Mr. Speaker, for tackling this problem of urban

transit, and didn't understand, first of all, that it really meant that

you could be flexible as you go, to deny that it could be done is to

deny the productive capacity of this Nation and its people. In terms of

the whole process of planning and cash flow, we are not talking about

$300 million of debt money, we are talking about a commitment, year by

year, over a 20-year period, which is within the competence of this

Legislature to provide and it certainly should be, if it's not, within

the competence of the Federal Government.

Mr. Speaker, I can understand, to some extent, the myopia of the

Liberal group opposite when they continue this peculiar, and that's

about the only word that one might use to describe it, this peculiar

attitude to the fact that perpetual funds exist in British Columbia and

that those perpetual funds are invested in a number of projects which

are uplifting the people of the Province of British Columbia. Now, I

don't happen to have the responsibility for any fund other than the

First Citizens' Fund (interruption) .

Yes, that's the attitude of the

Liberal Party. It was when it was introduced.

Mr. Speaker, this particular fund…the Liberal Leader can call it a

perpetual hoax if he likes … but the Member from Atlin knows it is

not

a perpetual hoax. The $25 million in that fund, in the first year of

its existence, earned $1,800,000 odd. Now, Mr. Speaker, that money was

invested in the capital requirements of British Columbia, which include

Hydro and the PGE and the school financing authority and the hospital

financing authority. We were paying the interest accrued to ourselves

and we were setting up an interest fund from which first-class,

effective projects could fall out on the Indian people.

Now, if the Liberal Party really means what it says, I'll tell you

what the alternative happens to be, Mr. Leader, because I am sure you

don't understand this. At the very time, Mr. Speaker, that these funds

were growing and being built up by the careful budgeting over a good

number of years by this Government, at that same time, other

jurisdictions were in this so-called free marketplace. I think that is

the word you used, Mr. Leader, a "free" marketplace. If you think that

there is such a thing in the capital investment world today as a "free"

marketplace, you don't know what you are talking about. The minute you

have a fiscal policy laid down by a Federal administration, in the

United States and here in Canada, you can predict within a quarter of

one per cent, or a half of one per cent, what you are going to have to

pay in

[ Page 449 ]

the marketplace, that so-called "free" marketplace.

You should know

that. But you don't know that because every time you stand on your

feet, you try to produce this myth to the people of British Columbia

that some