H0327pm 07

H0327pm 07

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Thursday, March 27, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Volume 13, Number 7 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 4TH SESSION, 37TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Claude Richmond EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council................................................................................. .........................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations.............................................................................. ..................... Hon.

Greg Halsey-Brandt Deputy Premier and Minister of Education ....................................................................................... ..................................Hon. Christy Clark Minister of Advanced Education................................................................................................. ...........................................Hon. Shirley Bond Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations.............................................................. .................... Hon.

Geoff Plant Minister of Children and Family Development.................................................................................... ..............................Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of State for Early Childhood Development.............................................................................. .................................Hon. Linda Reid Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services......................................................................... .................. Hon.

George Abbott Minister of State for Community Charter........................................................................................ .................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Minister of State for Women's Equality ......................................................................................... .................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ................................................................................ ..................................Hon.

Rick Thorpe Minister of State for Deregulation ............................................................................................. ............................................ Hon. Kevin Falcon Minister of Energy and Mines................................................................................................... ....................................... Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of Finance ............................................................................................................ ....................................................... Hon.

Gary Collins Minister of Forests ............................................................................................................ .................................................. Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Health Planning .................................................................................................... ............................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Minister of Health Services.................................................................................................... ................................................ Hon.

Colin Hansen Minister of State for Mental Health ............................................................................................ ...................................Hon. Gulzar S. Cheema Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care ............................................................................. Hon. Katherine Whittred Minister of Human Resources.................................................................................................... ............................................Hon.

Murray Coell Minister of Management Services................................................................................................ .........................................Hon. Sandy Santori Minister of Provincial Revenue................................................................................................. ................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ................................................................................ ..................................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Skills Development and Labour...................................................................................... .............................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Minister of Sustainable Resource Management and Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries ..................................Hon. Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..................................................................................................... .................................................... Hon.

Judith Reid Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection..................................................................................... ....................................Hon. Joyce Murray LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................. ..............................................................

John Weisbeck Leader of the Opposition ....................................................................................................... ...........................................................Joy MacPhail Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ........................................................................................... .............................................. Harold Long Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .............................................................................................. .........................................E.

George MacMinn Clerk Assistant ................................................................................................................ ................................................................... Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .................................................................................................. ........................................................ Ian D. Izard Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees........................................................................................ ............................................Craig H.

James Clerk Assistant/Committee Clerk................................................................................................ ............................................ Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms ............................................................................................................... .........................................................A.A. Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................... ........................................

Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian.......................................................................................................... ............................................................. Joan A. Barton Legislative Comptroller ........................................................................................................ .................................................................Peter Bray Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker by the Queen's Printer, Victoria.

Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636. Fax: 386-0221. www.leg.bc.ca/hansard In addition to printed transcripts, Hansard Services publishes transcripts on the Internet and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.

Party Standings: Liberal 75; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 2. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ....................................................................... Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L) .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)............................................. Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L).........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L).................................................................................

North Coast Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................... East Kootenay Bhullar, Tony (Ind. L) ................................................................. Surrey-Newton Bloy, Harry (L).................................................................................. Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).........................................Prince George–Mount Robson Bray, Jeff (L)......................................................................Victoria–Beacon H ill Brenzinger, Elayne (L) ...............................................................

Surrey-Whalley Brice, Susan (L) ............................................................................Saanich South Bruce, Hon. Graham P. (L)................................................ Cowichan-Ladysmith Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Cheema, Hon. Gulzar S. (L) ..........................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Chong, Ida (L)................................................................ Oak Bay–Gordon Head Christensen, Tom (L) .............................................................

Okanagan-Vernon Chutter, Dave (L) ........................................................................... Yale-L illooet Clark, Hon. Christy (L) ..................................................Port Moody–Westwood Cobb, Walt (L) ............................................................................. Cariboo South Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ........................................ Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L) .............................................. Fort Langley–Aldergrove Collins, Hon.

Gary (L).........................................................Vancouver-Fairview de Jong, Hon. Michael (L)....................................... Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................... Surrey-Cloverdale Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................... Comox Valley Halsey-Brandt, Hon. Greg (L) ..................................................Richmond Centre Hamilton, Arnie (L)............................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) .....................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Harris, Roger (L)......................................................................................Skeena Hawes, Randy (L) ............................................................ Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Hon. Sindi (L).......................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ................................................................... Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Hon. Gordon (L) ........................................................

Surrey–White Rock Hunter, Mike (L) ...................................................................................Nanaimo Jarvis, Daniel (L)...................................................... North Vancouver–Seymour Johnston, Ken (L)............................................................ Vancouver-Fraserview Kerr, Brian J. (L).............................................................. Malahat–Juan de Fuca Krueger, Kevin (L).................................................

Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ...............................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lee, Richard T. (L).......................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L) .......................................................................... Ch illiwack-Sumas Locke, Brenda (L) ...........................................................

Surrey–Green Timbers Long, Harold (L) ...................................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................... Bulkley Valley–Stikine McMahon, Wendy (L).............................................Columbia River–Revelstoke MacPhail, Joy (NDP) ..........................................................

Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) .............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ...................................................................................Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L) ........................................................... New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) .......................................... West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (Ind. L)..................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon.

Richard (L)...................................................... Peace River North Nijjar, Rob (L)...................................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Nuraney, John (L) ...............................................................Burnaby-W illingdon Orr, Sheila (L) ...........................................................................Victoria-Hillside Penner, Barry (L)....................................................................... Ch illiwack-Kent Plant, Hon. Geoff (L) ......................................................... Richmond-Steveston Reid, Hon.

Judith (L)............................................................Nanaimo-Parksv ille Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L) ................................................................ Kamloops Roddick, Valerie (L)..........................................................................Delta South Sahota, Patty (L).....................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Santori, Hon. Sandy (L)..............................................West Kootenay–Boundary Stephens, Hon.

Lynn (L) ........................................................................ Langley Stewart, Ken (L)...................................................... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Stewart, Richard (L) ...................................................... Coquitlam-Maillardville Suffredine, Blair F. (L) ................................................................Nelson-Creston Sultan, Ralph (L)....................................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Thorpe, Hon.

Rick (L) ..........................................................Okanagan-Westside Trumper, Gillian (L)................................................................Alberni-Qualicum van Dongen, John (L).........................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Visser, Rod (L).................................................................................North Island Weisbeck, John (L).........................................................Kelowna–Lake Country Whittred, Hon.

Katherine (L) ...................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wilson, John (L)........................................................................... Cariboo North Wong, Patrick (L)............................................................Vancouver-Kensington LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn................................................................John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman ..............................................Hon.

Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum.......................................................................G illian Trumper Bulkley Valley–Stikine ..............................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North..............................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds............................................................................Patty Sahota Burnaby-Willingdon......................................................................

John Nuraney Burquitlam ........................................................................................ Harry Bloy Cariboo North ..................................................................................John Wilson Cariboo South .................................................................................... Walt Cobb Chilliwack-Kent ............................................................................. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas .................................................................................

John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke....................................................Wendy McMahon Comox Valley .......................................................................... Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville .............................................................Richard Stewart Cowichan-Ladysmith .......................................................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Delta North.......................................................................................... Reni Masi Delta South................................................................................

Valerie Roddick East Kootenay .................................................................................. Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin...................................................................Arnie Hamilton Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops ....................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ........................................................Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country...............................................................

John Weisbeck Kelowna-Mission ................................................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Langley ............................................................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Malahat–Juan de Fuca .....................................................................Brian J. Kerr Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................... Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows .............................................................Ken Stewart Nanaimo..........................................................................................

Mike Hunter Nanaimo-Parksville ...................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Nelson-Creston.......................................................................Blair F. Suffredine New Westminster ..................................................................Hon. Joyce Murray North Coast ........................................................................................Bill Belsey North Island........................................................................................Rod Visser North Vancouver–Lonsdale.......................................... Hon.

Katherine Wh ittred North Vancouver–Seymour .............................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head .......................................................................Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon .................................................................... Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside.................................................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North .............................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South .......................................................................

Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley ....................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................... Karn Manhas Port Moody–Westwood......................................................... Hon. Christy Clark Powell River–Sunshine Coast.......................................................... Harold Long Prince George North................................................................................Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................Hon.

Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................Paul Nettleton Richmond Centre......................................................... Hon. Greg Halsey-Brandt Richmond East .......................................................................... Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ................................................................ Hon. Geoff Plant Saanich North and the Islands ............................................... Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South...................................................................................

Susan Brice Shuswap .............................................................................. Hon. George Abbott Skeena.............................................................................................Roger Harris Surrey-Cloverdale ................................................................. Hon. Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Brenda Locke Surrey-Newton ............................................................................... Tony Bhullar Surrey–Panorama Ridge................................................. Hon.

Gulzar S. Cheema Surrey-Tynehead .......................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley ...................................................................... Elayne Brenzinger Surrey–White Rock ...............................................................Hon. Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard................................................................. Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview............................................................... Hon.

Gary Co llins Vancouver-Fraserview ...................................................................Ken Johnston Vancouver-Hastings .......................................................................Joy MacPhail Vancouver-Kensington...................................................................Patrick Wong Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Rob Nijjar Vancouver-Langara....................................................................Val J.

Anderson Vancouver–Mount Pleasant............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................... Hon. Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena............................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill.............................................................................Jeff Bray Victoria-Hillside.................................................................................. Sheila Orr West Kootenay–Boundary.................................................... Hon.

Sandy Santori West Vancouver–Capilano ..............................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ................................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Yale-Lillooet .................................................................................. Dave Chutter

CONTENTS Thursday, March 27, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 5693 Statements (Standing Order 25 B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 5693 Transit services in Victoria J. Bray War against Iraq J. MacPhail Kitimat anniversary R.

Harris Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 5694 Gaming funding for B.C. Paraplegic Association J. MacPhail Hon. R. Coleman Workplace safety regulations H. Bloy Hon. G. Bruce Addiction treatment services B. Locke Hon. G. Cheema Cruise ship industry in B.C. J. Bray Hon. R. Thorpe Nursing strategy J. Les Hon. S. Hawkins Government policies on women's issues J. MacPhail Hon. L.

Stephens Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 5696 S. Orr Ministerial Statements ......................................................................................................... .................................................... 5697 Severe acute respiratory syndrome Hon. S. Hawkins J.

MacPhail Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 5698 Agrologists Act (Bill 4) Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 5698 Agrologists Act (Bill 4) Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 5698 Foresters Act (Bill 5) Hon.

M. de Jong P. Bell R. Visser

Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 5700 Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 22) Hon. G. Abbott J.

MacPhail Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 5702 Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 22) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 5702 Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 22) Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 5702 Forestry Revitalization Act (Bill 28) (continued) K.

Krueger R. Harris R. Visser T. Christensen P. Bell S. Brice Hon. M. de Jong Committee of Supply ............................................................................................................ ................................................... 5717 Estimates: Ministry of Energy and Mines Hon. R. Neufeld P. Nettleton J.

MacPhail Royal Assent to Bills .......................................................................................................... ...................................................... 5721 Agrologists Act (Bill 4) Coastal Ferry Act (Bill 18) Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 22) Supply Act (No.1), 2003 (Bill 26)

5693 THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 The House met at 2:06 p.m. [J. Weisbeck in the chair.] Introductions by Members Deputy Speaker: Good afternoon, hon. members. I have the pleasure to make the first introduction. In the gallery is Fran Crowhurst, legislative counsel with the Attorney General's ministry, and joining her is Mi- chelle Fletcher on exchange from parliamentary council office in Canberra. Joining her is her husband, Karl. Would the House please make them welcome. Hon. R. Thorpe: Today in the members' gallery we have a very special visitor from Japan. Mr.

Suzuki is the chairman of the Listel group and owns Listel hotels in Vancouver and Whistler as well as a travel com- pany, Choji Travel Canada Ltd. Mr. Suzuki is an active promoter of Japanese tourism to British Columbia and Canada. We greatly appreciate his contributions in developing new trade and cultural exchanges between British Columbia and Japan. Mr. Suzuki is visiting British Columbia in celebra- tion of his recent seventieth birthday, and his visit will be subject to a documentary film in Japan. He is ac- companied today by Mr. Zhou, vice-president of Listel Canada, and Mr.

Okamoto of NHK, Japan's national radio and television. Would everyone in this House please welcome Mr. Suzuki to British Columbia. K. Manhas: Today in Victoria we have a group of grade 11 students from Terry Fox Secondary School in Port Coquitlam led by Mr. Don van Os, Mark Prinster, Bruce Moore, Bill Mullan, Andrea Gielty, Bruce Kiloh and Scott Parker. They're all outstanding teachers at Terry Fox Secondary School in Port Coquitlam, who have brought along their classes and 280 of their fa- vourite students up to Victoria for an annual visit to the Legislature and to visit our House and the capital city.

Would the House please make them very wel- come for their visit here to Victoria. R. Stewart: Not to be outdone, we've got two out- standing teachers and their grade 11 socials class from Centennial high school in Coquitlam visiting the Legis- lature today. Teachers Joe Gluska and Steve Fukui and their grade 11 class are entering the gallery right now. Would the House please make them welcome. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) TRANSIT SERVICES IN VICTORIA J. Bray: Today I wish to speak about a very impor- tant issue in my community, the provision of transit services. Public transit is a vital component of a healthy, sustainable community, one where people are able to travel between work and home, school and home, and to other community services and events. Next year in Victoria, transit will carry over 20 million passengers. Good public transit connects people. Currently, the Victoria transit commission is con- ducting a review of services in my constituency. Possi- ble changes being proposed may impact some of my constituents.

Let me review B.C. Transit's mission: "To excel in the provision of safe, reliable, cost-efficient and market-focused public transportation systems that support the social, economic and environmental goals of customers and the communities that they serve." In Victoria many of the decisions regarding transit services and funding are made by the Victoria regional transit commission.

In Victoria the commission is re- sponsible for determining route configurations and transit service levels, setting fares, reviewing and mak- ing recommendations for the annual budget, and rais- ing the local share of the annual cost of transit. In my latest constituency newsletter I asked for feedback on important local issues. Given the possible changes proposed for transit service in my community, many constituents have identified transit as a major area where they look for my involvement.

To that end, I have met with the Minister of Transportation to dis- cuss issues around transit and the impacts of service changes to seniors, students and others who rely on transit for their participation in the community. I have met with the Victoria transit commission again to dis- cuss these issues. [1410] In March 2003 the transit service review is asking for feedback over the next couple of weeks. The final recommendations will go to the transit commission. I encourage all residents in my community to read the transit review document and provide their feedback directly to Victoria transit.

Constituents can contact my office for copies of the latest report and information on how to submit their views. I can assure my constituents that I will continue to work for strong public transit in my community. WAR AGAINST IRAQ J. MacPhail: The war in Iraq is on the mind of every British Columbian. Whether we agree with the decision to go to war or not, we all watch with horror as the violence and death of war unfolds on our television screens. We are all deeply concerned for the combat- ants, for the Iraqi people and for the children of war for whom this must all be a bewildering nightmare.

On Monday I asked for an emergency debate in this House to express support for an end to the hostilities and the pre-emptive strike against Iraq. That request was denied. However, I have tabled a motion that can be called for debate today. I respectfully ask that the government allow this House that opportunity. Ultimate responsibility for Canada's involvement in the war lies with the federal government. However, I believe that the provinces and communities must also

5694 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 play a role and take a stand. Already dozens of cities and communities in North America have passed reso- lutions opposing a pre-emptive, non-sanctioned war in Iraq. In British Columbia this is our first opportunity to engage in a debate about the most significant event of our time and one in which the whole world has an enormous stake. In my view, as elected representatives we have a moral and practical responsibility to take a position on a war that will have massive humanitarian, economic and social implications.

Already the consequences of war are being felt here at home. Its effects are rippling through our economy and disrupting our daily routines. British Columbians are asking how we can play a role in helping relieve the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding. British Columbians come from every part of the world. We celebrate every faith, and we are joined to- gether by common values: peace, civility and tolerance — values which in these dangerous times must be given voice. We have a collective responsibility to take a stand for the values that British Columbians cherish.

For future generations and for the security of the world, we must take a lead role and encourage peaceful solutions. I ask that my motion to oppose the pre-emptive strike in Baghdad be called for debate and that this body act as a strong voice for peace and justice in the world. KITIMAT ANNIVERSARY R. Harris: I t ' s m y p l e a s u r e t o i n f o r m t h e H o u s e about the fiftieth anniversary of a unique community in my riding. On March 31, 2003, the district of Kitimat will celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of its incorpora- tion as a district municipality.

The story of Kitimat is not a normal story of a crossroads that grew, attracted more residents and then commerce, and finally became a community. Rather, it's a story of how the post–Second World War efforts t o o p e n u p B . C . 's no rt h t o i nd u s t ri al d e v e l o p m e nt l e d to the founding of a brand-new, fully planned commu- nity which now makes a very significant contribution to the economy of British Columbia. In the 1950s the Alcan development of the aluminum industry in Kiti- mat was featured in the National Geographic Magazine.

I'd like to take this opportunity to extend Kitimat's invitation to the people of British Columbia to visit during these fiftieth-anniversary celebrations. While in Kitimat, visitors will be able to enjoy some of the best deep-sea river fishing for salmon in the province, if not the world. They will find a community of great rugged beauty, surrounded by snow-capped mountains and providing some of the best outdoor recreational oppor- tunities and amenities in our province. A visit to the neighbouring community of Haisla offers an opportu- nity to experience a wealth of first nations heritage and culture.

Kitimat is a modern community with a new hospital, a good school system and recreational facili- ties that are the envy of many larger communities, thanks in many ways to the impacts of its industrial development. I am pleased to distribute to the members a special invitation. As the MLA for Kitimat, I expect to play a role in the fiftieth-anniversary celebrations and hope that many of my colleagues and people of B.C. will grasp this opportunity to see and celebrate with this unique community in 2003. [1415] Oral Questions GAMING FUNDING FOR B.C. PARAPLEGIC ASSOCIATION J.

MacPhail: Can the minister responsible for gam- ing explain why the B.C. Paraplegic Association is los- ing close to a million dollars in gaming funds, threaten- ing programs that help British Columbians with spinal cord injuries? Hon. R. Coleman: I'm actually meeting with the B.C. Paraplegic Association tomorrow to discuss the issue with them. Basically, in the past there has been some disproportionate funding to provincial organiza- tions under the grant program that existed. We've sat down with the organization and looked at a transition plan with them, and I'll be sitting down with them to- morrow.

Deputy Speaker: Leader of the Opposition with a supplemental. J. MacPhail: I'm aware the minister is meeting with the Paraplegic Association tomorrow. He has actually got his facts wrong. The former government worked with the B.C. Paraplegic Association to consolidate its ten regional gaming licences into one to actually cut red tape. That saved both the government and the association thousands of dollars in administrative costs and allowed the B.C. Paraplegic Association to concentrate on what it does best — helping people with spinal cord injuries.

Now this minister is going to turn back the clock and force this important organization to jump through bu- reaucratic hoops while cutting close to a million dollars from its budget. Again to the minister: can he explain why he thinks it makes sense to throw up bureaucratic obstacles, impose red tape and at the same time cut the funding of an organization that thousands of British Columbians with spinal cord injuries depend upon? Hon. R. Coleman: The member is aware that we have been dealing with the direct access program and trying to see how we can revamp it to make it sustain- able for all British Columbians.

As we've done that, we've run into some things like the Paraplegic Associa- tion finding themselves in some difficulty. Each time that happens, I meet with the organization and try and figure out long-term strategies to solve their problem. I'm doing that tomorrow. I look forward to meeting with the organization and coming back and sitting down with my officials to see how we can deal with some of their issues.

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5695 J. MacPhail: As always, it is left up to the agencies that provide services in this community to bring this govern- ment to its heels and to its senses in doing the right thing. This government always tries to do the wrong thing first. Yes, the minister is meeting with the Paraplegic Associa- tion tomorrow, and here's what they will tell him. They will tell him that they help 100 people a month at G.F. Strong to recover and to leave hospital early. That saves the health care system hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, but the program at G.F.

Strong, as of this day, may have to go entirely in order to make up for this minister's budget cut, costing the taxpayers millions over the long term. Will the minister commit that after his meeting tomorrow, he will an- nounce that every dime of gaming funding cut will now go directly back into helping British Columbians with spinal cord injuries? Hon. R. Coleman: Once again, a nonsensical state- ment from the Leader of the Opposition. There has not been one single dime cut from gaming to charities in the province. Next year it will go up by over $3 million.

Under that government, it was not a sustainable pro- gram. In the last year of your mandate, over 500 chari- ties applied for money and didn't receive a dime. This is the first time in many years that we've had a sustain- able grant program in British Columbia, and over 400 more charities were helped this year than in years past. Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Order. The member for Burquit- lam has the floor. [1420] WORKPLACE SAFETY REGULATIONS H. Bloy: My question is to the Minister of Skills Development and Labour. This morning the B.C.

Fed- eration of Labour presented a brief on the impact of deregulating WCB regulations. They claim that the changes will seriously water down work safety stan- dards and hurt the health and safety of workers. Can the Minister of Skills Development and Labour tell me if this is true, and what are the reasons for the changes? Hon. G. Bruce: I appreciate the question. In fact, what we're attempting to do is to revamp the WCB so it's an agency that is useful and worthwhile in being able to help and protect and improve the safety of the worksite.

Currently, there are 34,000 regulations in the prov- ince of British Columbia around safety at the worksite. Tragically, it would be important to note that in respect of the forestry sector and the deaths in the forestry sec- tor, in spite of the fact that we have twice the number of regulations from a number of years ago in respect to WCB, we still have the same number of deaths or even, in some years, higher. That's simply not good enough. The other aspect of things….

If one looks at think- ing that regulations are what make the difference for a safe and protective worksite, in the oil and gas sector in our northeast sector, compared to that in Alberta…. Alberta has 38 regulations; British Columbia has 88 regulations. Alberta has 52,000 people that work in the oil and gas industry. We only have 2,000, and their injury rate is considerably less. ADDICTION TREATMENT SERVICES B. Locke: My question is to the Minister of State for Mental Health. Surrey is a community of over 370,000 people.

Along with that big-city population come big- city problems, not the least of which are drug addic- tions. One of the issues that is important to my com- munity is the availability of addiction services. To the minister: can he tell us what this government is doing to ensure that services are available for those people wanting and needing the help in Surrey? Hon. G. Cheema: An addiction is not a character flaw. It's a disease of the brain, and that needs to be treated like any other disease.

It's important to note that 70 percent of the patients in B.C.'s addiction system are also patients of the mental health care system. As of April 1, 2002, and for the first time in B.C.'s history, our government has brought addiction care directly to the health care system. We are also integrating mental health and addiction ser- vices to serve patients more effectively. Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Let's hear the an- swer. Hon. G. Cheema: Our restructuring is helping the health authorities to revitalize their addiction service.

This will ensure that the services are provided on the basis of evidence-based studies and are carefully man- aged throughout the regions. The Fraser health author- ity's plan for addiction services will also result in more detoxification services for youth and many others in our province. CRUISE SHIP INDUSTRY IN B.C. J. Bray: My question… Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Order, members. Let's hear the question. J. Bray: …is to the Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise.

Recently news reports have indicated the potential growth in the number of U.S. cruise ships visiting B.C. ports, including smaller ports like Victo- ria. As I've mentioned before, cruise ship visits are very

5696 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 important for our local economy. This year 119 ships are expected to visit Victoria, which potentially brings millions of dollars into our local economy. Can the Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ex- plain what government is doing to foster further growth to ensure that port communities like Victoria and others along the coast can maximize the opportu- nities from growing cruise ship visits from the U.S.? Hon. R. Thorpe: This year the cruise ship industry will generate $34 million in economic activity in the Victoria area.

Last year our government eliminated the 7 percent tax on bunker fuel. This year we eliminated the tax on fuel for gas turbine engines. Our govern- ment is working in partnership with the federal gov- ernment to build a cruise ship facility at Prince Rupert. [1425] Together with my colleague the Minister of Sus- tainable Resource Management, the government is working on a ports strategy for the coastal communi- ties of British Columbia. For the first time in the history of British Columbia, on May 23 of this year there will be four cruise ships docked in Victoria. It is a new era for cruise ships in Victoria.

NURSING STRATEGY J. Les: My question is to the Minister of Health Planning. One of the challenges that we've had in Brit- ish Columbia is the provision of qualified nurses throughout the province. Our government's nursing strategy demonstrates its commitment to addressing this challenge and the shortage that exists in British Columbia. Can the minister explain to the House the results she has had thus far as a result of her efforts? Hon. S. Hawkins: Our government decided to act very quickly, in fact, to address an issue that had been ignored by the previous government for ten years.

We implemented a nursing strategy. We invested $42 mil- lion, and to date we've seen results in our ability to attract, retain, recruit and educate nurses. In fact, the Minister of Advanced Education added 1,266 more nursing seats. We've had initiatives to encourage B.C. nurses who aren't working to take a refresher course and come back into the health care system. We've trained 400 nurses who weren't working to do that. We've re- cruited more foreign-educated nurses to help fill those hard-to-fill spaces in our ICUs, our emergency rooms, our operating rooms, and labour and delivery.

We've given new opportunities for nurses to get specialty training across the province, and we invested $15 mil- lion last year in funding bed lifts for health authorities outside the lower mainland. The Minister of Advanced Education also imple- mented a forgivable student loan program, the first of its kind in Canada, which ensures that nurses who work in underserved areas can get their loan forgiven over a period of three years. We've seen some real benefits to that. We now have a net of 538 more nurses this year than last year, and in the face of an aging and retiring nursing population, I think that's great.

We've also de- creased the nurse vacancy rate by almost 60 percent. The RNABC reports that 73 percent of 2002 nursing grads are working in permanent positions today, compared to 24 percent in 1997. So that's good news. GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON WOMEN'S ISSUES J. MacPhail: I t ' s a l w a y s d i s a p p o i n t i n g w h e n t h i s government continually fails to realize that we live in a global economy. This morning the International La- bour Organization censured this government once again.

A few weeks ago another UN body censured this government for their record on women's equality, but did the Minister of State for Women's Equality pay any attention? No, she's at it again, talking to her local paper and attacking the organization that she's sup- posed to be working with — the very organization she's supposed to represent. This time she set her sights a little higher, attacking the United Nations. Why? Be- cause the UN released a report criticizing her govern- ment's record on women's equality issues.

To the minister: what conspiracy theory does she subscribe to that would lead her to conclude that the United Nations would release a politically motivated report criticizing her government — exactly what she accused the UN of in her local paper? Hon. L. Stephens: O n c e a g a i n , t h e L e a d e r o f t h e Opposition is completely wrong — completely wrong. T h i s g o v e r n m e n t i s o n e t h a t h a s m a d e s u r e w e h a v e protected those critical services for women. We have the third-highest level of legal aid funding in Canada.

We have the programs in place that make sure women have the services they require. We will continue to do that. We have, in fact, put in place our safer community strategy that we're going to be working on and we will be releasing shortly. [1430] This member here continues to talk about what she thinks is relevant. In fact, she continues to get every- thing wrong. She needs to go back and look at what was said. She needs to look at the women's centres, which are the ones that were talking about the kinds of problems that the UN thought they were addressing.

It is the women's centres that are looking at making sure they, in fact, put forward the wrong information that we continue to try to address. [End of question period.] Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. Petitions S. Orr: I rise to present a petition. This petition has 334 signatures from the parents of Richmond Elemen-

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5697 tary School in my riding and their concerns about and opposition to possible closure of their school. Ministerial Statements SEVERE ACUTE RESPIRATORY SYNDROME Hon. S. Hawkins: Over the past 24 hours there have been significant developments regarding an out- break of a rare and potentially fatal respiratory illness. This has been causing widespread concern around the world, and the origin of SARS, or severe acute respira- tory syndrome, remains a mystery.

Since November 2002 more than 1,400 people worldwide, including 28 cases in Canada, have been diagnosed with SARS. A total of 53 people around the world, including three Canadians in Ontario, have lost their lives. In British Columbia there is one probable case of SARS, and 12 other cases are being monitored for SARS. Four of these cases look suspect, but in all cases symptoms of SARS were reported after return- ing to Canada from areas where SARS cases have been confirmed.

Four of the 12 cases meet the sus- pect definition of SARS, and isolation precautions h a v e b e e n t a k e n f o r a l l o f t h e s e c a s e s . T o d a t e , n o British Columbia health care worker has been im- pacted. I want to assure every British Columbian that our government continues to monitor the situation closely, and we are prepared to take any necessary action to safeguard public health in relation to this outbreak. Through the B.C. Centre for Disease Control and the office of Dr.

Perry Kendall, who is our provincial medi- cal health officer, we're receiving regular updates on the provincial, national and global developments re- garding the spread of identified cases of the syndrome and the latest efforts to respond to this global public health issue. Working closely with our health authorities and the network of medical health officers across the province, w e ' r e e n s u r i n g w e h a v e a c c e s s t o i n f o r m a t i o n a r o u n d any potential or emerging cases on a regular basis.

We also continue to work closely with Health Canada and the other provinces and territories to share information and ensure consistency in our approaches at the na- tional level. Anyone watching the news last night or who picked up the paper this morning will be well aware that Ontario has been hard-hit by this illness. In fact, as of Wednesday afternoon thousands were advised to remain at home in quarantine for a period of ten days. The province of Ontario officially declared a public health emergency.

Based on the advice of our senior health officials, w e h a v e b e e n a d v i s e d t h a t i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y t o t a k e this step as yet in B.C., given the small number of sus- pected cases here at home and the strong surveillance networks we have in place. I want to emphasize, though, that we will act swiftly if the situation changes.

I want to say, as well, that in British Columbia the situation has remained well in hand because of our ability to respond quickly, given the smaller number of health authorities and the improved coordination across the spectrum of our health care system, which includes our network of public health and disease surveillance. Today we have posted the most current informa- tion about SARS on line on the B.C. government website at www.gov.bc.ca, on both ministries of Health webpages, and I encourage the public to explore both the Health Canada and B.C.

Centre for Disease Control websites for further information as the situation develops. I understand we'll have the links to those on our webpages as well.

In addition, our NurseLine, which can be accessed by calling 1- 866-215-4700, is available to any British Columbian with specific questions around the symptoms of SARS or who have concerns about their own health. [1435] I think it's really, really important to understand that a history of travel to the Far East — to Hong Kong, Singapore, Hanoi, Taiwan and the Guang- dong province in China — or known contact with a SARS case is necessary for a diagnosis of suspect or probable SARS. Those are key factors, and we want you to understand that, as the symptoms of SARS are consistent with many other conditions.

We want to avoid unnecessary alarm. Again, I want to em- phasize that our top priority as a government is to ensure public health and safety. We will continue to be vigilant in our efforts to monitor and respond to this developing situation. At this time, I do want to acknowledge the work of the provincial health officer, the B.C. Centre for Disease Control, the health authorities, their medical health officers and public health officials who are doing just an amazing job in keeping us informed and keeping the situation under control.

Deputy Speaker: Responding to the ministerial statement, the Leader of the Opposition. J. MacPhail: Thank you to the Minister of Health Planning for providing the opposition with her re- marks. Also, thank you to the minister for making note of the opposition's request to have information posted on the website.

In these times of high anxiety about so many issues affecting us nationally, internationally and locally, it is important that everybody have the most current information not only to make sure the issue is managed safely, securely and quickly from a health status but also to ensure that the high anxiety does not create disturbances beyond the health is- sue, particularly as it comes to travel and how that may affect our economy.

Anything the opposition can do to ensure quick and proper access and distribution of information, we w i l l d o i n o r d e r t o h a n d l e t h i s m o s t s e r i o u s h e a l t h issue.

5698 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 I. Chong: I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members I. Chong: Joining us today is a group of ladies who make an annual trek to the buildings. They're not al- ways the same people, but they are a club: University Women's Club of Victoria. They are led by Ms. Sylvia Camp. I believe there are 14 women accompanying them. If they're not already in the gallery watching, I know they soon will be. I still would ask the House to please make them welcome. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call committee stage debate on Bill 4.

Committee of the Whole House AGROLOGISTS ACT The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 4; H. Long in the chair. The committee met at 2:39 p.m. Sections 1 to 36 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. S. Hagen: I move the committee rise and re- port the bill complete without amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 2:40 p.m. The House resumed; J. Weisbeck in the chair. Report and Third Reading of Bills Bill 4, Agrologists Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. Hon. G. Collins: I call second reading of Bill 5. Second Reading of Bills FORESTERS ACT Hon. M. de Jong: I move that Bill 5 be read a sec- ond time now.

The Foresters Act, Bill 5, repeals and replaces exist- ing legislation that has been in place since 1947. It also contains a more concise, modern and enforceable defi- nition of professional forestry practice. The act also modifies the name of the regulatory body that oversees the forestry profession, changing it to the Association of British Columbia Forest Pro- fessionals. That association name change reflects the inclusion of registered forest technologists within the organization.

The transfer of forest technologists into the association represents, in my view, a sig- nificant step forward in support of the regulatory design of the Forest and Range Practices Act legisla- tion introduced and passed earlier by this Legisla- ture. The Forest and Range Practices Act relies on the judgment and accountability of resource profes- sionals and technologists to ensure that environ- mental standards are maintained under a workable results-based code.

The key to maintaining this commitment is being able to depend upon highly trained, dedicated, accountable professionals and technologists to make sound resource management decisions. Forest professionals will be held more account- able on the plans they approve. A lack of diligence can lead to sanction of a member of the association, as amendments to the Foresters Act provide stronger capacity to sanction poor practices and poor practi- tioners.

This bill makes the discipline process out- lined in the Foresters Act more cost- and time- effective by better enabling the association to take the necessary actions to hold its own members ac- countable, by clarifying the investigative powers of the association as well as the role and powers of the panel charged with conducting hearings into the competence or conduct of members with complaints that are made against them and, finally, by formaliz- ing mechanisms to assist in resolving complaints against members and make the process more ap- proachable for potential complainants.

The new Foresters Act also provides association members with protection against adverse actions such as suspension or discharge taken against them for exer- cising their professional obligations and raising com- plaints. With this new Foresters Act, the judgment of forest professionals can be relied upon as a cornerstone for the results-based era that this government prom- ised and has now acted upon. P. Bell: I'm very happy to stand in support of Bill 5 today.

I believe that even though this bill has received little publicity and, really, little focus, it's a key part of the equation in moving towards a new era of forestry in the province — just as significant in many ways as some of the other acts we have passed and will be pass- ing in the coming weeks. [1445] I think most significant is the focus on moving for- esters into a true professional association. I think that truly brings a new honour to the profession of regis- tered professional foresters. I believe it indicates their responsibilities to society.

It really, I think, mandates an entire new era for the profession and moves them to a new level.

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5699 More importantly, without this particular piece of legislation, Bill 74, the Forest and Range Practices Act, really would become far more complex. It is a signifi- cant piece in the sense that in order for Bill 74 to func- tion appropriately, we have to rely on the accountabil- ity of professionals. I was always kind of curious.

Oftentimes we would have an engineer design a bridge or a tall building, and we would rely on that engineer's stamp on a document or a piece of paper and presume that that individual had accepted responsibility for that, when there are literally thousands or perhaps millions of lives at stake as they travel over that particular bridge or move around that building. Yet in the forestry community, when we have a registered professional forester sign off on a document to cut down a single tree, that has in the past not been good enough. We had to have multi- ple signatures and multiple stamps.

This moves us to a mechanism that will allow for professional accountabil- ity. This allows that individual, upon completion of their degree at one of our wonderful universities in the province, to sign off on a document and accept respon- sibility for their actions and the impact that individual would have on the environment. I think it's a tremen- dous step forward for us. I think it's extremely impor- tant. I think the inclusion of forestry technicians and the recognition that technicians are, in fact, individuals that are very responsible and have received significant training….

The reliance of those individuals and the advice that they give…. I can speak from the perspec- tive of an individual who worked in the forest industry for a number of years, and I oftentimes relied on the opinions and judgments of forestry technicians. This has truly given them a new sense of responsibility and a new authority that they need to accept and move forward on. Probably most important is, I think, the fact that this moves us to the results-based objectives that we stated very clearly in our New Era document some two years ago.

We wanted to move to an era in British Co- lumbia where we allowed people to take responsibility for their actions, and when they had received a period of education and when they signed off on a document, we understood that they were accepting that responsi- bility and that they would provide us the result we were looking forward to.

Although this particular piece of legislation has not received a lot of attention, I am certainly very happy to speak in support of the legisla- tion, and I think it is very significant for many, many thousands of professional foresters in our province who look forward to the anticipated results. R. Visser: I just wanted to take a couple of minutes out of the House's time to talk a bit about Bill 5 and the professional foresters and engineers that I know up my w a y .

I h a v e m e t w i t h t h e m o n a n u m b e r o f o c c a s i o n s and actually had the privilege of going and lecturing to the fourth-year forest policy class at UBC's forestry school a few weeks back. I know firsthand of the work that they do, the commitments that they all have to their communities and what they contribute to the for- ests of the North Island.

As I travel from Holberg to Woss to Gold River to Campbell River, the people that show up and want to talk about forests — who want to communicate with government about how we're going to behave in the forests and how we should act in the forests, about the relationship between the ecology of the environment and their jobs as foresters — are true professionals in every sense of the word. They believe in what they do, and they've wanted some recognition and some free- dom for a long time. They wanted to be understood in the broader context of public policy for the role they play.

There are four pieces of legislation that have gone through, in my mind, in the last year — Bill 74, as the member for Prince George North talked about; the For- est and Range Practices Act; and this bill, Bill 5; along with the Agrologists Act and the professional biologists act — that really speak to this government's commit- ment to embrace professionals. [1450] You know, one of the most startling things I learned from lecturing the fourth-year class is that kids aren't taking up the profession these days.

The number of kids that have graduated out of the University of British Columbia's forestry school is scheduled to drop by a factor of half over the next three years. T h a t ' s s i m p l y n o t g o o d e n o u g h . T h a t s p e a k s t o t h e attitude that we've had in this province for a decade, about what they did, what their job was about and what they contributed.

I think this bill and Bill 74 and the atti- tude that this government's shown and that the minis- ter's shown towards professional foresters are going to go a long way to making sure that we get young people, bright young people from all over British Columbia, back into a profession that we should be inherently proud of, and one that we lead the world in. I just wanted to take a couple of minutes to speak in favour of this bill, thank the minister for recognizing this profes- sion, bringing it to the House and moving it forward. Hon.

M. de Jong: Thank you to the members for their comments and for their observations about the i m p o r t a n c e o f t h i s p i e c e o f l e g i s l a t i o n a s p a r t o f t h e overall results-based new era that we are creating. Deputy Speaker: The question is second reading of Bill 5. Motion approved. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 5, Foresters Act, read a second time and re- ferred to a Committee of the Whole House for consid- eration at the next sitting of the House after today. Hon.

G. Collins: I call Committee of the Whole for consideration of Bill 22.

5700 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 Committee of the Whole House COMMUNITY, ABORIGINAL AND WOMEN'S SERVICES STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 22; H. Long in the chair. [1455] The committee met at 2:56 p.m. Sections 1 to 9 inclusive approved. [R. Stewart in the chair.] On

section 10. Hon. G. Abbott: I move the amendment to

section 10 standing in my name on the orders of the day. [SECTION 10, in the proposed amendment to

Schedule 2 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, deleting "Chair" and substituting "Chief Executive Officer".] On the amendment. J. MacPhail: Could the minister please explain the amendment? Hon. G. Abbott: In the proposed amendment, the term "chair" would be deleted, and the term "chief ex- ecutive officer" would be substituted. Amendment approved. On

section 10 as amended. J. MacPhail: Sorry. I said I was just going to discuss 11, 12 and 13, but I do have a question on this. Why is it neces- sary to remove it from the Freedom of Information Act? Hon. G. Abbott: Just so it's clear to the member, they are not being removed from the schedule. The Freedom of Information Act will still apply. It's just a change in terms of the designated responsible authority.

Section 10 as amended approved. On

section 11. J. MacPhail: Mr. Chair, with the indulgence of you and the minister, perhaps we could discuss the amend- ments to the Heritage Conservation Act. My questions flow amongst all of them, if I may. I'm sure the minister has heard the feedback and the anxiety level being raised by these changes amongst heritage conservationists. There was an

article earlier this week and then one last week as well. I'll just quote from the one last week, March 21, in the Times Colonist : "But anxious heritage activists say very few heritage sites in the world make money, and even with the best will in the world the new operators are unlikely to be able to make ends meets — let alone pay for upkeep and maintenance." Their concern is arising because I think what's hap- pening in these amendments to the Heritage Conserva- tion Act is that there will be a British Columbia heri- tage legacy fund created.

It will be given $5 million in seed money, and the fund will be administered by a non-profit society that will be put together by Heritage Society of B.C. and the Land Conservancy. Let me ask the minister why he's moving in this direction. [1500] Hon. G. Abbott: There are actually two processes here, and I'll just provide the member with some clari- fication so there's no confusion around the two. The first process that the member alluded to is what we would term the devolution-of-management process.

In that process, what we are attempting to build on is the experience over the past decade in heritage sites — for example, Emily Carr House or the Grist Mill at Kere- meos — with private sector or non-profit management o f he ri t ag e s i t e s .

I t 's m y v i e w and c e rt ai nl y t he v i e w o f government that government continues to have a vital role in heritage around things like legislation, policy, the setting of standards, the quality assurance, assurance of stewardship — all of those areas — but it is not neces- sary for government to be a direct delivery agent in terms of the management of heritage sites. We are building on what is actually a well- established track record at places like Emily Carr House and the Keremeos Grist Mill with that private sector or non-profit sector management of heritage sites.

It has been very successful, and we're very confi- dent that the process we're involved in now is going to be successful. There is, I think, some misunderstand- ing, which was reflected in the Times Colonist article, with respect to whether the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services expected that all the approximately 15 heritage sites in the province would be self-sustaining and self-supporting in the future. That's not the case. We expect some will continue to be supported, but I don't think that is universally un- derstood among some of the heritage advocates.

I know some see this as a substantial change, and that's fair enough. The articles reflected that concern, and that's fair enough as well. But I think, certainly, that for some of the heritage advocates I've spoken to, once they have a clear understanding of what we're attempt- ing to do, their fears will be much allayed. Again for the member's information, that devolu- tion process is distinct from what we are doing in this bill, which is moving away from the B.C.

Heritage Trust, a trust inside government that has enjoyed only funding from government, to a model that will see in a conjunction between the Land Conservancy and the Heritage Society of B.C. the creation of a new trust that will be external from government. We have, as the member noted from one of the arti- cles, provided $5 million as the initial endowment for the new trust. We believe, and we're very confident of

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5701 this point, that as an entity outside of government, the new trust will be the recipient of individual donations, of family bequests, of corporate endowments, and so on, that as a part of government, the outgoing trust simply couldn't attract. We think this is a better, stronger, more workable model for heritage programs in the province than what we had before. The Heritage Trust inside government had been around for awhile. At one point it was funded, I think, to the tune of perhaps several million dollars annually.

As the member knows, in the early 1990s we saw — as governments, including her own, faced fiscal chal- lenges — that the contribution from government to the trust was diminished. That pattern certainly continued with our government. It's one of the areas that suffered as we were looking at measures of retrenchment. I think that by moving it out of government, by getting it on a sustainable ongoing basis, in fact, the new trust will be an ongoing and a very powerful method or vehicle to advance the interests of heritage in the province.

It is very much modelled on the Na- tional Trust of Britain, which started out with even smaller resources than the $5 million with which we've endowed the new trust. We believe the new trust is going to be very successful and is going to be a great vehicle for allowing us to preserve, promote and cele- brate the heritage of British Columbia. [1505] J. MacPhail: I wonder if the minister has been able to offer that comfort to heritage activists. Hon. G. Abbott: I believe the answer is yes.

I think there will always be some who are critical of a new path, who are only comfortable when the environment is entirely unchanged. I think that for those, while I respect their views, it's not a view which I do or can share at this point. Some may always feel some measure of discomfort with anything that changes in the world. I do have to say that certainly the meetings I've had with the Land Con- servancy, with the Heritage Society of British Columbia — which is the largest and really is the umbrella organi- zation for virtually all of the major heritage organiza- tions in the province….

I think they are very comfortable now with the new model, very supportive of it. They're really excited about the opportunities and that they're going to be able to go out and raise matching dollars from the individual, family and corporate areas. So I think they're very excited, very much ener- gized by the new approach to heritage in the province. I think, having worked closely with them in recent weeks and in recent months, that the level of comfort is much higher today than it was, for example, a year or 18 months ago. J.

MacPhail: I assume that the not-for-profit agency may provide tax deductions for donations? Hon. G. Abbott: Within the bounds of charitable donations as are currently reflected in the tax laws of British Columbia and Canada, charitable donations to this foundation certainly would be acceptable. J. MacPhail: I was interested to hear the minister's comments that some heritage sites still may require support. How will it be determined what will be a self- sustaining heritage site and one that will require gov- ernment support? Hon. G.

Abbott: The subsidy arrangements that exist on different sites are a product, I guess, of the historical experience the different sites have gone through. There are obviously great differences across the 15 sites. Some operate without subsidy and never have operated with a subsidy. Some of the larger ones — for example, Barkerville and Fort Steele — have had extensive subsidies at times — most of the time, in fact. The size of the sites is one of the determining fac- tors. The marketplace, the size of the adjacent commu- nity — all of those are factors that come into play.

What staff are looking at particularly as we're moving forward here are the business plan proposals that various entities have brought into play through the request-for-information or request-for-proposal por- tions of the devolution process. [1510] J. MacPhail: During the devolution process, do the heritage sites have to reveal fee increase strategies? How do fee increases occur? How will they occur? Hon. G. Abbott: I'm going to try to provide the member with a thorough answer here, even though she may want to give some thought to picking this up in estimates.

It's not actually a part of this bill — this part of it. Nevertheless, I'll oblige with the best answer I can. Part of the devolution process is that it will put more decision-making power into the hands of those who will, as a non-profit or private sector entity, be operating the sites. They would obviously look again at some of the factors we talked about earlier: the size of the market, the public interest in the site and so on. Those would likely be the principal determining fac- tors as they set out in their business plan what the ad- mission cost to the site would be.

Rather than cabinet determining those things, the site operator would be looking at that much more closely and have much more control over that than was the case the past. J. MacPhail: Yes, I accept that this isn't part of the bill, but it may be a consequence of this change. Interjection. J. MacPhail: No? Okay. Well, let me ask other ques- tions, then. Does the minister's answer also apply to changes in hours of work or hours of operation or the potential for sites being threatened with closure because of lack of support?

5702 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 Hon. G. Abbott: Again, I'm going to oblige the member by responding to the question. Just for clarifi- cation, there is no expectation on the part of this minis- ter or on the part of my ministry or the government that in creating the new Heritage Trust, somehow some portion of the interest accrued from the $5 million that we've endowed the trust with will be used for heritage sites. That will continue to be the responsibility of gov- ernment as opposed to…. They're two very different things.

To respond to your questions, because I don't want to be difficult about it, things like when the facilities will open and close, hours of opening and all of those kind of operational details, while likely to form a part of their business plan, are issues that we would in large measure leave in the hands of the site operators or site contrac- tors. That having been said, I do want to underline that the first and primary issue that my staff looked at in terms of evaluating the requests for information or the requests for proposals was stewardship of the sites.

We fully expect that the sites are going to be managed in ways that will celebrate, promote and maintain public access to and appreciation of the wonderful cultural heritage that we have in British Columbia. J. MacPhail: Perhaps the minister can then just an- swer my last question in this area, which is the rela- tionship between the not-for-profit society and mu- nicipalities. Again, media speculation was that there may be a potential for downloading onto municipali- ties. What reassurances can he give against that? [1515] Hon. G.

Abbott: Again, I never take exception to critics of the government having an opportunity to bemoan theoretical downloading. I think it would be pretty much a stretch to make that argument here. We certainly have never discouraged any municipality from expressing an interest at request-for-information or request-for-proposal stages in this. There is some municipal interest in some of the sites, and we certainly welcome, encourage and try to foster that interest, but there certainly has never been any explicit or implicit demand that communities look at this.

I think they, in most instances, are looking at these as opportunities to build local tourism, to kind of bring the site closer into the culture of the community. It's something that I think is valuable and welcomed. From those who have taken an active interest in this, I haven't heard any suggestion that they feel they're being downloaded upon. I think that concern comes from rather more predictable critics of the government. Sections 11 to 24 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. G. Abbott: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:17 p.m.

The House resumed; J. Weisbeck in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 22, Community, Aboriginal and Women's Ser- vices Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, reported com- plete with amendment. Third Reading of Bills Deputy Speaker: When shall the bill be considered as reported? Hon. G. Abbott: By leave, now. Leave granted. Bill 22, Community, Aboriginal and Women's Ser- vices Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, read a third time and passed. Hon. M. de Jong: I call for continued second read- ing debate on Bill 28. Second Reading of Bills FORESTRY REVITALIZATION ACT (continued) K.

Krueger: When we adjourned debate we had just heard from the urban socialists with their particu- lar rhetoric. I took the opportunity…. Interjection. K. Krueger: The member points out there is only one urban socialist speaking in the House anymore. That's a good thing. There are a lot of us in this House who represent heartlands ridings, where these changes to forest policy are very welcome good news. I mentioned a little bit earlier that the things that worked or appeared to work decades ago with the so- called social contract haven't been working very well in the year 2003 or, really, all through the nineties.

An American representative regrettably referred to what he called Soviet-style forest policy here. We don't agree with that characterization, but we do agree that when you're getting the kind of dismal results we've been getting in British Columbia in the forest industry de- spite all the advantages we have, it's time to have a look at those results and look for ways to deliver better ones.

It is bizarre that with the best wood available in the world competing with fast-growing varieties grown in plantations elsewhere, which are so weak compared to our wood that the construction companies in those areas actually prefer to use our wood over theirs; the best technology available in the world; the best ma-

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5703 chinery in the world ― in fact, manufactured right here in British Columbia in places like Salmon Arm — and the best-educated workforce in the forest industry in the world, somehow we have dropped $600 million per year in revenue since 1997-98. The trend has not been positive. [1520] One of the issues, of course, has been that most of our eggs are in one basket in the marketplace — that being our good friends to the south, who have about 87 percent of our market.

Of course, we have a good mar- ket in Japan, but it's always been a wonder to me that we send our very best wood cut in places like Vavenby, in my constituency, to Japan. I wonder why that is. What they do with the finest wood we produce is mill it, turn it into things like banisters, doors and window frames — things we could certainly be doing here.

We have found ourselves competing in primary manufac- turing of dimensional lumber — 2-by-4s and 2-by-6s — even now, these many decades later, when Third World countries are able to compete head-to-head with us in those areas with much lower labour costs and a much less educated workforce.

We're proud of our primary wood manufacturing industry, proud that they have responded to the many challenges and are doing as well as they are, but it's long since time that we embraced the value-added in- dustry more and the entrepreneurial spirit here in Brit- ish Columbia that would like to harness all those assets I spoke of and really compete at a whole new level. I applaud the minister for the changes he's made. Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, who spoke as an urban socialist, I speak for an area that has real-life experiences with the problems that have existed in the forest industry.

Most notable and most recent for us is the closure of the Vavenby Weyerhaeuser sawmill. T h a t t o o k a w a y 1 8 4 o f t h e b e s t j o b s i n t h e N o r t h Thompson Valley — the best paycheques gone. It's an economic impact something like losing a hundred thousand of the best paycheques in the lower mainland with several months' notice. It's devastating for people in Vavenby and all through the North Thompson Val- ley. The ripples of that, of course, reach out all through the valley's economy.

People who count on their homes as their retirement package have seen the value of their homes devaluated because of this very unfortunate event. Of course, there was fear and tremendous upset in the North Thompson Valley when this closure was announced. I went up to Clearwater, a little community where 400 people came out to talk to me and the other elected people who had come up and representatives of the company about their fears and their hopes and their desire for government to do some changes that would help them cope with this economic catastrophe.

I want to say on the record that Weyerhaeuser has been a model corporate citizen in the way it dealt with this closure. I accept that they had sound business reasons t o d o i t i n o r d e r t o b e a b l e t o c o m p e t e . T h e y h a v e t o max out production at their remaining three sawmills in the southern interior. I never thought they would choose Vavenby if they had to close one of the four, but they did. As I say, they've got good reasons.

One is that there isn't natural gas supplied in the North Thompson Val- ley, so it was much more expensive for them to acquire the necessary energy to run what was a very modern operation. They have been really principled about the way they dealt with this whole unfortunate matter. I'll talk a little bit about some of the solutions we're coming up with, but I can tell you that one of the rea- sons we're able to be confident about finding solutions and we're actually putting a pretty substantial silver lining around this big black cloud is our Minister of Forests, who listens.

I've talked many times in this House about how proud I am of a government that actually is listening to the people who elected us. A structure has been set up where, through the govern- ment caucus committees, we're able to feed input in. Ministers and the Premier pay very close attention, and decisions are made with that input in mind. I came back from that meeting, and I wrote a letter to the minister and said that my constituents are alarmed. They're saying that some of the answers are: "We'd like to see more woodlots. We'd like to see more community forests.

Specifically we'd like to see a Clearwater community forest. We' like to see better participation for the first nations people, the Sec- wepemc people" — our people tend to refer to them as the Shuswaps — "all through our area, but certainly the North Thompson Indian band, who've been tremen- dously patient about that concern." Chief Nathan Matthew of the North Thompson Indian band, who's now the chair of the Shuswap na- tion tribal council, was talking with me one time about their hope that they would get a share of a 200,000- cubic-metre partition that the ministry did.

He said to me: "You know, really, Kevin, this is a guts-and- feathers deal as far as we're concerned. We get some participation in these little one-off deals, but we de- serve a share of the cut." I always thought he was right. That's what I heard at that meeting. It's one of the things I put in my letter to the minister. I asked the minister to do what he could to facilitate Weyer- haeuser's willingness to actually give up some of its AAC. [1525] They were talking about sharing it with Slocan if Slocan could take some of their displaced employees.

They were also talking very generously about support- ing value-added enterprises that might be interested in their site, in their land and in their equipment. I wrote the minister all these things, and he came to me a few weeks later and said he thought he could support every- thing in my letter except one thing. He never told me what that one was, so I'm counting on him for all of it. I can tell you that this act and these policy changes that we're debating this week in the legislature are really good news to a heartlands community — a place where trees actually grow, which people cut and take to market.

I always thought it was quite a joke during the 1990s, when the NDP held power, that they had a

5704 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 thousand registered professional foresters living and working for government right here in Victoria, and there hadn't been any logging during my whole term in Victoria. People up in the North Thompson Valley live by logging and live by the proceeds from the forest industry. For way too long now, they've been shut out of new opportunities, and we have not been getting the value that we should out of individual logs. It's been a real struggle for people looking to create new opportu- nities.

Well, now we have a government that has decided it's going to open up new opportunities for those Brit- ish Columbians far too long denied; a government that is going to aggressively pursue new markets world- wide and has put the machinery and the money in place to go after those; a government that is going to ensure environmental standards remain here in British Columbia, the best of the industry anywhere in the world; a government that will make sure that our in- dustry is no longer hamstrung by government and its arrangements. We're going to be delivering an actual market system. What a novel concept.

What a good thing to finally be doing. We're going to be compensat- ing private enterprise for the changes to their private property with regard to takeback of tenure. We're also going to be vastly increasing the value of the remaining 80 percent of their tenure because of all the artificial constraints that are going to be taken away — the shackles that are going to be knocked off the legs of industry — so that they can actually flourish doing what they're good at. For example, we're no longer going to insist that if you are a manufacturing company in this industry, you also have to be a logging company.

Many of them don't want to be. They had to play really artificial games in order to get some access to fibre when they really did- n't want to be loggers. That day is gone. We're going to be stabilizing the industry, allowing it to modernize and to pursue the markets that are out there. There are lots of markets worldwide. We're going to be allowing them, of all things, to actually have a return on invest- ment. I believe we're going to see those Crown reve- nues increase once again. Forestry in British Columbia has never been a sun- set industry. It never will be.

It'll always be an industry that's of tremendous value to British Columbians, es- pecially British Columbians out where I live, the people I represent from the heartlands. It's been sad to see jobs drop from 100,000 in the late nineties to just over 87,000 in the forest industry now. We can reverse that. There's one company in Kamloops that's called Paul Creek Slicing, and it slices white pine cants — 32 slices to the inch — into veneer. Beautiful stuff. They splice it back together.

They put it on the face of parti- cleboard furniture all through the United States, down the west coast and also in Quebec and along the east coast of North America. They can sell as much of that as they can cut. The only limitation to them is that they haven't been able to get the white pine. We're con- stantly scrambling, trying to find them the fibre that they need. In order to get that fibre, they would have to bid on timber sales when, as I said, they really didn't want to be loggers.

They would log timber they weren't really interested in and then be in a position of having to try to trade those logs for white pine logs so they could finally get down to doing the business they were actually there to do, which was slicing up white pine. They were ground very hard by some of the licensees who had more timber than them. They had to give three logs for every one white pine log. I always thought that was regrettable, because they are willing to expand. They have the markets to expand. They have around 200 employees. They're almost all women. It's very light work. They really enjoy it.

I've gone and visited them many times. Many of them used to be on welfare; many are single moms. By the time Paul Creek Slicing is done with a thou- sand board feet of lumber, it is worth $2,000 in gross domestic product, where a thousand board feet of 2-by- 4s fluctuates just over $200. It hasn't made sense that anybody is cutting white pine into dimensional lumber when it could be going to an operation like that. That's only one example. Everybody tells me that nobody can outbid a log home builder when it comes to bidding for the logs they want. They have a terrible time getting them.

There are all sorts of value-added plants that are going to benefit by the changes that are embraced by this legislation. [1530] I have a lot of small-scale loggers in my constitu- ency. It's been like beating my head against the wall all through those five years — the last term of the NDP, when I was in opposition — just finding a way to allow those people to work in the bush. They have equip- ment. They know what they're doing.

They're envi- ronmentally sensitive too, but because of the tremen- dous regulatory overburden that the NDP had im- posed on this industry, the government couldn't find anybody to oversee their work and put through the necessary paper. They were effectively shut out of the bush. I finally talked Dave Zirnhelt into providing one officer through FRBC who would actually oversee them for a couple years. We got a bunch of people back to work. At one time I was told there were 100 salvage loggers operating, where many of them had been on welfare in the past just because they weren't allowed to work.

Lo and behold, they do things like small portable sawmills. One of them developed a contract for dry fir in Alberta; all that he could produce. They get tremen- dous opportunities like that. Another one I heard of recently was that the oil patch up in northern B.C. needed dry fir for corduroy road over the muskeg. It's the only way they can get equipment in. They couldn't get any dry fir, so they were bringing up oak wood from the United States and building corduroy road across the muskeg with that.

One of my little sawmills had an opportunity to bid on a tremendous contract for supplying dry fir for that purpose. We always should have been really going after sal- vage logs. When we do it's a forest health initiative, because if those dead trees are allowed to remain in

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5705 place they often give rise to bug infestations. We've seen calamities recently in British Columbia from those. They also become forest fire hazards. I really believe in salvage logging. Again, I congratulate the minister because I wasn't sure he believed in salvage logging at first, but he listened. He's accepted the input h e h a s . H e ' s s t r u c k a c o m m i t t e e o f M L A s t o b r i n g o n success for salvage loggers. He's appointed the mem- ber for Prince George North to chair that committee.

Salvage loggers figure very prominently in the plans of this government moving forward in this industry. I'm very, very pleased with that. The minister is freeing up the flow of fibre in British Columbia. He is providing a new source of fibre, where people don't always have to go to the Crown begging for a share of the tiny bit that wasn't already spoken for. About 98 percent of the annual allowable cut in British Columbia has been really completely sewn up.

There hasn't been much to work with in trying to settle the legitimate aspirations of first nations and all of these entrepreneurs who are bringing on these tremen- dously job-productive new operations in British Co- lumbia. Existing licensees will be able to sell portions of their tenure. What a good idea. What a commonsense thing to do — to allow them to make their own busi- ness decisions.

This problem we've had with an over- supply of manufacturing capacity and a shrinking tim- ber supply won't be the case any longer when people actually have the opportunity to be assured of fibre and can build the kind of new processing plants that British Columbia needs to really maximize the use of every log in B.C. We did have — I guess still do at the moment — the highest costs in our industry of anywhere in North America — anywhere in the world, actually.

I remem- ber seeing a sad statistic while we were in opposition — that in five years Sweden had gone from 1 percent of the Japanese market to 17 percent at our expense. Our industry had been hobbled by regulations that made us such a high-cost producer of wood fibre. I'm glad to see the end of those days. It's great that we're going to have an increase in the amount of wood available for auc- tion, because people ought to be able to bid on it and bid on the sizes and the species they want. We ought to be able to prove that we are providing a legitimate evi- dence of the actual market price.

In all of these areas I'm absolutely delighted with the legislation and with what the minister is doing. [1535] I was sorry to see that the IWA were making the kind of comments they were about these changes, be- cause that is very old-fashioned thinking. We just can't c o n t i n u e t o p r e t e n d t h a t w h a t w o r k e d i n t h e p a s t i s going to work in the future. The IWA has been the one big disappointment in the community in the North Thompson Valley. All the elected people working to- gether, the industry people — whether it's loggers or Weyerhaeuser itself or Slocan….

Everybody has been pitching in, but the IWA repeatedly turned down op- portunities to help create jobs for their members who are going to be displaced from Vavenby. At one mill after another, the IWA refused to make the necessary changes, for example, so that their workers, their members, could work on Sundays in the remaining three mills — work at straight time, granted, but it's still a job. A job at those wages, at straight time, would be the envy of the world as far as the workers in this industry elsewhere. But they wouldn't do it.

In the end a number of people are being laid off, having their jobs terminated, whom Weyerhaeuser would have em- ployed in one of those other mills if the IWA had been more flexible. The IWA in those decisions caused their brothers and sisters to become unemployed persons when they had the right to choose otherwise, and I very much regret that. I'm proud of this government. I'm proud of this minister. I'm delighted with the fact that we are mak- ing these changes. I support them wholeheartedly, and I congratulate the government for moving in the right direction. R. Harris: Like the previous member….

This is a great bill, and I want to talk about all the good things about it. After listening to the Leader of the Opposition this morning, I think there was some shock and awe here. Maybe I had it. First of all, I couldn't believe the comments that she was referring to. At the end of the day, after a nice bowl of soup at lunch, I realized that the shock and awe…. I shouldn't have been in such shock at all. She never did get it. They never got it in the past, and they still don't get it. They don't under- stand the problems in this industry.

I listened to some of the comments she made this morning — "lack of discussion." I think she made refer- ence that it's taken two years. I actually think that when we took two years to talk about this thing with industry, with labour, with communities, with log sal- vagers and with associations, this minister had more meetings, went around this province more often, talk- ing to more people — as a matter of fact, probably…. People in my riding would definitely say they wish that this had come sooner. In fact, it's the right stuff, because we did take the time to consult.

Two years, I think, is the appropriate time because the product we've got here, in terms of legislation that's going to set the framework for the future, is just an excellent piece of legislation. I personally would like to thank the minister for the meeting he had in Terrace. At our meeting we had everybody there. We had a representative from every one of the first nations communities in my riding. We had labour there — the IWA. We had pulp mill work- ers there. We had the sawmills. We had value-added people. We had elected municipal representatives. We had people just out of the community.

It was a great meeting. It was a great exchange of information, an opportunity for the minister to talk about what he was proposing and for him to get some feedback. Anyway, it was a great meeting and a real oppor- tunity for people to have the input that the Leader of the Opposition says never existed. When she talks

5706 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 about no input and no consultation, she just hasn't fol- l o we d any t hi ng t hat 's g o ne o n. I t i s al way s , a s i t u s u - ally is, more about politics and less about the results. She talks about loss of jobs in rural communities. She talks about mill closures. "Communities will be devastated." I don't know where she's been living for the last ten years. I really don't. I talk about the fact that in one of my other lives I was the board member of Local 171. It had a member- ship of about 5,000.

It covered the Queen Charlottes on the north coast, down to Bella Coola from Prince Rupert and right into the Terrace area. That local actu- ally doesn't even exist today. It's been gobbled up and amalgamated as its membership dropped. That's actu- ally what's been going on in rural communities for a long time. I am not surprised when that member doesn't know what's been going on and is surprised and doesn't see a need to change. She talks about reallocation as if it's the great evil, as if all of a sudden, by taking 20 percent of the timber away, it just vanishes into the air.

I guess the reciprocal is that she's implying that the present alloca- tion system works absolutely, perfectly fine. Nothing can be further from the truth. It's time to wake up and smell the roses. It's just unbelievable. [1540] She made reference to Skeena Cellulose in her comments. Terrace and Skeena are in the heart of my riding. Skeena Cellulose is an operation that contains one pulp mill, four sawmills, one TFL and five licences, and covers three ridings. People that used to work there don't work there today in most places. That's because the workers thought that their union seniority gave them job security.

The Bill 13 contractors thought that that legislative tool gave them job security. The communities thought that having cut control as it was, as it is today still, gave them the security of knowing that those facilities would run and their taxes would come in. Lo and behold, they all forgot the one key ingredi- ent. If the company doesn't make money, all the legisla- tive tools in the world aren't going to work. They didn't work there, and they haven't worked there — well, three times in the last five years and probably seven or eight times over its history.

You know, it is time for a change because the status quo doesn't work. That's why this is such a great piece of legislation. The minister, when he got up, talked about two things that I'm going to spend a little bit of time on and will probably repeat myself a lot about: access to fibre and log markets. That's what's so critical about this. When the Leader of the Opposition gets up and rants about the fact that we're a big-corporation gov- ernment, I get quite a kick out of that. What have we done? We've gone out to major licensees and taken 20 percent back.

We've used a formula for calculating compensation that her previous government put in place. Then we put a number to it that we brought to the public and did it in a very open manner, so that there are no secrets here. We're going to reallocate that timber to small communities. In most cases, I suspect it will go to small, community-based organizations, whether it's community licences or small business sales or woodlots. I mean, that somehow doesn't resonate like the big-company government that we are. You know, this rhetoric just goes on and on, and I got to admit it wears pretty thin on me.

What else have I got here? This bill really finally puts in the hands of government the tools that we need to start to revitalize this industry, and the minister re- ferred to it. That's the trees. That's what this is about. It's about trees. That's where it starts. For people like me, it has been a long time coming. This legislation and this series of legislation we're put- ting through around forestry are in fact the reason I ran. It was an opportunity to start to let local communi- ties have impact on the resources that surround them. That's actually what we're about.

Our communities were built on this industry. They're going to be there a long way into the future, but they can't be exactly the same industry they were in the past. Every day in my office — literally every day — I have salvage loggers coming in or phase loggers, first nations, full-phase contractors. Every single walk of life in my community is tied to this forest industry, and they all have these creative ideas of things they can do, different widgets they can make. I have value-added mills in my community that aren't operating today, and all of them have the same problem: no fibre, no access to fibre.

Why isn't there access? Because we as a government don't have the tools. We can sit there and tell them it's a great idea. I t ' s t h e k i n d o f t h i n g w e s h o u l d b e d o i n g . W e c a n support them in principle and support them in the- ory. We can support them in everything we want, but the one thing we can't support them with is what they need: access to fibre. When you get that access to fibre out there and you create an industry of harvesters…. People should re- member the harvest sector is a sector that actually cre- ates the most employment.

It's also the sector of the industry that has the most capital investment. Yet you get those people out there harvesting logs, you get them in, and you create a log market. Today in Terrace we actually have a log market. We have it because to s o m e d e g r e e w e h a v e b e e n a b l e t o t a k e s o m e o f t h e fibre that belonged to SCI and get it out there for peo- ple to work. It is that access to log markets that allows people who want to build a better widget to get access to fibre. This is the way you change the industry. You change it by bringing more players into it.

When that member talks about how this is going to centralize the industry into single core companies, nothing could be further from the truth. I can't believe for one moment that a community is going to get a community-based forest licence and turn right around and sell it to Weyer- haeuser or that a first nations community is going to go out there and get a first nations forest licence and turn around and sell it to Weyerhaeuser. They want these licences because they want to have impact on their

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5707 communities. They want some say in the resources that surround them. These are exactly the right kind of tools. In the timber sales program, which is going to see a significant increase in fibre, those are community- based businesses that in most cases are going to be logging that. These are the community-based busi- nesses that buy locally. They hire locally. Theirs are the families that are going to live in our communities, fill our schools and provide us with that mass of people to support the small business and our chamber of com- merce.

These are great, innovative people, and we shouldn't undersell them. [1545] Where I live up there, you know, we like to say a lot that we don't think all the geniuses are sitting around tables in the urban centres all the time. We have some incredibly creative people that live in our communities and I would say some of the sharpest minds in the world, especially when it comes to this industry, because we live it. We live it, we're in it, we're around it, we smell it, and we touch it. These people have great ideas. They're innovators. In many cases, they understand niche markets.

We have an individual, Mario, in Terrace. All he needs is about one or two spruce trees a month. It takes him two or three people and three or four days to get them out of the timber and get them to his yard. Then when he's in the yard, he cuts them into pieces that are 18 and 20 inches long if it's the right fibre, and they go to make guitars. This is one tree that employs probably half a dozen people for a week. This is the kind of high- value product we have to get.

I was at the member for North Island — not North Island; we try to go to his riding every once in a while, but it's too far — o r N o r t h C o a s t l a s t w e e k i n P o r t Clements…. An Hon. Member: Come to the heartlands. R. Harris: Come to the heartlands. Foothills. In Port Clements in the Queen Charlottes I was there with a friend of mine, Randy O'Brien, who has a logging operation and is a small contractor over there. He just spent half a million dollars, and he's installed a log peeler.

Not only will it allow him to make poles out of the cedar he gets, but it will allow him to actually now get into the log house product line. This is a great business for them over there. The Charlottes are actually blessed with that product. But you know what? He's got the same problem everybody else does. He's got no access to fibre. There are saw- mills over there that, because of timber-harvesting and timber-processing agreements that force all that timber to have to come down to mills down here, can't get any wood. When I hear people tell me mills are going to close…. This isn't about mill closures.

This whole sys- tem is about: your mill just may not make 2-by-4s anymore. It's not that you're going to lose a mill; it's that you have an opportunity here to have two or three different kinds of mills. This is the kind of innovation we have in our communities. I hear this urban rhetoric, and you know what? I'm just tiring of it, because you know what? We know how t o r u n t h i s b u s i n e s s . W e k n o w h o w t o d o i t r i g h t . W e know how to turn our communities around and get them growing again. This is the kind of legislation that's going to do that.

It's going to do it for each and every one of our rural communities right across the northland. It's about embracing it, not fighting it all the time. I think the previous member talked about the fact that we live in a world where our forest policies are 50 years old, but the world is a lot different today than it was 50 years ago. It's that new competitive market and that entrepreneurial edge we're going to need if we're going to compete in the global marketplace. I think this bill starts that process. It starts it by providing the ac- cess to fibre.

It starts it by opening up a whole bunch of new doors to access fibre by doubling woodlots through salvage programs, through community li- cences, through the timber sales program, through first nations initiatives. Another creative way of accessing fibre is going to be through a new rolling cut control period, which doesn't allow people to carry the cut forward. Another access point for market opportunities is going to come through the ability of licensees to sell off. This is a great opportunity for people in the value-added sector. One of the other aspects I like about how this bill has been crafted….

I think that is the right word — crafted — because it's the result of talking to a huge number of people from every sector and trying to accommodate where you can in a way that's measured but allows people to create a transition to what I think their future really looks like. I want to end by just sort of saying to the minister that I think you've done a great job of putting this bill together. I think you did a great job of consulting, and I think it is in fact very much the start of the right tool for rural communities to start to take back charge of their lives.

This is the kind of stuff that's going to help us start to rebuild the population by actually introduc- ing entirely new industries to our communities. On that note, Mr. Minister, congratulations on an excellent bill. [1550] R. Visser: I was reminded today — when the Leader of the Opposition, who sits in front of me here, was speaking — about the other day when we were talking about her misguided and rather irresponsible private member's bill for closed containment fish farms.

When she was talking, she introduced or made reference to some friends she had in the gallery who were here from the Suzuki Foundation, and I thought that was really kind of her to acknowledge her speechwriters. I was upset that she didn't acknowledge her speechwriters today from the Western Canada Wilderness Committee or others. You know what? I'm from the north end of Van- couver Island — that's the heartland of British Colum-

5708 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 bia — and I can tell you that when I hear her, as the Leader of the Opposition, stand up and ask if people like me will have the courage to speak to a bill like this, or say that we'd better not speak to this bill because it will be reported in our papers back home, you know what? I'm going to do it, because this is probably one of the best pieces of legislation that this government has tabled today.

It's part of a package, a package that started two years ago with the election of this government, a pack- age that has been guided by this Forests minister — through the results-based code, through countless meetings, through the direct award piece for first na- tions, through all of that stuff — to get to where we are today, revitalizing British Columbia's forests and forest industry. This is stuff to be proud of.

When she stands up and speaks, it is painfully ob- vious to all of us — whether you're from Skeena, the North Coast, the north Thompson, all of British Co- lumbia — that she doesn't know what she's talking about when it comes to trees and forests. Interjections. R. Visser: The Kootenays — it's that place by Al- berta. You know, I've been involved in the industry for a long time, and I've represented that industry's interests for a long time. When I talk about the industry, you know who I talk about? I talk about that guy that runs a log loader. I talk about the guy that drives the truck.

I talk about that forester that lays out the road, that cruises the timber, that does the ecology studies. I talk about that biologist who looks at endangered species and how they interact with the logging plans of the tree farm licence. I talk about those people that coach those hockey teams, that take their kids to school in the morning. I talk about those people that join Rotary, that form the Lions Clubs, that volunteer in their communi- ties, that live there, that feel a profound connection not only to their community and not only to their industry but to the forests and trees around them.

I c o m e f r o m a p a r t o f t h e w o r l d t h a t ' s a f o r e s t e x - porter. We export. We have one sawmill on northern Vancouver Island — one sawmill. We're responsible for probably 60 percent of the cut on the coast of British Columbia, and we have one sawmill. That's not a comment on whether it's bad or good. It is a comment about something that's fundamentally important to this bill.

This bill, and this series of bills and every step we've taken so far, recognizes a historical fact that in the infancy of this province and in our desire to build rural communities and our desire to spread ourselves out amongst all of this land, we thought we should build a mill and grant access to trees. In essence, what we're doing is building policy that took us from the mill to the tree. Fifty years later, 40 years later, 30 years later, that's not going to work anymore.

The member for Skeena talked about how that's not going to work anymore, how that didn't work for him and his people and the people he represents and works with and knows. [1555] I ' m e n c o u r a g e d b y t h i s s h i f t . I t d i d n ' t w o r k , s o we're going to change. What we're doing now, and this is what this bill is about…. We're going to make policy starting with the tree, and we're going to take it to the mill. Now, people say that's fairly simple, and I agree. But in that simplicity is something very profound. The member for Skeena is right. The harvesting sector does employ more people.

The harvesting sector is as capitalized as and probably more capitalized than the manufacturing sector, but what I want to add to that comment is that it all begins in the harvesting sec- tor. It all begins with an understanding that in rural British Columbia, in the heartlands of British Columbia and on northern Vancouver Island, we need forest pol- icy that encourages us to grow the trees, to make them grow faster, to make them grow better, to utilize that resource in a way that's more acceptable. That's what this bill does. This bill gives effect to what I think are three very important things.

It requires that large licensees grant back to the Crown 20 percent of their harvest levels so that we can reallocate it to encourage new entrants, to encourage new opportunities, to meet commitments that we have to first nations — first nations on north- ern Vancouver Island that are involved in the forest industry in ways that are remarkable and other first nations there that want to share in the prosperity and those successes.

It gives effect to and allows us to distribute fibre in an auction system where those that are willing to pay the most for that tree, so that we who own and live and work near those trees can get the return we deserve for those trees…. That auction system will allow it to oc- cur. It provides for woodlots. Those people can stand there amongst their trees, and they can pick up a hand- ful of soil and let it sift through their fingers and tell you for hours endless stories about that soil and its relationship to that tree and how that tree can grow faster if only we could get out of the way. This is good stuff.

This gives effect to the idea that communities are important and that communities like Sayward, like Gold River, like Tahsis, like Zeballos and like Holberg can embrace the notion of community forests if it is something they would like, if it is some- thing that community thinks is important to them. They want to embrace as a community the relationship they have to those trees. We have the tools to do it now. We didn't before. The previous government paid lip service to it all.

We've seen some of the most heinous words expressed to this industry I represent, to these folks I represent, by the previous government that was supposed to be such a friend of that industry. The former Premier said that not one single job will be lost on Vancouver Island due to a land use decision. It's not true. We've lost whole communities because of land use decisions. "The jobs and timber accord will create 40,000 new forest

THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5709 industry jobs." We have lost 13,000 jobs since they said that. We can't put a number on these things. It would be a fallacy to try to put a number on these things. It's not what this government does. We build the fundamen- tals, and we do it in a way that makes sense, so when we require that 20 percent gets taken back, we also say we will compensate fairly for it. The bill gives effect to this.

This bill gives effect to the notion that governments have interfered with rights that had been granted in the past and that we need to respect those and understand those if we want to maintain a relationship with the investment community that at the end of the day, like the member for Skeena says, provides us with the capi- tal to access all of those trees and provides us with the capital to have those jobs. What I think is most impor- tant in this bill is the setting up of the B.C.

Forestry Revitalization Trust. [1600] I'll come back to that in a second, because I want to talk a little bit about this consultation process. The member is right. You know what? There wasn't a royal commission. The Leader of the Opposition is right. We didn't hire a whole bunch of people to traipse around the province holding huge public meetings, rehashing eve

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0327pm 07
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0327pm 07
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6b6493b1b2ee8d0a29185733adf207add23ea714

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).